UKbound

Good grief, go read a book already. Talk about tunnel vision, sheesh!

It's irrelevant that you think what I think is irrelevant. You've officially moved yourself into a position of "completely missing the point." I am one of an overwhelming majority that has, basically no clue about the way this whole QM business works, but nevertheless is on board with it. I'm done quibbling about Einstein, you're clearly seeing exactly what you want to see in that article and further discussion would be futile. If you don't like the invocation of Einstein, fair enough. We'll go with your boy Newton. If you want contemporary, why don't we go with Murray Gell-Man, Franz Boas, Noam Chomsky, Richard Feynman, David Bohm, Saul Kripke or Noam Elkies? I can certainly provide several more if you've got a problem with that list, but I think it should suffice in establishing the fact that there have been many (self-described) religious persons both in the distant past and not-so-distant past who were intellectuals. Shalom :wink:

I, as in me, this non-physicist has faith in QM. I don't fully understand it and, more importantly, I don't need (or even want) to. I have faith in the science. That was the whole point of offering that list. There are many things that we non-scientists absolutely take on faith. I don't need to get into a lab and see the experiments to feel confident about the work that's being done. There's a distinct possibility that much of it will turn out to be rot...like the Ptolemaic system, flogiston, fixity of the species....blah, blah, blah...but for now it's good enough. Oh, btw, Immanuel Kant lived a hundred and fifty or so years AFTER Newton. Moreover, he's widely credited with being the father of Logical Positivism. Also, Einstein was religious by his own account (see the groovy little Wiki article provided by a PP), not mine.

I applied to five, total. That turns out to have been more than enough. I think it really depends on the strength of your application.

Pantheism (Greek: ??? ( 'pan' ) = all and ???? ( 'theos' ) = God, it literally means "God is All" and "All is God") is the view that everything is part of an all-encompassing immanent abstract God; or that the Universe, or nature, and God are equivalent. I'm pretty sure I didn't specify what sort of faith/belief/religion any of those men had, but I did look at your link and, provided anything in it is legitimate (it is Wikipedia after all), I think that first line sums things up quite nicely. "The question of scientific determinism gave rise to questions about Einstein's position on theological determinism, and whether or not he believed in a God. In 1929, Einstein told Rabbi Herbert S. Goldstein "I believe in Spinoza's God, who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world, not in a God Who concerns Himself with the fate and the doings of mankind."[55]" Please note, he was talking to a rabbi. Anyway you cut it, that's faith. Oh and thanks for reminding us of yet another religious (albeit a bit unconventional) person..Spinoza. Spinoza was a pantheist as well. I suppose if I had to choose a camp, agnostic that I am, pantheism seems like a fairly good bet but I'm not even convinced there's a God " who reveals Himself in the lawful harmony of the world" at this point. As far as chosen-ness goes, I think it's pretty clear that that is the most ridiculous idea of all. If the Jews were chosen for anything, it certainly wasn't anything good. Not even sure why you included it...but hey thanks for sharing.

What about those images of the blessed virgin in your toast? http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4034787.stm In all seriousness though, the claim that religious people are not intellectuals is patently ridiculous. In addition to Plato, St. Thomas Aquinas, Renee Descartes, Immanuel Kant, and William James who were all religious men, one of the greatest intellects of the 20th century, Einstein, was a man of faith ("God doesn't play dice" ring a bell?). For many, such as William Paley and Blaise Pascal (nevermind all the ID proponents) it is the "evidence" that leads them to God. I think you need to be very careful, and a bit more precise, with your use of the term evidence. For believers, it's all around them. As non-believers, we're really not in much of a position to dispute it. It just doesn't work for us. But to say religious people aren't intellectuals is ....ugh there's not even a moderately polite way to describe what a bigoted and misinformed position that is. Also, where the heck did you come up with that definition of faith?? Faith is not Are we supposed to simply take that definition on faith? If so, you've basically created a nice little Liar's Paradox for yourself. You certainly can't prove that that is what faith is. Faith is just the belief in ideas that may not be empirically 100% verifiable. Ironically, all of the empirical sciences, being based on induction (there's always the possibility that a purple/black/green swan may show up), rely on faith to some extent. I personally have a great deal of faith... in things like the theory of evolution, quantum mechanics (certainly need a great deal of faith with this one), and the existence of minds.

There certainly do seem to be a lot of not-so-persecuted religions/persons that fall into that category. On the other hand, those that do have a history of genuine religious persecution often just want to put it behind them and move on. With the exception of a handful of extremists, I think most people who have had it bad in the past would prefer to make sure things are better in the present and future, than whine (or kvetch as we say) about being persecuted. Even most modern-day Jews of the kooky variety are more likely to embrace slogans like "never again" than "vengeance is mine."

Likewise. While I certainly consider myself an ethnic Jew (I'm genetically an Ashkenazi Jew and I respect the traditions), the whole God question is just not something I feel any rational person should devote too much time to. I don't, personally, know any Jews who even bother with this issue. Most are basically agnostic, or like my mother, full-blown, hard-core atheists. Frankly, I don't care enough about the God question to even bother with committing to atheism (saying there is NO god opens us up to as many difficulties as saying there is one...you just shift the burden of proof, as in "hey atheist, prove there isn't a God"). I do not, however, have a problem with or feel a need to disabuse persons of faith of their myths. All religion is just a form of collective action at bottom.

HA! How is a religion that boasts 1.5 billion members a minority? You want an Abrahamic minority religion, go with Judaism (we're sitting pretty at whopping 13 million or so). Of course, we don't waste a lot of time praying for favors--we know that if there is a God, it's not very nice. Sorry for the digression...I just find it funny that Islam is considered a minority faith.

Philosophy is generally categorized under the Humanities umbrella, so it's quite possible that it's school specific rather than discipline. I have a good friend who applied to Berkeley's Psych program at the deadline last year and was in by late Jan. Also, not all schools bother waiting until after their own deadlines have passed to send out offers/rejections.

I submitted three applications during the first week of September, got offers from two of the three the third week of October and an offer from the third about a week-and-a-half ago. I also submitted two other applications at the end of September--so far one rejection and I haven't yet heard from the other. So it looks like anywhere from about six to ten weeks...give or take.

Minnesotan, your obnoxiousness is second only to your obtuseness. I didn't shift the topic to racism or anywhere for that matter, American Woman did. I didn't support the act of fraud, and neither did UKgrad (thank you for reposting the post ...it's quite clear that this person thinks the original poster is a busy body, and is simply going out of his way to point that out...still no "YOU SHOULD COMMIT FORCERGY AND OTHER ACTS OF FRAUD" message in there). We may be stinky, buy you sir are a blockhead. I genuinely hope you pay closer attention to your coursework than you have the actual content of this thread. :wink:

It would be nice if we could keep track of who we're talking about. Our "British friend" never weighed in on the matter of racism, I did. I'm an American, and I don't endorse fraud OR racism. I think this whole topic has gotten kind of out of hand. No one, NO ONE, endorsed forgery or committing fraud. I, personally, find the whole sordid business very disappointing. The original problem, the way certain posters responded, and even the misrepresentations on the part of still others is really sad. Not one single person on either side of this supposed problem has spoken out in favor of fraud (UKgrad's point, as I took it, was essentially 'stop worrying about others, take care of your own stuff'). Yet, we suddenly have accusations of endorsement of fraud. WTF is that about? What's really disturbing to some of us is the way people have argued against this girl's actions. Slurs, slights, and insinuations should have no place in a discussion between educated adults. We all seem to have forgotten what the original poster presented to us. For starters, there hasn't been a forgery (if these fraudulent letters were submitted online, not even the signatures were forged). The pathetic girl in question wrote her own letters of support and put someone else's name on them. A crappy thing to do, indeed, and definitely fraudulent...but the reason we all get so up in arms about plagiarism is we don't want others taking credit for our hard work. That is why plagiarism is such a serious offense in academia. This girl wrote her own letters, supporting what sounded like an otherwise very solid applications, and "signed" someone else's name. Minnesotan and others who keep using terms like forgery, saying that those of us who saw the earlier crack about Brits as inappropriate are somehow supporters of the behavior, don't seem to be able to keep straight exactly what has a occurred. There's been no forgery, it's a case of fraud, and nobody approves of what this sad sack did, so let's knock off the mudslinging. Being loud won't make the things you've said any less inaccurate or inapplicable.

I sent both of the schools I was offered admission to a short email letting them know I would notify them of my decision shortly. Be sure to check for deadlines. Both of the programs that offered me spots had clear specifications about when I needed to accept their offer by. You may inadvertently lose your place if there are deadlines and you haven't acknowledged the offer.

Interesting, though I kinda wonder whether you'd take those comments the same way if they were made in reference to an American? An Asian? A Jew? Any person representing a group of color? A very clear, and quite direct, reference was made regarding the attitude of Brits, questioning their tolerance of ethical indiscretions (the comment wasn't directed at UKgrad). I, for one, think that comment is pretty clearly "culturally biased" and we all know cultural bias is really just a veiled form racism. I don't think your reply is terribly mature either, your little rant looks a little nutty even. All the things you brought up in your mini rant are real problems, and I actually envy you your glibness on the matter. I wish all of us could be so relaxed about these issues. There are some very good points that probably should be considered in American Woman's post. Wouldn't it be nice if Americans, as a culture, could try to see from others point-of-view on occasion. Just for kicks maybe...

Something to think about...your baby will not be a baby baby by the time you start your program and by the time you finish, he/she will have started school. As hard as it is to conceive right now, it will go fast. I'm 39 and have three children myself (3,13, 19), and I can tell you that time absolutely flies. I went back to school to do a bachelor's degree when the youngest was five months old, and while it wasn't easy, it certainly wasn't impossible. Most big schools have childcare facilities that are really quite good and there is some expectation that female grad students may have children during the five or six year period during which they complete their degrees. I think it's definitely quite possible to do a phd with children, that's certainly my plan, but as with anything make sure you know what resources are available to you. As for completing all the things you need to to complete your application by the deadline...that might be a little trickier. It might not be a bad idea to wait until next year in order to avoid making yourself totally nuts. You may find that going back to school with two-year-old is easier than with a one-year-old, for both you and your child.

This is the strangest thing. Since accepting an offer from King's College London I've become incredibly insecure about my undergrad education. I've done really well at a top tier state school, did well on the GRE, and have been accepted at least one other program. Nevertheless, I can't shake the fear that somehow I've gone these last three years without really "getting it." I'm sure part of it is the field I've chosen, as virtually everyone who takes up Philosophy as a career has experienced the sensation of feeling like everyone but you understands the material you're dealing with but, ugh...could I have come this far still have no clue? Is it possible the "fraud complex" could be setting in already?? I felt so confident...right up until I was actually offered admission. :?

Sadly, I think the poster above is right. If this girl has the mettle to be successful in grad school she'll do it. If she forged those letters because she doesn't, she'll find out soon enough. I really don't see the need to say anything one way or the other. You're not her instructor, you're not her adviser, and you're not her competition. It's really sad that someone can achieve what this girl has without finding a single person to support her application, but I don't think you're doing yourself, or anyone else for that matter, any favors by wasting your time ratting this girl out. If she doesn't have what it takes to get through grad school, she won't. Her personality clearly hasn't gotten in her way thus far. If her writing sample or personal statement were plagiarized I think the situation would be different. The fact that she feels she's the only one capable of supporting her application (which means she doesn't have much faith in either her instructors or herself) puts a different bent on the whole situation. Technically, she's not stealing anyone's work. She's putting words in someone's mouth, on her own behalf. At the end of the day, the whole thing is just really sad. I can't imagine what it would be like to go your entire undergrad career without getting to know even one instructor well enough to ask for a letter. Can you imagine what her internal life must be like... :|

My personal statement was one page, around 600 words single-spaced. It probably would have been even shorter if not for the fact that I'm quite a bit older and had to account for a very long break from academia (marriage, kids, work). Short and sweet seems to be the way to go. Just tell them who you are and what you want to do.

I accepted invitations to both Phi Beta Kappa and Golden Key. The initiation fee for PBK was actually paid for by my department, Philosophy.

I got my replies via email as well. The UK system is a little different so they came very early, but essentially the first round of emails came from the departments and the second came from the graduate school admissions. The second wave had all the administrative stuff, student ID number, housing info, conditions, etc. Btw, t_ruth you're not alone in the "old lady" club. I'll be 39 in March, and I have three kids. Fortunately two of them are older and will be staying in the US at least for my first year. My little one is with his father most of the time, so he'll go back and forth according to our academic schedule (in other words he'll be with me for breaks, summer, and holidays).

I suspect that the field the candidates are coming from (and entering) will be relevant here. Research experience for those of us who have done our undergrad work in fields like Philosophy or English is fairly unusual (as a Phil major, my honors capstone was simply a graduate level course which required a much longer paper). On the other hand, it's basically a given for things like Anthropology (for my Anth major, the honors project involved a year-long research project with a proposal at the beginning and the presentation of my thesis at the end), Biology, CS. With that in mind I would say the stronger candidate is going to be the one whose actually been most successful accomplishing what is expected for the field at that stage of his/her education. The GPA will probably be a more significant factor in those areas where research wasn't really an option. I would guess this would also be the case for the GRE.

Have you looked into the average GRE scores for the programs you're applying to? I think you should be fine. If you're really concerned you might want to consider applying to more schools rather than retaking the test. Your other scores are good, you've already done graduate work, and, in all honesty, a 4.5 AW isn't really bad enough to throw out the entire application. I have a very close friend who just started a Phd at Berkeley in Psychology who got in (with funding) with much lower scores. Also, the school I'm coming from has much lower GRE averages for the non-clinical programs in Psych than yours.

I don't know if this is any consolation, but your experience is not all that unusual. There's another thread of a similar vein on the Philosophy board below. I was also extremely surprised by my AW score (also a 4.5). My verbal was in the 99th (750) so it seems there may be some sort of disconnect occurring. How does a person whose verbal score is in the top of the top percentile suddenly find herself lumped in with average on the writing? I think it may be a situation where the evaluators are themselves not up to the task of evaluating the samples or, perhaps, they're just shuffling them through without really giving the samples proper attention. Either way, I'm not going to bother retaking the test. My combined score on the other two parts was 1460 and the writing sample(s) I've used in my applications have already gotten me offers from two schools. Your institutions will be evaluating your entire application, not the just AW section of the GRE. Link to other discussion: viewtopic.php?f=53&t=14219

I just sent the entire paper(s) and included a note on the top page , "Please refer to pages... in the evaluation of this writing sample." That way the paper was left in tact and references were included, but the evaluators were directed to the key part of the argument. If they wanted to read on they could. I think this approach will probably work for most disciplines in which a writing sample is required. My major is Philosophy, so four of the five schools I applied actually asked for two samples (with shorter page limits than I expected) and I was only able to honor the guidelines by doing it this way. So far, I've been accepted at two of the five programs, so I don't think the approach bothered the evaluators.