sacklunch

Edit.

Just thank the school for the offer of admission, but that you've decided to attend a different school.

It's just like anything else? Some people are naturally lonely, boring, anti-social, ect; some people are social and make friends easily.

Don't over analyse it.

So what? A lot of div schools are not conservative. They may be more than a lot of others, but I don't see how you could really say any of this without actually having gone there?

I'm just tired of hearing about how HDS is "insanely liberal" from folks who don't/didn't go there. You seem to think one cannot get a sound theological education from HDS. I guess it's always fun to pick on the big guy. Meh.

Honestly my experience with HDS hasn't been "lefty" at all. I have several friends over there, and have/am taking classes there through the BTI. Sure, they offer courses that are "lefty" but they also offer courses just like any other div school. The dozen students I know from HDS seem pretty normal theological, not any different from my friends at BC. Meh.

I guess I'm just used to plenty of atheists/agnostics studying this at the grad level? For most classes, unless specifically labeled as such (pastoral), I could care less about someone's faith, ect. I am an agnostic, if it matters.
shalom

So what? A lot of div schools are not conservative. They may be more than a lot of others, but I don't see how you could really say any of this without actually having gone there?

I'm just tired of hearing about how HDS is "insanely liberal" from folks who don't/didn't go there. You seem to think one cannot get a sound theological education from HDS. I guess it's always fun to pick on the big guy. Meh.

So what? A lot of div schools are not conservative. They may be more than a lot of others, but I don't see how you could really say any of this without actually having gone there?

I'm just tired of hearing about how HDS is "insanely liberal" from folks who don't/didn't go there. You seem to think one cannot get a sound theological education from HDS. I guess it's always fun to pick on the big guy. Meh.

Honestly my experience with HDS hasn't been "lefty" at all. I have several friends over there, and have/am taking classes there through the BTI. Sure, they offer courses that are "lefty" but they also offer courses just like any other div school. The dozen students I know from HDS seem pretty normal theological, not any different from my friends at BC. Meh.

I guess I'm just used to plenty of atheists/agnostics studying this at the grad level? For most classes, unless specifically labeled as such (pastoral), I could care less about someone's faith, ect. I am an agnostic, if it matters.
shalom

I am trying to get your message here, but some of your word choice is obscuring what I think may be your intent. So perhaps another approach -- it's so important in online communities to be careful using language that has strong connotative meanings. Your posts about this have made use of several words and turns of phrase -- gross, lefty, wet dreams, what lefty loves -- that are highly charged and frequently used in adversarial/conflicted socio-cultural spaces. While you may be making positive, supportive statements, your word choice is undermining your intent and making you sound dismissive. Does that make sense?

Honestly my experience with HDS hasn't been "lefty" at all. I have several friends over there, and have/am taking classes there through the BTI. Sure, they offer courses that are "lefty" but they also offer courses just like any other div school. The dozen students I know from HDS seem pretty normal theological, not any different from my friends at BC. Meh.

I guess I'm just used to plenty of atheists/agnostics studying this at the grad level? For most classes, unless specifically labeled as such (pastoral), I could care less about someone's faith, ect. I am an agnostic, if it matters.
shalom

Honestly my experience with HDS hasn't been "lefty" at all. I have several friends over there, and have/am taking classes there through the BTI. Sure, they offer courses that are "lefty" but they also offer courses just like any other div school. The dozen students I know from HDS seem pretty normal theological, not any different from my friends at BC. Meh.

I guess I'm just used to plenty of atheists/agnostics studying this at the grad level? For most classes, unless specifically labeled as such (pastoral), I could care less about someone's faith, ect. I am an agnostic, if it matters.
shalom

Harvard is famous for pushing the theological envelope and the obscure. A while back someone made mention of their work with pagan religious traditions and transgendered imagery or something to that effect---that's the kind of thing that they love--the stuff that lefty liberal arts college professors find their niche and get wet-dreams over. Gross. It's not a bad thing, it's just that HDS' program has been getting so far "out there" in the aether than it's hardly a Divinity school anymore, according to virtually every professor who wrote me a recommendation for Harvard this time around -- and according to multiple recent grads who went there to study theology. If you are looking for that sort of secularized approach, look no further, you'll likely get an acceptance and good funding to do so. Here's the rub with HDS though -- although you might not have anyone to work with specifically at HDS, at the masters level you can take the Invictus route and be the master of your own fate and captain of your own soul, your own destiny -- by carving out your own program. AND, and this is great -- you can work with many other schools and libraries surrounding HDS in the Boston area. There's some great resources and faculty available at the Graduate schools and the Boston area religion/theological consortium.

In sum, sometimes to find a reputable school to cater to your needs you need to fandangle a little bit, because you don't want to end up some place really small, with no funding, because you're doing something new which pushes the envelope! Go big!

It wasn't GROSS as in, "GROSS" that's a gross topic -- transgendered! EWWWIE! Miscommunication, miss. What I meant to say, "It's gross" as in ---its the stuff people get WET DREAMS OVER in lefty liberal arts colleges! Might as well strike while the iron is hot with that one, no need to fight the paradigm or go against the grain, what you're studying is important stuff, it's the stuff lefties love, and that's the way that liberal arts education programs are going. Good for you. I myself am as far left as you can possibly go, so I get it. Chill out! No value judgments here... if anything, your assumption about me insulting value judgments is the same cycle of value judgments you seek to protest!

If I run into you at HDS in a class some day I'll point out how hilarious this mis-communication was!

And again, I cannot emphasize enough how I used your scholarship as an example of the "stuff" that lefty HDS loves -- not something that is "gross" because it has something to deal with transgendered images. We don't need to get all hyper-vigilant-defense-mode here. Everyone has "niche" scholarship to a certain extend, yours will work well at HDS if you are accepted.

And Trin, I truly am sorry. It's been a crappy week. I wrote without thinking straight things through.

It's just like anything else? Some people are naturally lonely, boring, anti-social, ect; some people are social and make friends easily.

Don't over analyse it.

I wanted to start a thread for the 2011 Applicants to the MIDP program and Sanford school in general.

I was accepted on the 16th to Duke with a Peace Corps fellows scholarship, making the most attractive choice of the schools I've heard from so far.\


So tell your story!

I am also looking for some off the record information about the MIDP program at Duke. How competative, what's the student body like, and what is the school known for in terms of grad placement.


-Rob

YDS says on their website the 15th, but last year they released them a couple days earlier online, I remember.

From what I have been told they take half a dozen or so applicants in each concentration. No idea how many people apply for that concentration, but I imagine not "too many."

Right, but you seem to be missing the point: literature research has not, to my knowledge, been used to kill anybody. Scientific research, of course, has.
Literature may be--indeed is--a dangerous weapon. That's why experts are needed: we're the literary bomb squad.

The problem is usefulness has diminished greatly. Back in the day I agree it was important, but the importance of science and engineering as of today far exceeds that of the fine arts. My significant other and my mother are both artists and one is majoring in comparative literature. They are probably just as smart as I am and work just as hard, BUT the applications of what they are doing I will not admit are greater than the ones I am working on. Literacy is very important, and although in the past it has brought us to where we are, we have plenty of teachers to teach us how to read and write and at least interpret important papers or readings. If you want to do research about a certain writer's style or a certain time period, that's fantastic. But that does not mean that it will somehow make everyone later in the world better off even if you succeed and become famous.

My argument was speaking about the general public because their respect stems from application of study. I look at the individual and that is why I fully respect the field, but many people just want results and product. If any big revolutions are going to occur NOW (yes the past there were many in literature but also MASSIVE ones in science and engineering like the industrial revolution which pretty much changed the world flat out).

If you look to the future science and engineering have larger chances of changing out world and helping people who are sick or in need of food and water. That is why most people put money into these fields. Your argument about flourishing in the past is true, but now we have overcome that hump it is time for us to take over. You guys got us out of the stone age, now we will take you to the space age.



I completely agree, without language we would be screwed over. However, now that we have it it's not like we need millions of English Ph.D. students to help teach people to read and write. We need English teachers to teach elementary school and high school. You can do that without a Ph.D. Like I said we are now in the age of science like it or not, and that is how the world is and represents it self as. So I thank all of you for your contributions in the past. But now that we got enough knowledge to communicate decently, let us take over. You guys got us out of the stone age, now we will take you to the space age. Just because you were the king once does not make you the king now. Just because no one gave a shit about us many centuries ago doesn't make us the paupers now. Things are not equal, and it has always been this way. Just learn to accept it.

Think of it this way, if 90% of the world's English students decided to be lazy and stop doing their studies, it would be sad but the world would still be alright for awhile. If 90% of scientists and engineers just gave up and stopped working, we would be in some... deep... you know.
Note: Once again RESPECT the people who work so hard, but money goes where it needs to go, not where respect needs to go.

Am I the only one who had nefarious flashbacks of the verbal section of the GRE when I read this post?

I have the most respect for people in all fields and think no less of one or the other. However, the "respect' is lower simply because of the applications of English pale in comparison to many other fields which have far larger impacts and address more pressing needs in the world. To most people, this is why English and many other Liberal Arts seem less "important".

You've been lurking around these forums for four months just to make a thoroughly unnecessary grammar-nazi snark on a thread that had fairly well resolved itself two days prior?

You're in a PhD program and you still don't know the difference between your and you're?

Smoking no doubt affects all the parts of your body, but to quit smoking is always advantageous. Better late than never. Quit smoking benefits are almost instant. You stop smoking and your body begins to react almost immediately. Smokers who quit smoking enjoy better health than smokers who never quit.



There are physical as well as emotional advantages of quitting smoking. As soon as one quits smoking, the withdrawal symptoms may begin, but they are short lived. Ones hands and feet become warmer due to increased circulation of blood. Pulse rate and blood pressure, which are generally high for a smoker, return to normal levels soon after the last cigarette. The blood oxygen level increases to normal and the level of carbon monoxide drops significantly. The mouth, hair and face no longer smell of smoke. The taste buds and the sense of smell improve. Damaged nerve ends begin to regrow. Tendency to cough stops and the production of phlegm returns to normal. Lungs begin to relax and breathing becomes easier. Sinus due to smoking, fatigue or shortness of breath decreases. Cilia regrow in the lungs, thereby keeping the lungs clean and decreasing infections. Stamina and the capability to do more work increase significantly. Walking becomes easier. Energy levels soar higher. Field of vision improves by 15-20%. Risk of the dreaded diseases caused by cigarettes is reduced. Probability of the occurrence of emphysema, heart attacks and cancer come down significantly.



The feeling of confidence increases in the smoker after quitting smoking. Having quit smoking, a great achievement in itself, increases the courage to face all challenges in life.

You may be joking, but I think that's a valid point. Who were the people that developed the weapons of mass destruction? Not the English majors or historians. So many things in the world were just developed to harm each other. It's really sad.

I have very serious issues with the said argument that English in nowway helps anyone in this world. I am not sure how many English departments you have been to, or if you have been in one...but there are many different projects and many different stakes out there. I am personally invested in what I study, which is African American literature. And as an African American, I see the work that I am doing as being something that can open the way to policies that could be implemented to make this world a better place for blacks today....but more importantly underrepresented groups in the broadest sense. Of course I know how important engineering and science are, my dad is an engineer and my mom is a nurse and I respect them SO much for the hard work they put into make life easier for everyone. But there are also others things such as racism, political corruption, and economic exploitation...and I think they are equally as serious. And I respect those in English who are trying to raise the standard of living for us all by interrogating the status quo through their pens. How dare anyone who isn't in English and who hasn't thoroughly examined what is going on in the field think its okay to come online and tell someone in English that their work doesn't matter or that they aren't helping people. I have devoted almost 6 years to trying to figure out how I can use my love for literature to change this world, and I am very proud to be entering a PhD this fall to continue that. People invest their lives into their work, and I would be VERY careful how I voice my opinions about a field that I am not in. I am tired of the crap that I hear from those outside of my field. We need to try to work together in this world, or we all fail. How dare you.