gughok

I'm a trainee of analytic philosophy, and within that tradition I'm fond of what little Wittgenstein I've read. I do mind and language, and there I like David Lewis' writing but not necessarily his philosophy. I feel somewhat the same about Searle. Chalmers is obviously cool but also a bit hand-wavy at times. Dennett and Hofstadter seem like well-moderated minds, insofar as I have read them. But if I'm to be totally honest, as far as my favourite philosopher is concerned, I'm a slave to an insatiable obsession with the continental and their predecessors. Probably my favourite author of all time is Nietzsche - his writing is some of the most invigorating prose I have ever read. Ecce Homo is simply a masterpiece. Sartre is also wonderful. My first experience with the whole theme and style was Dostoyevsky's Notes From Underground, and that remains my absolute favourite work of all time. If nothing else, I will carry this around with me the rest of my life: But yet mathematical certainty is after all, something insufferable. Twice two makes four seems to me simply a piece of insolence. Twice two makes four is a pert coxcomb who stands with arms akimbo barring you path and spitting. I admit that twice two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, twice two makes five is sometimes a very charming thing too. -IX

Ah, that's where they were, thank you! Seriously hoping to hear from Yale before the week's end. Even if it's a rejection. Just... something to know.

Given past years, how likely is Yale's predicted date of tomorrow? Have they been consistent in the past? I had the list of past dates open, but I lost it.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/503589463155698/?fref=nf

Well, assuming I hear anything positive from anyone (which itself assumes I'll hear anything at all, and so far I have not), here's what I've got: most important for me is probably placement. I'm just not comfortable spending the time completing a PhD if I can't reasonably expect a good position coming out of it. But as far as visits are concerned, I'll be looking at how compatible the social atmosphere is with my personality, and what the town is like. I've spent the past four years living in the middle of nowhere, so ideally I won't have to repeat that. Weather is pretty important to me (I can't stand the heat). Lifestyle and diversity, I count as part of the social life, and I would strongly prefer a diverse cohort. I also really want to be with faculty who are friendly, approachable, and available.

Now, to be fair, a discussion can be a form of venting, a redirection of energy, and that's the point of this thread. But I agree.

Okay, "Not my top choice but w/e"? Someone has to be trolling us hard.

"White and male" is, as a bunch of us discussed here and there a while ago, also a problematic demographic to cite because, legally, I'm "white", but in reality I was born in Iran and half-raised in Dubai, immigrated to Canada and subjected to no small amount of discrimination and social disadvantage due to my background. Sure, the colour of my skin is white, but that hardly means anything. The whole point of these ethnic labels is to factionize the population into discrete groups each with consistent socioeconomic backgrounds and that just fails miserably. N.B. I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said, just venting on another issue.

In principle I don't think it's any more difficult to fake two posts than one. This early is unprecedented for them, too, so... hoping...

Shit. Two acceptances from NYU? Calls from Chalmers? I'm not sure I can believe it. It's too early. It can't be real!

*lassos hope with a frayed rope of optimism, wrestles it into a barren stable of possibility, feeds it the sweet hay of fantasy* UCLA pls

An excellent reason to enter the light. Congratulations, that's amazing!

Congratulations!

? I still haven't heard anything at all from anywhere. Presuming a rejection from UCLA, I guess.

Two people got into UCLA? Would either like to claim?

You know one of my writing samples argued for a memetic view whereby convention is nothing more than the evolutionary propagation of self-perpetuating behaviours and structures. Having come back from dinner I was treated to an excellent case in point where two responses to "yes" as an answer for "a or b" are battling it out in grand behavioural Darwinism.

Until someone we know and trust outright claims an acceptance, I'm just going to stop trusting these postings. Too easy to fake.

The counterfactual commiseration is (possibly) real!

What about the Princeton interview? Seems kinda trolly to me but it's not my area of expertise. Do they even do interviews? The text, for reference: "My WS argued that it is a modal theorem that []p -> []p. Given that, I conjectured that surely its possible that p must be true. Thus []p. But it is a modal theorem that []p -> p. Therefore p. I suppose the interview will be to find out how we could take that further. I look forward to speaking to Halvorson and Hogan."

Jac pls. Save us. pls halp.

I'm still hoping: in 2015, about a dozen acceptances were posted. In 2014, eight were posted. In 2013, four. 2012, about eight again. So our current three is well below what we'd expect.

Probably assuming a rejection from Princeton.

And the email was apparently only sent today, so it looks like they're taking their time contacting people. I can only hope.

Nobody gonna claim the Princeton admission? Congratulations to whoever. Guess I'm starting the season in the red.

I feel like this raises a second question: do committees arrive at their final list of admits more or less at the same time, or do they build up the list starting from a few "definite admits" and adding to that? In the former case, that explanation makes a little less sense: why would they be hush-hush about it if they're practically done, unless they inexplicably intend not to release their results for a while (that would demand a second explanation). In the latter case, I would be a bit nervous about not being one of the obvious admits.