MentalEngineer

I've never sat on an adcomm, but I've read a few dozen SoPs for people in the last couple years. The common wisdom among the faculty at UWM who teach our workshop on writing samples and SoPs is that the SoP can very rarely help you, but it can hurt you. A stellar SoP isn't going to take a so-so application over the edge, but a bad one can get a good application thrown out. Mostly, you avoid having that happen by not trying to be too gimmicky or innovative. It's kind of like fashion - you can do, like, one thing that's kind of outside the norm as long as you can make it fit, but you can't completely disregard what everyone else is doing. Look at some samples, or get people you know to send you theirs. Keep things that feel authentic to you and change things that feel fake and research, research, research your schools. As I mentioned in the other thread, I think the main positive thing you can do in your SoP is prove that you're a great fit for the particular program. In that sense, your SoP is a piece of philosophy, because it's an argument to the adcomm giving some of the reasons they should choose you over all the other applicants. Your writing sample proves (hopefully) that you're good enough at philosophy. Your SoP proves that you know what the program you're applying to does - not just in broad strokes of "I'm interested in philosophy of mind and Program X has many outstanding faculty who work in that area," but what faculty (and grad students, if they do something cool) have actually done recently. Your SoP proves that you have an idea of what you want to do at that particular program. Yes, your interests will likely change during the course of a PhD, but going into one without having thought about what you're going to do at all does not bode well. Your SoP proves that what the program does and what you want to do are a good match for each other. Ideally, it proves that not by declaring it to be so by fiat - anyone can do that, and adcomms get piles of applications that look like that. Instead, you prove it by pointing to things you have already done - courses taken, papers written, workshops attended, scholars corresponded with, and so on. Doing these things shows that you're approaching your graduate work with a professional attitude and not just applying for the hell of it. Since the ability to think professionally about what you do in your program is almost certainly a necessary condition for successful completion of a PhD, applicants who can already do it are, ceteris paribus, preferable to those who can't. Ceteris non paribus, of course, but you can't help that, so you should act as though they are. Having a well-turned phrase or two in there doesn't hurt either.

TL;DR: make sure your writing sample is good, make sure it reflects what you actually want to work on - this may require writing from scratch, make sure you apply to schools that do what you actually do as shown by your writing sample and not just what you think you do - do not just shotgun the PGR 20 programs in what you think is your subfield or otherwise apply based on wishful thinking. I wrote an entirely new writing sample and changed my list of schools fairly substantially, and I credit these two changes for my acceptances. I also joined these forums, which is definitely the best thing I've done for my professional development so far, as I get to network with people who got into much more highly-ranked programs than I did, put people whose work I dig into contact with each other, and hopefully help some good applicants do well in the next couple years. My very first writing sample was a barely edited paper from a graduate seminar that I took for undergrad credit. In hindsight, it was almost more of an English paper than a philosophy paper: the argument boiled down to "some of the things Madison says about 'faction' in Federalist 10 are similar to what Aristotle says about stasis in Nichomachean Ethics, and some of the things Madison says aren't similar at all." (I still think this is really interesting, but it was not an interesting paper.) I solicited feedback from multiple faculty at my undergrad and proceeded to ignore about 95% of it. I deservedly struck out in my PhD applications; I have NO IDEA how I got into UWM with it. My second writing sample was just the seminar paper I hated least, with a good amount of polish put on it to make it seem like I was actually interested in the problem it addressed. (I was not interested in the problem.) This paper was not my first choice, and it still showed, even after revisions. UWM has a semester-long writing workshop in the second fall semester for everyone who's applying out, and it was really helpful - probably the single most beneficial thing about doing the MA. Unfortunately for me, what I learned from it was that my original choice of writing sample was just totally incoherent (which was true) and wouldn't be of interest to many people (which was also true). There were several other people in my cohort writing on the topic that I switched to, we were applying to many similar schools, and their papers were better. They got in and I did not. To do my last writing sample, I met with my advisor, talked about what I wanted to write about, and really started hashing out some ideas that I'd had scratching around the back of my head for years. He helped me work out what I should read and react to so that I wasn't just vomiting out my ideas without any context, but he also helped me work out my view so that there was more than just exposition going on. That allowed me to write a paper that's actually a piece of original scholarship which advances and supports a view that nobody else holds, in an area that is finally starting to see a bit of mainstream consideration. Getting good advice on your writing sample is critical. If at all possible, get it from someone you can actually talk to in person. If that's not possible, do not be shy about contacting people elsewhere and doing it early. Like, now. You need time to get feedback and time for rewrites. No matter what, if someone's not being helpful, be ready to "dump" them and move on quickly. You need professional eyes on your work and you need them to belong to someone who understands what you're trying to write about. Also, they make you better at philosophy. So much better. Those conversations and reading suggestions alone were probably worth the three years I spent in Milwaukee. I did a lot more research on programs. I looked less for programs that did the work I had always thought of myself as wanting to do (phil. of mind/cogsci/AI stuff), although I kept the ones that I thought could support me. Instead, I looked at programs that seemed likely to be interested in the work I was actually showing I was already capable of in my writing sample. I don't think it's a coincidence that all three of my acceptances came from schools that were new to my list from the previous year, because I was able to show concretely not just how the particular program would be good for me, but also how my work fit into what they wanted to be doing as a department. I think this is my single biggest piece of advice. Everyone will tell you to write a better sample, and they're right. But I think the best bang-for-buck change is to think carefully about where you can demonstrate a strong mutual fit between the program and the actual work that you do as opposed to the work you imagine you do. I did not retake the GRE, and I don't think it's worth the time, effort, or money unless one of your scores is definitively bad. A better writing sample can save a borderline GRE at most programs; a stunning GRE will not help with a mediocre writing sample at most programs; a marginal improvement will have a marginal effect. On the other hand, my first set of scores was good enough for everywhere except a few really quant-heavy programs like MIT, so I'm biased. I suppose if it would make you feel better to retake it and you can afford it, you may as well.

I went through three seasons in total and never even thought to ask schools about this! I assumed that even if departments still had any of my materials, the graduate school or university would require fresh stuff with every application. It would certainly be worth inquiring at places you're re-applying; you could save quite a bit of money.

The fee is in CAD; you probably paid at a bad time.

If you aren't Canadian, the fees to apply in Canada are immense. The spreadsheet says I paid ~120 USD to apply to UBC last year. CUNY's are also huge - spreadsheet says that one was $125.

I'm a successful reapplier with an unhealthy appetite for giving advice, so I'll be around this year again too.

This is tremendously snarky, and I apologize for that, but it's all I can think of reading this thread. Are you sure you're not the new Russian Presidential Chief of Staff and inventor of the nooscope, Anton Vaino? Because what I can extract from your writing looks an awful lot like this: If so, can you explain to me what a three-stage mix level is?

UWM has a current student who studied children's illustration in undergrad, and a couple of people have come through recently with strong interests in aesthetics. If you're also starting to gravitate towards M&E, UWM might actually be a pretty good fit for you. The main question is going to be how much background you've been able to build up. For example, our former artist had done a fair bit of theology and philosophy of religion; while he mostly knew other areas as they were relevant to that focus, he really knew them as applied to it. If you had some formal coursework in theory, you've chosen your outside work to get some background on areas you didn't study at RISD, and you have a good sense that there is philosophy outside of aesthetics and how it's relevant to your focus, you've got as good a chance of getting in to UWM (and by extension, comparable programs) as anyone else. If (as with everyone else) your writing sample is good. Also, don't pay for a MA. Also also, there are some MA programs that are more continental, though I can't remember which ones off the top of my head apart from Marquette. Someone else should know, though.

Bit of a latecomer to this thread, but I'm a recent UWM alum. Feel free to message me now or in the future with any questions you might have.

My stats are in my signature, and aren't/weren't dissimilar to yours. My cumulative is a bit higher, but my philosophy GPA was lower than yours will be. I (with some patience and luck) did fine. You have the additional advantages of name recognition and attentive advising, both of which I lacked at the undergrad level. I think you have as good or nearly as good a chance as many other applicants. I'm still going to tell you to apply to well-regarded, fully funded MA programs, because you should do that whether or not you think you should have to and whether or not you want to.

I know you... This person is cool, y'all, and you should live with her!

Yup! All the other bearded white guys are jolly - crankiness is the province of the follicularly challenged.

Got Austin Saturday (mildly nice to know I actually was still in limbo all the way through deadline day, I guess) and Riverside today. Finally, the season officially closes for me.

Depending on where you are now, it may be...somewhat more difficult to drop half your monthly budget on food in Tallahassee. I share your disposition, so I asked about this. It seems to be possible to get an apartment for $500-$700, which seems pretty manageable.

A number of people at UWM have roommates, but most of them live with other philosophy grad students. This seems like it works, as long as you're willing to become academic/platonic life partners with the other person. That ain't me, though.

This is the first time in my life I'll be able to afford living alone, so I. Am. Doing. That. I think I remember hearing that a 2-person place that's currently being rented by two philosophers is being vacated, though, and that they're looking for replacements. You should message/friend some current students in the program and ask around for other possible opportunities.

Party on, dudes!

Woohoo! Looking forward to meeting you!

Congrats! Madison's a lovely place.

Two things for you. First, my understanding is that FSU (shameless plug) will always offer at least one survey course per semester; in Fall '16 it's Early Modern. So you can get that there. Second, having taken plenty of both at this point, I think your intuition is right. I think survey courses are great for background, they often show you all sorts of connections between your pet interests and other issues, they help prep you to teach undergrad-level stuff, and they're often lots of fun. But for starting to develop my own work, I've found it much more helpful to start digging into a specific area or problem in a seminar. Even if it turns out that I hate the area or think it's a non-problem, I learn a lot getting to that point.

I'm going to have to read this too, then. Because Christ knows I have no idea what Burge thinks he's shown us by the end of that abominable tome.

See ya in two years, then

I know what you mean, but it comes from rereading Philosophical Investigations. Plato is the other "most pleasurable thing in the world" - jumping up and down, screaming, and frothing slightly at the mouth while knowing that I'm completely warranted in doing so.

This is also what I was told when I inquired as to my status. It took a couple days to think it over, but I decided that unless I was certain that I would accept Texas sight unseen, without time to gather more information or visit the department, I'd go ahead and take the best offer I actually had rather than holding out. Lacking that certainty, I accepted the other offer and moved on; your mileage may vary.

I'm pretty sure I'd like him if I read him. I've done enough thinking about "Pierre Menard" that I should probably just read the damn story, and then some others for good measure. We can keep playing this game, though. Anyone else for Steven Millhauser?