Marcus_Aurelius

Yeah, this seems more plausible/clear than what I said before, that joint programs with Classics are more likely to care about hard evidence of Greek than Philosophy depts alone are (even those with strong Ancient programs). But OP also mentioned trying to pass an exam, and that does seem like it'd be sufficient to show profficiency. Ultimately it probably depends highly on the program (caveat again that I'm not so familiar with European programs).

I admittedly know little about European Master's programs, so maybe it doesn't make a big difference for those, but in general, a course on one's transcript is a clearer indication of a certain level of proficiency than a line in a letter is (though letters are, on the whole, more important than transcript). If I were on an adcom and I saw someone who wanted to do ancient but didn't have Greek on their transcript and didn't explain extenuating circumstances, I'd be very confused. If you're relatively sure you want to do ancient, it seems to me that, as long as you've taken a decent number of philosophy courses, nothing is more important than learning Greek (and Latin, or at least whichever is more important for your interests), at least if you hope to end up in a strong PhD program.

Frankly, although I wish you much luck, I'd be surprised if you have much application success without well-documented intermediate-advanced Greek. As others noted, you should have recommenders mention it, but if you can take Greek courses for credit, I'd highly recommend it. (Latin too. Sadly other languages probably won't count for anything, except German, French, and Italian might a bit.)

Unless your AoI requires significant expertise in math/logic, and maybe even not in that case, retaking the GRE seems like it'd be a waste of time with those scores. Based on everything I've seen on this forum, I doubt those scores are what held you back (there could be a bunch of reasons, including just bad luck, but I'll repeat the writing sample mantra).

Ditto what Hector said.

I don't have any particular expertise, but 20 sounds like more than would be particularly helpful, and 10 sounds like rather few to get foundations in a variety of subtopics. Is it possible to minor in something else and take several philosphy courses more than needed? If your philosophy interests would be benefited by a specific double major (e.g. philosophy of physics, bioethics, ancient), a double major could be a game-changer, but otherwise it probably won't matter much. I defer to others, though, since I'm definitely not an expert.

Major GPA is more important than overall GPA. Ideally, in your SoP you'd explain why your bio/overall GPA is lower, which is often easier if your grades have improved over the course of undergrad.

Often, Aristotle's Poetics is more commonly worked on by classicists rather than philosophers. Ditto for Plato's Symposium. Crito and Charmides seem fine, though it's a lot about method and how you think, more than the exact text. That being said, you're right that there's a lot of discussion on some works, so just make sure to key into relevant (preferably recent) literature.

I've accepted Yale, for the joint program in Classics and Philosophy (Classics track) Declined Stanford and Toronto today and took myself off NYU waitlist

I don't know much about the program, but I know it's very strong for analytic mind, and I've had the opportunity to take a couple classes with a faculty member there (recurring visitor at my current institution) and he's great.

Will PM you.

In at Stanford, notified by email Friday night March 22

They sent out initial offers several weeks ago. It's possible they're not done, though, and I don't know what chances are like from someone who hasn't heard from them yet. (I'm a current undergrad.)

That sort of paper would likely be looked at a bit more favorably if you were applying to a Classics track, but it probably wouldn't make a huge difference. Chapters of Cambridge or Blackwell companions are fine sources, but they're often not a good way to get a sense of the current discourse. Looking in journals shows what people are most interested in talking about at the moment.

Regarding the second point, it's worthwhile if you want to apply through Classics departments, but otherwise perhaps not. And there are some philosophers in Classics departments, but not all that many.

Yeah, I wouldn't say a Hellenic sample is necessarily bad, but it should be complemented with perhaps other non-Hellenic stuff elsewhere in the application and should perhaps show familiarity with non-Hellenic material. (Though my impression is that your sample deals extensively with Plato and Xenophon? That sounds great.) This is a diagnosis from afar and I can't say anything concrete without reading the paper, but it sounds like you take on way too much in that sample to be able to make a cogent argument and engage with relevant literature. Philosophy departments want to see your philosophical potential, so focus on philosophical argumentation in a niche of current literature. To be honest, it sounds like the question of to what extent School X follows Socrates is too big for even one writing sample; I can't imagine being able to discuss three schools thoroughly in under 20 pages.

Maybe this is a bit cynical, but I recommend criticizing an argument. Pick a relatively recent paper in an area you're interested in, explain how it fits into the discourse, and critique it (by saying it doesn't prove its point or proves less than its point, must consider something that it doesn't consider, isn't valid because of a controversial suppressed premise, etc.). Best of luck!

I was accepted to Yale and rejected by Princeton, Chicago, and Michigan. (Applied to 9 other programs through Philosophy and was accepted to 1, waitlisted by 1, still waiting on 1, and withdrew from 6.) GPA: 3.99 // GRE: 170V/160Q/6.0AW // Language (semesters): Greek(6)/Latin(8)/German(3) PM me if you want to take a look at my writing sample or SoP. Ultimately, I think I put together some good materials, but at the top schools fit (as perceived by the dept.) seemed to be the explanation for admissions results on my end. But one can only control one's own materials.

BU isn't a particularly well known program for ancient phil afaik, but if there are profs you really like, could be worth it. Michigan also has the PhD in one topic and MA in the other, but I doubt an MA improves one's job prospects, though the places with joint programs are often better programs. I'm no expert, but if you're applying to Philosophy departments (as opposed to Classics departments or Classics tracks of joint programs), I'd recommend against focusing mainly on Hellenistic. Few profs specialize in it, and it'll be much easier for them to imagine you as a good fit if you have familiarity with Plato/Aristotle. Whether you like it or not, they're unavoidable, and besides, much of Hellenistic philosophy indirectly or directly responds to them anyway, so to really be a specialist you'll need to know them well. My biggest passion is Epicurus, but in my statements of purpose I mentioned Aristotle first. And my sample is on Aristotle, though that's in large part because my advidor works on Aristotle. It seems much easier to insert oneself into the literature for Plato or Aristotle and get one's bearings because there's just more literature.

I have no comments on your choice, and I wish you the best of luck, but I do want to say that if 16 courses isn't a very solid background then I don't know what is.

Yeah, as Prose notes, if you really want to apply again, cold emailing profs might be your best bet. Maybe you could audit classes at a local place? That'd help you become familiar to a prof too. And feel free to PM me if you want me to look at it.

They've sent out initial offers but I don't think their whole process is done. I'm a current undergrad, feel free to PM me if I can be of service.

Cornell is a bit of an exception, yeah, because they have multiple joint appointments between Philosophy and Classics and a couple professors (Brennan and Brittain) who have done lots of work on Hellenistic. (I also quite like the interests of their faculty.) So yeah, there it might not matter as much, but there's still a difference. (I applied to Cornell through Philosophy.) Even within Hellenistic, though, there are more Classics-y and more Philosophy-y ways to do things. (E.g. you'd be hard-pressed to find someone in a Classics dept. working on Stoic logic.) I don't have any knowledge of GRE differences, but I doubt there are any. Both departments probably just glance at it in a cursory way.

Addendum: I had separate statements of purpose for the Classics vs. Philosophy apps. Same writing sample.

Hi! Member of your target audience here. I applied to 4 joint programs through Classics, 2 joint programs through Philosophy, and 7 regular Philosophy departments. I've been exceedingly fortunate and was accepted to a joint program through Classics and another through Philosophy. With the caveat that I'm no expert and can only speak from my limited experience this cycle: First question: how are your languages? If they're not pretty decent (3+ years, preferably in both, but at least for the language you intend to do the most work in), apply through Philosophy. Second question: how many professors could write you good letters? I got 3 letters from Philosophy profs and 3 from Classics profs. Could've gotten by woth 5, though (since one of the Philosophy profs does Ancient). If you don't have enough good letters to do either, pick based on whom you could get good letters from. Third question: what are your interests? If you have major interests outside Plato and Aristotle, consider applying through Classics; Philosophy department folks tend to focus on them almost exclusively, particularly on ethics/metaphysics/mind/biology/rhetoric, so if you're mainly interested in works like Aristotle's Poetics or Plato's Symposium, also highly consider Classics. Fourth question: how many language courses do you want to take in grad school? If you don't want to take more than a few and prefer to just participate in reading groups, go to Philosophy, because on a Classics track you'll have to take a whole bunch of (non-philosophical) language courses. Fifth question: what do you want to teach while in grad school? On a Classics track, you'll teach language. Ideally you'd get a chance to teach Philosophy too, but if have a strong preference on what you'll teach, take that into account. These questions aren't exhaustive, but they're some of the major issues. My main advisor (a Philosophy professor) recommended I apply to top programs through Classics because he thought it'd increase my chances and then once I arrived I could focus on my interests; although there are many factors that go into admissions, mt initial impression is that he's correct that Classics is a little less competitive (but still very competitive) at many places. After many conversations with both Philosophy and particularly Classics professors, I was torn about which way to apply because I really love both ways of approaching texts, and I care deeply about language and want to take and teach language but also want to do lots of philosophy and teach at least some philosophy. I eventually decided not to apply through Classics to Toronto because their website said they expect applicants to already have 4 years of both languages (even though a Classics prof told me I'd still be ok to apply there; for reference, I have 4 of Latin, 3 of Greek, and 1 of German). I decided not to apply through Classics to Stanford because I was on the fence and couldn't decide and wanted to apply to some top ones through Phil. Ultimately, I didn't make a decision when applying and still haven't; I will in large part when I choose a program in early April (not sure which way I'll go). I hope this helps! Happy to answer more questions/chat here or by PM.