Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About quineonthevine

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Location
  • Application Season
    2020 Fall

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. This is a group for everyone applying to graduate school in philosophy this cycle, to matriculate in fall 2020. There is also a Facebook group with the same name as this thread, where people can discuss everything about this whole process. Good luck everyone! ☺️
  2. I agree with the suggestion that you should contact philosophers working in ancient/Hellenistic phil. I think it's also worth contacting the faculty members of Classics departments near you, as there are many ancient philosophers working in Classics departments.
  3. quineonthevine


    I'd be surprised if UCLA accepted fewer people than usual this year, as the department recently received a gift of $20 million.
  4. One of my professors submitted two writing samples because she was interested in two very different subjects. (I think one interest was in contemporary analytic philosophy and the other was a historical paper in ancient or modern philosophy.) The benefit of doing that is you can show admission committees you're competent in two very different sub-fields of philosophy. She was admitted to top programs, although I think she applied before the recession, so maybe the situation is different now. But she served on admission committees at my university and elsewhere, and she didn't think it was a bad idea to submit more than one paper (unless both of them are extremely long or something).
  5. I get the sense that many academic philosophers are well-meaning, but there are many reasons (many of them institutional) that can make philosophy an inaccessible and/or hostile environment for people of color and women. One reason has to do with demographics: something like 75% of practicing academic philosophers are white men, and 10% or so are white women. That lack of representation among faculty often dissuades people of color and women from participating in academic philosophy. Another reason is lack of diversity in what is taught at major universities (both with respect to content, such as restricting material to major topics in analytic philosophy, as well as the philosophers discussed in classes, who by and large tend to be white men). Moreover, academic philosophers tend to continue teaching throughout most of their lives. So there are many prominent philosophers who are just from a different time period, and tend to be less cognizant of the need to be inclusive than the younger generation. Also, I think the rigor of academic philosophy allows for an environment where it is permissible to be dismissive of unorthodox views/dissenting voices. This is something that's sure to vary from place to place, but I think this a problem in the culture of academic philosophy. I've seen undergraduates talking over other voices in the classroom, especially undergraduates who are women and people of color. I've seen undergraduates talk over graduate students, or even professors, who are women or people of color. I've also heard of philosophers from diverse backgrounds getting hate mail because they are minorities (even explicitly). It's hard not to notice these things, and it's very clear what impact it has on people from these groups, even if actions like these are unintentional. And I know plenty people of color and women in philosophy (from various departments) who have felt unwelcome in academic philosophy for various reasons. Those are some reasons why I don't think it's plausible to say that philosophy is very inclusive as things stand. For if it were, we should be seeing much more participation from people of color and women. Organizations like MAP are fighting the good fight, but there's a lot of work to be done to make philosophy more inclusive. With all of that said, I don't get the sense that philosophy is generally vicious in the way OP was asking about. I just think it can be vicious in different respects. I hope this clarifies what I meant @Rose-Colored Beetle & @loffire.
  6. I haven't heard of graduate schools being like that, but I do know that graduate school in philosophy is often a hostile environment for people of color and women, although it depends on the program. In that sense it can be a vicious environment.
  7. UPenn's department recently dropped the GRE requirement from admissions.
  8. As far as I know, your community college GPA does count as part of the GPA that adcoms consider. Of course they care more about your upper-division coursework, but that substantially brings up your overall GPA.
  9. @HomoLudens Thanks for making this thread! While I think novelty can be good, your topic may be too esoteric. If the only people who work on your topic are in Germany, most admission committees in the US won't really know what to make of your sample. I don't know. My letter writers told me to have a topic that people on the admission committees would be familiar with, so it might be detrimental in your case to write on something that admission committees will likely not be familiar with (although you'll probably be applying to places that work more heavily in continental philosophy, so this might not be so bad.) On a different note -- what do you all think about having an ambitious writing sample? My paper basically argues that meaning is irreducible -- of course, that's a really controversial view, so I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to write about it. On the other hand, I think my topic is more interesting than what I'd write otherwise.
  10. My AOI's are meaning, mind, and epistemology. I also have interests in the history of analytic philosophy and the history of philosophy generally. My sample is on Kripkenstein and I'm coming from a PGR top-10 school. I'm planning to apply to ~20-25 PhD programs (the PGR top-20, more or less, and some other programs) and 4 or 5 MA programs. NYU is the dream, but I'd be really happy with any top-20 PGR program in NYC, Boston area, or California, with a couple exceptions. If anybody's interested, I've compiled a word document with all the deadlines and application fees of all the schools I'm applying to. Some programs haven't updated their application deadlines - for those, I included last year's deadline and made a note. This list includes all of the PGR top-20, I believe), so it might be useful to a few of you. The total cost of application fees for about 25 PhD programs and 5 MA programs is approximately $2500 ?. PM me if you want this document! I'm planning to give this list of deadlines (minus the app. fees) to all of my letter writers so they know when their letters should be submitted by.
  11. My AOI’s are language, mind, epistemology, and history of (analytic) philosophy. I’m basically planning to blanket the PGR top 20 and apply to some other PhD programs. I also want to apply to a few MA programs, although I’m not sure where I’d apply. My sample is on Kripkenstein and non-reductionism about meaning. I’d really love to go to NYU, but I’m not holding my breath. Thankfully most/all of the schools I’m applying to are strong in my research interests. I want to go somewhere that has at least some focus on the history of philosophy, so I’m not sure whether I’ll apply to MIT.
  12. This a thread for everybody applying this fall for admission in the fall of 2019. What are your areas of interest? Where are you planning to apply? What is your topic for your writing sample? What are your stats (if you feel comfortable sharing them)? Also, you should all join the Facebook group called "Philosophy Graduate Entrants 2019".
  13. I really like Scanlon's fundamentalism about reasons (non-naturalist normative realism). I think his account in "Reasons Fundamentalism" provides a nice way of thinking about the irreducibility of plenty of other central topics in philosophy (I'm thinking about the irreducibility of meaning, understanding, and knowledge in particular.) I don't think nonreductionism is very popular outside of metaethics/moral philosophy, however, but I hope that will change. I'm sure the grounding craze will die down, but I expect that people will start to think more about explanation in general, and what sorts of explanation are satisfying. I think this is especially so because certain concepts (e.g. knowledge) have failed to be analyzed in the traditional way via non-circular necessary and sufficient conditions.
  14. Any of the above books seem good. I know this isn't an anthology, but I'd also suggest reading all of Kripke's "Naming and Necessity". Personally, I thought it was a fantastic introduction to analytic philosophy of language (but it also has very important implications for metaphysics and philosophy of mind, and it gives you a good sense of some different debates in analytic philosophy), and it's very accessible in my opinion. The manuscript was originally given as a lecture, so the writing is very casual and easy to follow. I think that's the single most important book-length work that someone in your shoes should be somewhat familiar with.
  15. Same - in particular, if anyone has written their sample in language/mind/epistemology, I'd love to read it!
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.