vse

Thank you for the thoughtful response. As I mentioned in my initial comment, I have already excelled in both an analytic graduate seminar taught by an NYU alum (I will have at least two more by the time I apply) and in an undergraduate logic course (including symbolic logic, which I can work through because the ideas are still ultimately verbal). I have also participated professionally in my particular AOI. The spatial processing deficit has never impacted my non-mathematical academic performance; I have performed well in the discipline, will have strong letters (the only reason they know about this is because I have brought it up for this reason; it wouldn't have become apparent to them otherwise), and have people familiar with my research in some of the departments that I am considering applying to. I caution at being arrogant, because I sincerely do not think I am more or less philosophically qualified than any other applicant, but to the degree that most applicants can be presumed to be qualified, I am in that pack minus my quantitative scoring. If I can get my score to a mediocre place, it seems from this thread that a lot of folks are saying not to worry about it too severely. But if it is a bad score, it seems as if risking disclosing might be better than risking inexplicably poor performance. This is genuinely my concern. I have not gone through practice tests on the quantitative section at this point, but it would not surprise me at all if I hit terribly low scores such as that in the Quant. section, while hitting high percentiles in writing and verbal. Of the many, many reasons standardized admissions testing is bad, which also includes class disparities and the like, this is one of them. These tests simply don't work if you fall outside the white, middle-class, neurotypical archetype they have been built for. It doesn't mean I am not going to do everything that I humanly can; but I also know that I am not someone who can simply practice into succeeding at the GRE. There's a clear ceiling and it has nothing to do with my philosophical abilities. Concrete mathematical abilities (as opposed to understanding the logic behind math, which is separate)? Certainly. American Sign Language abilities? As I learned at a conference recently, I will never be able to learn ASL. Ability to take timed mathematics examinations? Quantifiable impact. Analytic metaethics? Not a problem (a meaningful challenge, as it ought to be for all of us, but not because of this). I don't expect anyone here to have a clear bullet; I was just wondering if anyone might have personal experience with an ad. com or with this in their own experiences. Neurodivergence among graduate students and academics is not uncommon, so it's always worth trying.

I have some time before I take the GREs (I will be applying next cycle), but I am genuinely very worried about its implications - so this thread has in many ways been of comfort - and was wondering if anyone here might have some thoughts on my particular circumstance: See - I have a spatial processing disability. What that means in practice is that re-arranging numerical symbols (as well as balance) is difficult for me, which brings down my quantitative scoring and mathematical abilities quite a bit. This isn't a logic problem - I could explain the logic of math to you easily, have succeeded in graduate seminars in an analytic program (think: professor graduated from NYU), and will likely be able to glean a strong letter from my logic professor (the 'symbolic' part of it is still a bit difficult for me but because it's ultimately working with verbal ideas I can translate well enough where the symbols don't get in the way of my love of the actual conceptual / argumentative aspects). I have also presented at professional conferences in my specific AOI and will have strong letters generally. The problem is quite literally only in the symbols themselves. While I can work to minimize the impact (and do qualify for accommodations, though I have complex thoughts on using them), there is nothing that I can do to prevent it from hurting my score as a fact of neurology. I am terrified that my quant. score will keep me out of a discipline that I love and am committed to, either through outright rejection or not being able to get into a program that will get me a job. I am wondering how much I should be concerned - and at what score ought I be concerned - as well as if it would be worthwhile to communicate this fact to ad coms. I don't want to needlessly stigmatize myself, as there is still a deeply false association between hyper-specific learning disabilities such as mine and "intellectual disabilities", but if it would explain the concern in a way that would have an honest, positive impact I would of course prefer that. I could also have letter writers communicate it, though that would seem potentially odder to me. The main focus is on convincing a committee that my quant score is not reflective of my philosophical abilities or potential, which - while I would always caution on being overconfident - is something that everyone universally agrees is true. (Note: I mention the analytic background to emphasize what this concern does not indicate. While I use analytic philosophy as method quite often, my interests are more pluralistic. For example, if I would have to pick schools whose faculty line up most closely with my AOI, I would say that Georgetown and PSU would be at the top. Of the PGR top-top schools, Stanford is likely the best match. Even if was entirely otherwise qualified, the likelihood that I would actually be accepted to NYU is slim to none because there is nobody there who could mentor me.) (There is also a greater than zero chance I would be able to come in with a little bit of my own funding, at least for the first few years, via an external scholarship that could be extended into graduate school.)

Hello folks: Searching through old threads on this topic, I have seemed to hear two things repeated here and there: (1) Presentations during undergraduate don't matter or don't matter much and (2) You shouldn't publish as an undergraduate. I wanted to reach out, if possible, and ask if this resonates as true (the answers I found were disparate and it wasn't the primary focus of questioning); if so, then I am concerned about what the potential for harm is. I have presented at two conferences and have a few abstracts out for consideration - one was a poster session and one was a presentation; neither were undergraduate (I do also have one of those, but tend to be conflicted about including it on my C.V at all because the paper was out of my AOIs. Part of the reason I am starting this thread is that in a lot of prior ones people were assuming the OP was referring to undergraduate presentations). They were sincerely some of the best experiences of my life and solidified my decision to enter Philosophy, so I wouldn't change them - they also pushed me out of my comfort zone and I grew a lot. It would of course disappoint me if my conference activity won't be of help given the time and labor that has gone in to making them possible, but it wouldn't change my desire to attend / participate / present. Given that, I am wondering what harm I could do unintentionally and if there are any notes of caution I should keep in mind. I am also wondering about the possibility for networking. I have had the opportunity to speak with and meet Philosophers in my AOI at multiple universities, as well as make connections within professional orgs. that contain more, and this includes those who work at graduate schools I might want to apply to. I value those relationships for their own sake, but am wondering if my intuition that I should take that opportunity seriously and follow through - that it could help - is correct. Finally, I received unexpected positive feedback on the last paper I presented and was encouraged to publish and asked that I share further edits. I am unsure that everyone who made that recommendation was aware I was an undergraduate student (I didn't hide it; it just didn't come up). Should I not do this out of risk that the work I produce will not be what I want associated with my name one, two, five, ten, etc. years down the road? Thank you for your time!