you'll_never_get_to_heaven

Well, you know, you got a point! I do have a 4.0 GPA, a decent run of assistantships, etc. Could maybe pan out nicely.

Frankly, I just doubted that I had any chance at Pitt or Berkeley, but maybe I ought to try anyway - haha!

Hey all! I think my philosophical journey is going to involve a lot of Hegel/Hegelianism whether I like it or not, so I'm curious as to what everyone's thoughts on the best PhD programs for an applicant with such interests? I already have set my hopes on a few probably obvious contenders (Boston U, Columbia, Northwestern, UC San Diego, UC Riverside, the Catholic universities, etc.). I'm at a more analytic-leaning M.A. program because I wanted to broaden my horizons a bit. My writing sample is on Husserl's horizon-structure / the universal a priori of science. Thanks! (Also happy to talk with other applicants with similar questions)

so, you mean you did not move to Indianapolis for grad school - right?

If you're like me and have/had relatively little existing student debt / paid off debt and built a credit score in between undergrad and grad, the third bullet point might not be as damning. Key word being "might." There might be good M.A. programs that really are funded super well, but not most if you talk to students in attendance. There's an opportunity cost and financial cost to attending an M.A. program in philosophy - period. You can make that worth it whether or not you go onto a PhD program if you play your cards right (i.e., get some good internship-type experiences or what have you, start freelancing, I don't know). Anyhow, here's some admittedly quick googling of tuition statistics for the mentioned schools with terminal M.A. programs mentioned (also most public M.A.s will have in-state tuition waivers): Georgia State: "In-state tuition 9,286 USD, Out-of-state tuition 24,517 USD" UWM: "In-state tuition 9,526 USD, Out-of-state tuition 21,168 USD" NIU: "14,610 USD 2019 – 20" vs. Columbia: 61,788 USD NYU: 53,308 USD Exactly how large is NYU's tuition scholarship? Because it'd have to to be several thousand dollars to compare with what it would cost to attend the first three programs without any funding or tuition remission at all, all of which are also in cheaper locations (well, maybe not GSU at this point but I do not know for sure). It looks like you could fumble through NIU, not do very well and thus not get many funding opportunities and ultimately decide not to go onto a PhD and you would still have accrued substantially less debt. Admittedly, I could be missing something here so correct me if I'm wrong! But it's worth noting that the state schools that have M.A. programs really want you there and really want to place you. They have active incentive to do so. I don't imagine that exists to the same degree at all at the two schools with world-renowned PhD programs.

Cool, I'll check that. So - yeah - as far as "mutual respect" goes, it depends. You ought to reach out to terminal M.A. programs and tell them something about what you're interested in. For example, regarding the program in which I eventually choose to enroll, my graduate advisor was frank that they do not mess with any sort of psychoanalytic business. I would say that, for terminal M.A. programs, I'd weigh how the admissions chair talks to you heavily in your decision. If they are helpful and attentive, it's a good program. If they aren't, it's not (or, at least, it won't be good for you). "Leiter doesn't even really recognize the SPEP ones so I can't say I blame them." Well, if you mean New School, Emory, Stony Brook, Memphis, etc. - then yes. The McAfee-Leiter beef rabbit hole is a great way to waste time on the internet. According to various tenure or tenure track philosophers I have spoken two, the PGR also seems to undervalue both programs that are and are not places with tenured SPEP members: Cincinnati, Essex, Utah, Kansas, Tulane, Amsterdam, Ghent, McGill, Connecticut, Georgia, UC Davis, Temple, Johns Hopkins, Florida, and Buffalo.

I considered the MA at at Stonybrook - no funding except work study, very expensive living situation, and placement seemed to be very restricted. Of all the "continental" M.A.s which also have a PhD, I'd say University of New Mexico would be best. Honestly, I think any terminal M.A. that's a good terminal M.A. overall is good for a student interested in continental, as so long as it isn't overtly hostile to continental. For what it's worth, I'm at an "analytic" program and I've taken courses on Kant, Foucault, and an independent study of Husserl, but I also have a much wider understanding of what's going on in the discipline as a whole and I know how to talk about, say, Canguilhem, to someone who has almost zero familiarity with that area. I also know more about the philosophy of cognitive science than most people interested in continental philosophy. At my program, we had a student place at Memphis which is pretty SPEP-y (as well as Irvine). Anyhow, I don't know, I'm still pretty continental-oriented and I think it was overall a good decision to attend a program strong in analytic (insofar as the division really makes sense anymore). So, I'd apply to M.A.s that are overtly continental, but also M.A.s that are solid overall. It's not a PhD program - you're only there for two years. Also you might wanna take a look and notice that the placement record among the hardcore SPEP programs is, uh, a bit incestuous (similar relationships exist among sets of "analytic" programs as well). And, on one final note, most younger philosophers coming out with PhDs these days don't take the analytic-continental divide as seriously as people did decades ago. Like, no one's going to become visibly upset if you mention Heidegger or whatever.

Oh, and I should add that several excellent terminal M.A. programs are profoundly less expensive than NYU or Columbia. In fact, I don't even have to look up the numbers to tell you with certainty that almost all of the most highly regarded terminal M.A. programs in Philosophy are so much cheaper than those at NYU or Columbia that I cannot think of very many possible reasons why a person would choose either of those.

this. The general rule of thumb is that you ought to be extremely cautious about any MA program that has a PhD program in that field. There are situations in which the MA at a school with a PhD is a solid, well-supported program, but that is not the norm. I mean, think about it - Are you going to get TAships at a place where you're competing with PhD students? Almost certainly not. One of the major reasons to attend a terminal M.A. program is to better set you up for PhD applications - you can broaden/deepen your understanding of the field, present at conferences, get some TAships, dip your toes in grad school life, etc. At the end of the day, the fact is that the department at a school with a PhD program has little reason (or, more importantly, time) to do that for unfunded MA students.

I'm from Indianapolis originally. Feel free to drop into my private messages with any questions! Are you from a coastal city by chance? I think the general conception of the midwest that coastal people have is... horribly inaccurate if I'm being honest.

It depends if you are applying or have been accepted to those programs. I would apply to more programs than just three (and at least a few M.A. programs). In my experience thus far, the programs that the hardcore SPEP people recommend seem to exclude or downplay programs that are - in my experience - pretty good programs for students interested in continental thought (Irvine, Northwestern, etc.). For what it's worth, I've taken courses on Foucault, Kant, and Husserl at an M.A. program that is supposedly "analytic" and some of the strongest students in the program have "pluralist" research interests. I don't think the analytic-continental divide is as strong as it once was, and I have talked about this quite a lot with a recent UC Irvine PhD. I think many in the younger generation feel intellectually deprived if they never read the philosophers that are cited in other departments (History, English, etc.), and yet it is also strange not to have read any Churchland, Dennett, Kripke, etc. If there is a philosopher at a school you like, you ought to ask them about it.

Although most of the people admitted will not ever find a permanent position working in the field and it is clear that much of the published work is irrelevant (and self-indulgently so), I imagine that a small but still too large number of people will be admitted to doctoral programs. Many of these people will have no idea what they are in for and might be doing themselves a massive disservice, but a few people who can't tolerate doing anything else will be roughly as happy as they would otherwise.

don't know about the department but, personally, I find the southern midwest to be one of the most beautiful geographic areas of the United States and it starts right around Bloomington. Brown County, etc. - really great parks.

Oh, wow, that must be recent information! That was the person who was also admitted to Duke and some overseas program as well, I believe.

Depends. Keep in mind that all M.A. programs are relatively newly esteemed. Younger philosophers hold them in high regard, whereas an older 50+ tenured prof at a SLAC might believe that M.A. programs are to be avoided. so, 1) all of the M.A. programs are trying to prove their worth. That means placing students. 2) the ones that have done so already do not need to prove anything by placing you. They probably accept less students, of course, because students who are accepted will almost certainly enroll. They assume - rightfully so - that they'll be able to place most students in good programs. This has its drawbacks, and it's a different situation than PhD programs. For example, my undergrad advisor said GSU would be good for me, except that he had heard rumors of favoritism at that department - and that some students are simply left behind. That's not going to happen at a program that has a vested interest in placing you - specifically you. at any rate, what matters is what program wants you there. If they want you there, it's because they think you're promising and they think they could place you in a top program. That's part of what makes M.A. programs less of a gamble overall (and also why an applicant should choose an esteemed M.A. program over a struggling PhD program).

For what it's worth, a student who finished that program in 2020 advised me not to attend. My correspondence with the grad admissions chair was pretty cold in comparision with my discussions with the admissions chairs at CSULB and New Mexico. Now, last application season was very stressful, so please keep in mind: (1) This is not a comment on the grad chair from last year's character. I do not know him personally at all. (2) I have never been to CSULA, I have only attended a Zoom course - and that was just fine!! But, the student I talked to said that GAships and the like had dried up - and he didn't sound particularly enthused about the future. However, I heard excellent things about the faculty and cohort environment. I would suggest also looking at CSULB if you're looking at terminal M.A. programs in California. Actually, scratch that, I'd highly recommend it. I've had a better than expected time here (and I expected good) and my interests fall outside of what is typical among faculty and my cohort (I'm more "continental" by a really long shot). The admissions chair is extremely helpful and responsive - and critical when he ought to be. He keeps tabs on just about everything that would help a graduate student, he's well-read across the discipline, he knows where you ought to apply (and not apply) based on your interests, he makes sure you have what you need (GAships, etc.), forwards conferences relevant to your interests, etc. If your interests are not "typical" for the department, he'll find courses in other departments that might be helpful. He's gone over and above what I think any student can reasonably expect from someone in his role. The accepted placements I know of from this year's graduating class were into Duke University and UC Irvine. I don't know anything about other students - the whole pandemic thing has made that a bit difficult, as you might imagine. Feel free to contact me in my messages!

If you have questions about CSULB, I'd be happy to answer them!

Eh, it's so hard to find programs friendly to psychoanalysis that I wouldn't bother. At least, M.A. programs. Very few. I don't know if the jump from analytic to continental is really easier, honestly. And you don't need it to be. If you have an interest and you're in a program, there's no reason you can't work with multiple people in other departments if you'd like. And it's not as if you can't go to whatever conferences, etc. you'd like. The program with the grad admissions chair who had his shit together the most and offered the best funding offer was from a more "analytic" department. I'm currently taking a course on Foucault and having an easier time then most because of my background, but it's great to have some more "analytic" peers. What's most important is that your department takes an interest in YOU. Given that they've already been studying and teaching for years, if they like you and offer you money, it's entirely possible that they see interests in your writing sample, etc. that you don't even know. Who cares if the department teaches what you think you want to learn if they don't take an active interest in your career? Department climate matters a lot. Who cares if you get to develop your knowledge of, say, Kierkegaard if you have to do it in with people you dislike in an environment that isn't intellectually engaging?

for what it's worth, I'm a "continental"-oriented person and doing just fine at a supposedly "analytic" department - probably taking an I.S. on Heidegger sometime soon, currently in courses on Kant and Foucault. I mean, you probably wont be able to find someone who wants to talk about Lacan, but Heidegger, Foucault, Marx... shouldn't be so bad. And it's good to have an understanding of how people in other philosophical camps think anyway, even if it means wrestling to understand material that you'll ultimately decide is completely on the wrong track (taking a course with a metaethicist who advocates a reductive naturalist view that is totally wrong to me). I think it matters more at the PhD level than at the M.A. level.

I'd like to come back to this after my second week of graduate studies. (1) research interests =/= teaching interests. You might find that someone who did their dissertation on the history of early analytic philosophy is ready and willing to, for example, teach a course on Heidegger. They might even find it to be refreshing! (2) the analytic/continental divide is far more rigid some places than others, perhaps where people have an ax to grind. But I think it's a rather tiresome debate for some, and for others it really just reflects what they had the opportunity to read. Sometimes it's simply that someone has no experience in X, rather than being opposed to it. (3) it can be really enriching to enter a department of one sort from one of a different sort. You can quickly learn what it is you understand well and what you understand poorly, and how to communicate what you know to someone with a very different background.

finding a part-time job. I'm starting to get pretty anxious about it.

In all honesty, maybe a very good idea for a reason that might not occur to some: I just started an M.A. program and one thing I'm worried about is securing a part-time job. I specifically worked at a university prior to entering grad school so I'd have a more-or-less easy time getting a standard part-time university office job. That seems highly unlikely now, and I'm unsure of exactly what I'm going to do about it.

If money is no object, Stony Brook's Philosophy & The Arts M.A.

Yup! I'm so happy to be in an M.A. and not a doctoral program, so at the end of the day I am not so screwed if I decide not to pursue anything further.

In my recent experience, you absolutely should do so for the CSU schools. The deadlines for non-resident tuition waivers may be months prior to the official deadline and I was admitted to my school long before the admissions deadline.