MVSCZAR

The system was trying to tell the ad com not to reject you. It was just like (in robot voice), "Rejection? Does not compute. Cannot do. Beep boop." 

I'm glad you specified the robot voice. Otherwise, John McDowell would have been doing the voice-over in my head.

The system was trying to tell the ad com not to reject you. It was just like (in robot voice), "Rejection? Does not compute. Cannot do. Beep boop." 

Thanks! I don't have a wife so I'll leave that part out. Or maybe you get a quicker response because then they know there's someone else waiting patiently too. I'll put that my mom really wants to know. That should work.

I just contacted McGill because I've seen multiple rejections and one or two acceptances and my application website still says nothing. Hopefully it's good news, but at this point, anything to end Schrodinger's AppliCATion purgatory. 

THEY LIE!!!

new goal: get a phd simply to be on an ad comm so I can lead the way in fairness -- releasing rejections all at once and immediately after decisions have been made. 
I will call this movement Rejection Reform. 

I'm trying to decide between an interdisciplinary program in cognitive science and philosophy, on the one hand, and a PhD in cognitive science, on the other, both in California and with full funding. Trying to decide whether your general boredom with philosophy is genuine or due to your gruesome MA dissertation process has been incredibly taxing :/

It doesn't seem to me that the Chicago MAPH is a good option. The general opinion I hear is that it's a scam. Some people do defend it, though they seem to have personal reasons to do so. 

Gotta email Axel Honneth. Tell him you love him. He's still there, right?? 

It's definitely true that continental philosophy suffers from obscurantist writing, for sure. But some of the best writing also comes from the continental camp, too, so there's that. 
As far as the bad writing is concerned, I'll give the apologist's response which I feel only applies to select writers, though not all. There was a huge push to become more performative in one's philosophizing, so that, when reading the author, one would be introduced into a forceful dialogue, rather than a monologue. Philosophy is, after all, a dialectic. That doesn't mean it's all good, but I can see where they're coming from. 
I think Deleuze gets too muck flak because the wrong people have gotten hold of him. I do hope that changes soon. He's actually not that bad and is, in fact, quite sharp. And, besides how frustrating it is to read Anti-Oedipus, it's actually a pretty good book. 
There are some works in the late 20th century which I find super cool: Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action is the first that comes to mind. Ricoeur was writing into the 2000s, Gadamer's Truth and Method is pretty cool, but it's not that late into the 20th century. Hannah Arendt wrote some good political philosophy books as well. That's not even getting into feminism and philosophy of race and stuff. 
I think it's true, though. Continental philosophy really needs to start producing original works that are accessible to everyone, especially since we pretend to speak about those things which are immediately relevant to everyone. That was a project that has slowed down quite a bit, and I suspect might be linked with philosophy's retreat into academic journals. I'm into journals and all, but at some point we have to go back down into the cave with good news, but I haven't heard anyone propose anything recently. 

It's definitely true that continental philosophy suffers from obscurantist writing, for sure. But some of the best writing also comes from the continental camp, too, so there's that. 
As far as the bad writing is concerned, I'll give the apologist's response which I feel only applies to select writers, though not all. There was a huge push to become more performative in one's philosophizing, so that, when reading the author, one would be introduced into a forceful dialogue, rather than a monologue. Philosophy is, after all, a dialectic. That doesn't mean it's all good, but I can see where they're coming from. 
I think Deleuze gets too muck flak because the wrong people have gotten hold of him. I do hope that changes soon. He's actually not that bad and is, in fact, quite sharp. And, besides how frustrating it is to read Anti-Oedipus, it's actually a pretty good book. 
There are some works in the late 20th century which I find super cool: Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action is the first that comes to mind. Ricoeur was writing into the 2000s, Gadamer's Truth and Method is pretty cool, but it's not that late into the 20th century. Hannah Arendt wrote some good political philosophy books as well. That's not even getting into feminism and philosophy of race and stuff. 
I think it's true, though. Continental philosophy really needs to start producing original works that are accessible to everyone, especially since we pretend to speak about those things which are immediately relevant to everyone. That was a project that has slowed down quite a bit, and I suspect might be linked with philosophy's retreat into academic journals. I'm into journals and all, but at some point we have to go back down into the cave with good news, but I haven't heard anyone propose anything recently. 

It's definitely true that continental philosophy suffers from obscurantist writing, for sure. But some of the best writing also comes from the continental camp, too, so there's that. 
As far as the bad writing is concerned, I'll give the apologist's response which I feel only applies to select writers, though not all. There was a huge push to become more performative in one's philosophizing, so that, when reading the author, one would be introduced into a forceful dialogue, rather than a monologue. Philosophy is, after all, a dialectic. That doesn't mean it's all good, but I can see where they're coming from. 
I think Deleuze gets too muck flak because the wrong people have gotten hold of him. I do hope that changes soon. He's actually not that bad and is, in fact, quite sharp. And, besides how frustrating it is to read Anti-Oedipus, it's actually a pretty good book. 
There are some works in the late 20th century which I find super cool: Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action is the first that comes to mind. Ricoeur was writing into the 2000s, Gadamer's Truth and Method is pretty cool, but it's not that late into the 20th century. Hannah Arendt wrote some good political philosophy books as well. That's not even getting into feminism and philosophy of race and stuff. 
I think it's true, though. Continental philosophy really needs to start producing original works that are accessible to everyone, especially since we pretend to speak about those things which are immediately relevant to everyone. That was a project that has slowed down quite a bit, and I suspect might be linked with philosophy's retreat into academic journals. I'm into journals and all, but at some point we have to go back down into the cave with good news, but I haven't heard anyone propose anything recently. 

It's definitely true that continental philosophy suffers from obscurantist writing, for sure. But some of the best writing also comes from the continental camp, too, so there's that. 
As far as the bad writing is concerned, I'll give the apologist's response which I feel only applies to select writers, though not all. There was a huge push to become more performative in one's philosophizing, so that, when reading the author, one would be introduced into a forceful dialogue, rather than a monologue. Philosophy is, after all, a dialectic. That doesn't mean it's all good, but I can see where they're coming from. 
I think Deleuze gets too muck flak because the wrong people have gotten hold of him. I do hope that changes soon. He's actually not that bad and is, in fact, quite sharp. And, besides how frustrating it is to read Anti-Oedipus, it's actually a pretty good book. 
There are some works in the late 20th century which I find super cool: Habermas' Theory of Communicative Action is the first that comes to mind. Ricoeur was writing into the 2000s, Gadamer's Truth and Method is pretty cool, but it's not that late into the 20th century. Hannah Arendt wrote some good political philosophy books as well. That's not even getting into feminism and philosophy of race and stuff. 
I think it's true, though. Continental philosophy really needs to start producing original works that are accessible to everyone, especially since we pretend to speak about those things which are immediately relevant to everyone. That was a project that has slowed down quite a bit, and I suspect might be linked with philosophy's retreat into academic journals. I'm into journals and all, but at some point we have to go back down into the cave with good news, but I haven't heard anyone propose anything recently. 

Ahem. You're in the wrong forum. You're welcome here and all, but you're gonna get less information trickling down. 

Bah! Everyone is smart enough to do continental philosophy! It's just a matter of being courageous and vulnerable. 

Waitlisted at Miami U. Now I gotta add a new color to my sig.
#1stworldproblems

HAH! I'm scared to start partying, since its still probably a long shot at admission, but it does feel good to finally have some sort of positive notification.
But, yes, I everyone is invited. Come to the 6th floor of curtain hall
...and bring bourbon in case Jonny is out

Who the fuck is Jonny and are we all invited? Party!! 

Who the fuck is Jonny and are we all invited? Party!! 

Was just notified that I am on the wait-list for Columbia! As I posted on the board I have only received rejections until now...so this comes as a very pleasant surprise. 
 

Columbia's got a WL. There's hope until there isn't!

Claiming the third Columbia admission. Mine had xxx's and yyy's!
2a/0w/2r and 3 presumed rejections out of 9.

I don't want to use the "there are starving children in Africa" trope, but this is basically what it is, man. 
 
It hurts to get rejected, even after getting accepted somewhere, obviously. But it's going to keep happening, and it's something we have to get used to. We aren't all little messiahs, as much as I'd like to convince myself otherwise. Some people are really just going to think we're not all that. Maybe that's part of the messiah thing, come to think of it. 
 
I think that what's rubbing people the wrong way is that your posts are making you seem impervious to other peoples' struggles to get even this far. And it may have been difficult for you too, and it likely has been, but it's difficult to see that when you imply that having to study at Cornell was you settling for less that what you thought you deserved. Meanwhile, a whole chunk of us would have never even dreamed of going to a place like that. And Harvard, man. I'd be so damned proud of myself. Nobody in my family knows any of the schools I've gotten into. Hell, they don't even know what a PhD is. They don't even know what philosophy is, really. I had one family member ask me if that meant I was going to work in a hospital with my mom. But even if they don't all know that, they know that Harvard means you're worth something. You should seriously be proud of that. When I got the news from Stony Brook, I was in my aunt's house in Colombia (they're poor as hell and haven't ever even left Medellin) my cousins asked me if I had applied to Harvard and when I'd be hearing back from them.   
 
My best friend who is the smartest person I've ever met, by far, and probably the biggest reason I've even gotten this far, had so much shit going on during this application season that he probably won't get into the one place he applied to, and he was only able to apply there because there was no application fee. When we complain, we probably sound like we're fishing for compliments to people like him. You got into a school most people dream about AND, most importantly, YOU took THEIR spot. They shouldn't have to console you or feel like they have to console you.
 
But yeah, I do think you're allowed to vent. I myself am feeling a straight panic right now and disdain and contempt, even. I feel like a spoiled bitch, to be honest, and I don't even remember what possessed me to go into a discipline that would turn down so many willing and able devotees. I'm confused and I want time to just stop for a little bit. And I can go on and on and fill whole threads about it. But, again, how can I ask anyone to console me when I'm in such an enviable position? You shouldn't change what you're feeling if what you're feeling is hurt or rejected. You're allowed to feel that way and forcing yourself to feel any other way is dishonest. It isn't that you don't have problems, but you wouldn't go into a leper colony and complain about your sore throat, even though sore throats can hurt like hell. 
 
I've already gotten my lashings worth from people who have told me I have nothing to complain about, even though I truly feel hurt, so don't take this the wrong way. I'm meaning all of this in the friendliest way possible. I'm sure that there are plenty of people who have gotten accepted to multiple programs who feel similarly rejected and hurt. But I think that's part of all of this. At least I'm hoping so. 

They wouldn't pay for a visit if you didn't have a good chance of getting in!