Olórin

Programs that have a lot of continental philosophy also tend to have a lot of coursework in the history of philosophy in my experience, I think that might be an honest difference between a lot of "analytic" vs. "continental" programs (trying to avoid talk about the divide etc.). Of course there are exceptions! A HPS program is going to have history. Obviously. If you were to study Husserl in a cont. program, your class might have a historical approach that follows the transformations in his thought rather than something like an evaluative approach. (Okay I made that phrase up, just trying to say that reading Husserl in a continental program probably won't involve evaluating the viability of his arguments.) I think continental programs tend to be pluralistic departments, because they learned awhile ago that "pluralize or die" were their only options (again, anecdotal experience here, I don't have data). (Probably no one would get a job who can only talk about Adorno.) Again, there are exceptions, but a lot of the programs are pluralistic. As for hiring prospects between analytic and continental departments, here's a report from a couple years ago. Continental programs show up a little higher than you might expect on placement rates (but uhh, they don't show up too high).

A little hesitant to get into an internet argument, but I do think giving a B+ to a 1st semester MA student is an asshole move. I would never try to tank someone’s transcript like that or invoke a logic that made doing so look ordinary (as if grades reflect merit in the first place, just look at gendered distribution of grades in philosophy if you’re doubtful). I’ve never come across someone getting a B+ in grad school without having other complications in the class. And look at the anguish it caused this person, you think a nice professor does that to someone, knowing they would feel the weight of their future so heavily when they saw a B+? What is this professor trying to prove by knocking people down? Also, the poster said that a lot of people got sustained low grades in the class, which means the professor failed to support student learning. Any teacher knows that.

Agreed about the weirdness of the updated list. The older one was less inaccurate in terms of stating where a student can go to find comprehensive support for continental philosophy (which to me means: find other students studying it and have most classes in it instead of just one or two classes a year). I posted the new one assuming it would be, um, not a pile of garbage. But that was a mistake.

Funny timing, I just found the updated guide for 2019/2020 this morning: https://my.vanderbilt.edu/pluralistsguide/program-recommendations/continental-philosophy/ I think your writing sample will be what counts most, and having a degree from a Brazilian university won’t make too much difference. It’s true that people might not be familiar with your university, but your application as a whole will speak for itself. It might help if some of your letter writers are familiar with Canadian/US programs and standards. Actually, it might be helpful to ask them about programs they are familiar with. And a lot of programs are interested in having students from different places, so that could help you.

1. Your professor is an asshole and should know better than to do something like this to a student. 2. Other people will recognize that fact. 3. People know that a B+ in grad school means the professor failed to support students. 4. As long as the other grades are As and continue to be As, you don’t have anything to worry about.

Here's a recent thread on exactly this question: Also, here's a link to the Pluralist's Guide (a non-ranked guide). I don't know when this list was last updated, but it has a good set of the usual suspects for continental philosophy. In my experience the usual suspects really heavy in continental philosophy are: Depaul, Duquesne, Emory, Penn State, Stony Brook, and Villanova. https://sites.psu.edu/pluralistsguide/program-recommendations/continental-philosophy/

Here's a link to the Pluralist's Guide (a non-ranked guide). I don't know when this list was last updated, but it has a good set of the usual suspects for continental philosophy. In my experience the usual suspects really heavy in continental philosophy are: Depaul, Duquesne, Emory, Penn State, Stony Brook, and Villanova. https://sites.psu.edu/pluralistsguide/program-recommendations/continental-philosophy/

Okay, my GPA was like 3.5 and I did fine. (It was college and I didn't know what grad school was until pretty late into my junior year, although I didn't go to grad school for at least four more years after that.) Of all the factors in an application, the GPA is the least significant. One of my refrains: people with higher quantitative factors than you will get rejected, people with lower ones will get accepted. A lot of people think this is straight competition (and it is), but GPA isn't what gets you in or out. It's fit, always fit. Also, if you go around telling people that you're worried your 3.8 GPA isn't good enough, you will elicit some well-deserved eye rolls.

I suspect admissions committees will be more interested in the spread of classes on your transcript, especially in the last two years. So it might behoove you to make sure you are registered for spring semester before generating the transcript (if you will still be taking classes next semester). Some people do think grades say something about a student's likelihood to succeed in a graduate program, but I doubt one more semester will be what makes the difference in their assessment.

1. It will depend on the program. Probably any program that accepts you will offer the possibility of transferring in some coursework, but it depends. I don't think there is such thing as "transfer" student status, because any new program you go to will probably have you start as a first year. It's possible a program will reduce your total funding time and let you enter with advanced standing based on your previous record. You'll only have a master's degree though, so really you'll be in the pool like anyone else with a master's degree in terms of assessing your application. 2. If your professors are invested in your development, they will want you to be in a place that you feel is best for making that happen. I think the extent to which you burn bridges will be incumbent upon how you interact with them throughout the application process. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world to keep up friendly relations as far as that is possible, because these people might be all you've got in the end. 3. Be direct, but don't harp on it. Your capacity to present yourself soberly could factor into whether they think you will be a good presence in their program, and no one will want to go to a pity party for you. Focus on showing why the program you would like to go to is in fact the best possible program for you. 4. Three clichés as a word of caution: The devil you know is better than the devil you don't. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. The grass is always greener on the other side. 5. The first semester of a PhD comes with lots of intangible difficulties. Things may even out, or they may not.

Call the office of graduate studies or its equivalent and ask if your electronic copy can suffice until the hard copy arrives. It could help if you can give them a delivery date. And you probably aren’t the only one because who would have expected they only take hard copies when everyone else takes digitals/unofficial.

So, uh, I have to counter this advice directly. The reality of the GRE is that it can only hurt you. Either you are fine, or your scores raise an eyebrow, or an initial cut is made based on GRE scores to make reading apps more manageable. If Michigan has extra fellowship money available based on initial scores, the department website would tell you or the grad school website would tell you. By the time a committee has narrowed down the pool to the "top" applicants, they are trying to put together a balanced cohort, decide the best fit with respect to other cohorts, make sure faculty members generally have enough students on track to work with them, make sure you're a nice person. The GRE is just not going to come into play at the very final stages of a decision. (Disclaimer: there's always the chance it will. But like, it won't.)

I'm torn because my anecdote is snobbish. It was once recommended to me as a good backup for people interested in continental philosophy. I did not apply. And that's my anecdote.

Sigh, it's hard to say. Every department has a unique admissions process, and the people on the admissions committee tend to change frequently. One year someone may care about quant scores more, another year someone else might not. I know it's frustrating to have to deal with that uncertainty, and my take on programs publishing average scores is that they do it to allay some of that frustration. Even so, an average is still an average; it says something, but not very much. I'd say quant scores usually only obviously matter if you declare an interest in philosophy of mathematics. Anything short of that, and it is the more common position to look past them. Think about this: the faculty evaluating quant scores probably don't study math, and they won't know exactly what a quant score assesses in the first place. So, it's not a great metric for those people to use when assessing applicants. Those people will be more interested in other parts of the application. Like your writing sample. At the end of the day, I wish we could say the score (which by the way is like, not a bad score), I wish we could say it doesn't matter. But it might, and few if any of us will ever know how it mattered, even if we get accepted. (My quant score was 158 if it helps, and I got accepted.)

I don't think it will be a hindrance, and I sort of think 156 is close to average for philosophy applicants. Know this: people with higher scores than you will get rejected from top programs, and people with lower scores than you will get accepted to them. As for understanding how the GRE is evaluated, there is no standard practice. Some people ignore scores, some recognize the GRE is an exercise that punishes people who aren't neurotypical, some people think the GRE measures something relevant to philosophical capacity. It's pretty impossible to predict which is the case for programs that still require the GRE as part of an application, too much inconsistency across the board.

Advice is: don't feel like you have to narrow down too soon. So you have two interest areas. Two is good, and three is sometimes recommended in SoP's by some people. By the time a dissertation starts you might not be interested in any of them. Also, if you show up with a dissertation ready to go, some faculty will perceive you as declaring that you do not intend to explore and evolve throughout the program.

We can't give you what you want. Anyone's odds could always be better. People with better odds sometimes don't get in. People with worse odds sometimes do get in. You're rolling the dice, and nothing about how you describe yourself suggests it will be a bad roll. It is, however, still a roll.

The advanced logic class probably wouldn't add anything to your app unless you write that you're interested in logics in your statement. And if you don' take the logic class, the adcoms will still see your app and think: "Okay, so this student has taken logic. Twice." Also: take the classes you want to take. Of all the things in an app, the particular spread of classes that you took in college are not going to make or break a decision. People will probably only pay attention to your particular classes once they're already sold that you're a competitive applicant anyway. Even then, this is probably not where the decision will get made. (At that point it will be about fit with faculty, program, and the other students they're considering admitting.) Last thing: don't take too much of what I suggest as the law. Adcoms work in mysterious ways and they are all different.

I agree with @maxhgns, especially about that 10 pages a day thing. A lot of other humanities fields privilege reading widely and quickly--but philosophy for me slow and steady. For class readings, I always prioritize reading at my own pace and getting as far as I can at that pace (instead of flying through a book without knowing what's happening just for the sake of it). In the long run, this has ended up helping me, even if there are class periods when I obviously haven't done all the reading. Also, in philosophy (any text really), there's a million and one directions you can follow while reading--just follow what genuinely interests or puzzles you, and don't worry too much about some mythical single meaning that you're supposed to be able to distill from all the noise. Advice for Foucault: in HoS vol. 1 (if that's what you're reading), he's too good at mimicking other people's positions, good enough to trick you into thinking that they are his positions. Sometimes he doesn't let you know until after the fact he articulates the position so that he can critique it later.

Just want to reiterate that age is not a good indicator of whether someone will be around or not, or whether they will be available to serve on dissertation committees. People get new jobs, they go on multi-year leaves of absence, they stop teaching because they get tired, they stop taking on new students because they're over-committed. All sorts of things happen that stop someone from taking on students. Once you get admitted somewhere (it's not worth asking before, it just isn't), then the only person who can tell you are the people you are interested in working with. Grad students don't know as much as they think they do, and they won't be able to predict what your working relationship with someone would be like. So, you should ask everyone directly about where they're at with respect to taking on students. It's part of their job for them to tell people this, they're the ones who signed up to work in PhD programs and be available to advise PhD students. It's also not impossible that someone who plans to retire would still like to serve on committees. Sidenote: if there is only one person in a program you think you'd want to work with, you are probably not a great fit for that program.

Seems like a classic case of putting the cart before the horse. If you get admitted, then you can ask the faculty member if they plan to be around for the next couple years. You should also ask every faculty member this question. They move around a lot and for all sorts of reasons.

Accepted applicants have until April 15 to say yes or no. After that, programs can rescind their offers if they haven’t heard back and give them to someone else. It is not unusual for programs to accept waitlisted applicants after April 15. Lots of programs over-admit on the assumption some will turn down. You’re right that you can’t swap your spot with someone else, you have no way of knowing you’d get an offer if some gradcafe person says they’ll turn down an offer. Even if an offer was made to someone, it might not be to you (same AOI doesn’t mean you have a claim to the spot). Bleak is the name of the game.

5 hours in class 6 hours of assistantship duties ~10 hours reading Sometimes some hours of writing Sometimes 6 hours of departmental obligations (job talks, workshops, prospective student visits) I used to work more but meh, not worth it most weeks.

You stand a chance. Don’t worry about the gpa, it’s not going to be the thing that gets you rejected in most cases. Apply to PhD programs too.

Re: adcoms: it's not just about how brilliant you seem to them. If they have a choice between two excellent candidates in an area, they might go with the one who seems more collegial to them, or the one who seems like a better fit with the other members of the new cohort. These adcoms are selecting people they'll be with for the better part of 6 years, and they're trying to create what they think is a well-balanced cohort. You might be a genius, but if you're a genius with an ego and it shows, that will get you rejected at some places. In other cases, adcoms will have decided to introduce different areas of interest into their program, and that might mean they select students with those interests even if they do not already seem like a polished genius. Also, lots of programs look for potential rather than genius or highly developed professional skills (and if you publish early, you're stuck with that publication for the rest of your life, and you might regret it one day). Basically, the quality of your application and all the accompanying details matter, but whether you get in or not cannot be reduced to how outstanding this or that application is. Other factors matter to them, too, and you can't guess what those are.