nonexistententity

Yay, accepted at UChicago!

Now I am REALLY worried. Based on my joke about using the same rejection letter they used last year, I just logged in to last year's account (they wouldn't let me use that one again so I had to make a new one for this year); when I opened last year's decision I found the rejection letter was dated to... Monday, January 25, 2016! So either they uploaded their decision to reject me to the wrong account, or the date on the old rejection was somehow updated to the present date. I sent them an email about it, but damn this is cruel... [Update: they replied that no decision was made yet, so the generic notification I have in my old account doesn't count. That's a BIG relief.]

@ Swann: I'm nervous for the same reasons, but as far as I can tell (and please do correct me if I'm wrong) there's only one confirmed wait list notification, plus StFrancisXavier's report of somebody in his MA getting accepted. That's it - doesn't sound like a full acceptance storm yet, so there's still hope. At least that's what I'll be telling myself until the moment when disappointment strikes in the form of an actual rejection. I hope they at least have the courtesy not to use the exact same rejection letter they used last year.

Yes, email them explaining which name is indicated on which document. It might be true that 'if they care enough they can match the scores', but if that's a pretty difficult job if you have 300 applications to match it with. Contacting them will make it easier for them to match the scores.

A piece of advice I've heard from several professors is to make sure your writing sample displays your skill in dealing with arguments and concepts. In my case, this meant that it was better not to submit my thesis on Plato, since that was mostly exegetical and philological rather than argumentative. Even if it was on Plato. So based on that, I'd say that any topic that is not "strictly philosophical" can be risky. Also, you need a topic that is/can be interesting even for those who are not already interested in it. You can't be exactly sure who reads it and who gets to decide, so more recondite topics are a greater risk - it's more difficult to get someone enthusiastic about Fichte's criticism of Reinhold than about Kant's refutation of idealism, for instance.

There might be something to that. Of course, most departments have TOEFL cutoff scores that will guarantee a certain level of ability to communicate in English; but if there is still any doubt (a grammatically shoddy writing sample, for instance), verbal scores might enter into that consideration.

One thing I've heard professors say is that GRE scores of non-US students are taken with a grain of salt, because non-US students are not as used to the system of standardized tests.

This is not exactly an answer to your question, but something to take into consideration nonetheless: the continent is not as continental as you'd think. (This is coming from someone born and raised on the continent with a background in continental philosophy). Scandinavia is almost completely focused on analytical philosophy, with the continentals retreating into literature departments. The Netherlands are moving in that direction as well. Even France is getting enthralled with Wittgenstein and Quine, and students at the Ecole Normale Supérieure are using formal logic to criticize Meillassoux (see here). Manfred Frank recently raised an alarm over the disappearance of continental philosophy from Germany - Heidegger's old chair in Freiburg has been shut down to make room for a philosophy of language chair, and it's increasingly difficult to do serious continental philosophy in Germany. A good English language article here, and Frank's article in FAZ in German here. Frank suggests that the USA is now a better place to study continental philosophy than Europe is. If your only reason to go to the continent is to do continental philosophy, you might be disappointed. Now of course there are exceptions, and just like in the States, there's some good universities that have a very strong continental department (Louvain and Essex come to mind, and there are certainly more).

Reapply. It's exactly as TakeruK said: either they don't recognize you, in which case there's nothing to worry about. Or they do recognize you, and they recognize: a) you're serious about wanting to get into their program; b ) you've improved in the past year. Both those things are going to be advantageous. I have been advised explicitly to reapply by the same people who turned me down last year. Now of course I don't know whether that's the usual course of business or an exception, but it does show that there is not necessarily a stigma attached to reapplying after a turndown.

Hi all, Here's a dilemma I've been struggling with: I know I can secure a very positive letter of recommendation from an internationally famous philosopher. However, this is someone who is quite controversial, in the sense that some people think their work is worthless. It's cutting edge continental stuff, so both analytic philosophers and more traditionally-minded continental philosophers tend to be sceptical. Besides being a recommendation from a 'big name', this is someone who doesn't teach at my own university, but still has a pretty good sight both of my philosophical skill, and other academic skills (I organized a number of conferences where they were a speaker). The question is: would this recommendation help me or hurt me? Would it be worth the risk? Any thoughts in general on the relative weight of fame vs. controversy; and of the value of recommendations from outside your own university?

Hi everyone! New to the forum as well. I have an MA in Philosophy and an MA in Classics, from the two universities in Amsterdam (UvA and VU, if that means anything here). Graduated last summer, and have had the great opportunity to teach at the University of Amsterdam in the meantime (on Foucault, the Philosophy of Science and the History of Philosophy). Last year I applied to only one university in the English-speaking world, and some other projects in Europe, but got shut out completely. I'm now going to focus mostly on applications in the USA. My main interests are Ancient Philosophy, Continental Philosophy in the broadest sense of the term (from German Idealism to Neo-Kantianism to Phenomenology to Post-structuralism to Speculative Realism), analytical metaphysics (especially issues of modality), and the history of philosophy. Since my SO is starting a program (not philosophy) in Chicago this fall, my top-choice universities are all in or around Chicago - UofC, Northwestern, Notre Dame. But I'll probably also apply to some other high-end schools that are strong in my areas of interest. Anxious to see what this season has in store for me.

Hi all, Are there any current Chicago grad students in philosophy here (UofC, Northwestern, DePaul, Loyola, even Notre Dame)? I'm looking to get a good overview of the particulars of the different programs - what the atmosphere is like, which staff members are actually teaching, you know, the sort of thing the website won't tell you - so I'd love to talk to people who are in these grad programs. I'll be in Chicago throughout August, so I can repay your advice with coffee and/or lunch. After that, I'm back to Amsterdam, but still digitally available. Thanks so much for your reply! Here's the full story: my SO is starting grad school at the University of Chicago this fall (not in philosophy), I'm going to try to get into grad school somwhere in Chicago this round. I want to do it right this time around; last year I was kind of late and super busy, so I didn't have the time to adequately research the programs: I missed some deadlines, then applied to Northwestern, only to find out the day before the deadline that there were reorganizations ahead that made my SOP irrelevant. So I had to completely rewrite my SOP in one day... Anyway, I'm going to do it more thoroughly this round. My background is this: I studied both philosophy and classics in Amsterdam (BA and MA degrees in both fields, all cum laude). I've been teaching philosophy at the University of Amsterdam since graduating, but it's one temp job after the other, and I don't have any time to do research. So I want to get a PhD, to commit to research and to get the title that might (hopefully, possibly, one day) allow me to get a slightly more permanent job in academia. Besides ancient philosophy (mainly Plato, Aristotle and the Hellenistic schools), my interests are in German Idealism, Continental philosophy, and issues of modality and existence in the analytical tradition. I'm also into the history and philosophy of science. That's about it. Thanks again!