Astaroth

I just submitted another application, for Cell and Molecular Biology at the University of Vermont. I hadn't really considered the place at all, it doesn't feature highly at all in rankings which I suppose is the reason why. My supervisor did some visiting research there during his post-doc and has a couple of friends in the faculty so he said that I should consider it. It actually looks like a very good program, sure it doesn't have "prestige" and you'll be hard pressed to find any Nature/Science/Cell publications by the faculty, but the research they do there is quite close to my interests and the place itself (Burlington) sounds wonderful. After applying here I've actually realised that I don't really care about prestige very much, and I know that the USNews rankings say very little about what the quality of my education/research will be at a particular university. In hindsight perhaps I should have applied to less reach universities and more places that sound like I would like doing a PhD there. It was definitely a mistake applying to Mayo Grad School, at this point I don't think I would go there even if they offered me a place.

Hmmm, quorum sensing, eh? I'm not a microbiologist but I am doing a microbiology module this term, in fact I have an exam on it next week. Quorum sensing and biofilm formation were in one of the lectures... interesting stuff, although the lecturer was trying to present biofilm formation as a form of "development" in bacteria, which I don't really buy. I actually had a rather horrible dream about biofilms, but let's not go there. Anyway sorry, I'm not really contributing much, continue.

Well, just sent in my application. Believe me, dowjones, the city should be paying you right now cause you have been a considerable influence in me wanting to go there!

Well you're selling your city quite well! Small, safe and fun are definitely things I am looking for. I'm quite used to walking and taking public transport as well, although I love a good long drive. I'm from Cyprus... so actually worse than Nevada. I'm doing my undergrad in the UK and one of the main reasons I'm leaving is the lousy summer you get here (if it can even be called a summer), so I guess weather is a consideration. Is the Burlington winter noticeably worse than, say, Boston's? How long would you say it is uncomfortably cold for? Sure, I'm not used to extreme cold but to be honest, as long as houses there are built with good insulation and I won't be spending half my stipend on heating, and if the city can survive heavy snowfall without everything shutting down, then I don't think I will have much of a problem with it. The good thing about cold is that you can just wear 5 layers of clothes and you'll be fine. On the other hand, there isn't much that can help you in 42 Celsius heat (quite a common occurrence in Cyprus).

Can anyone tell me anything about Burlington and the University of Vermont? I may be applying there for a Biophysics PhD. Are the winters as bad as they sound?

Ignore status pages, they are meaningless because due to the number of applications coming in they are never up to date (unless you're applying to a small school where they might have fewer paperwork to go through). I've had to phone one of mine and get the admissions person at the other end to pull my GRE scores out of a spreadsheet, where it had been sitting for weeks with my status page saying they had "not received" it! As for your little problem, write an e-mail explaining the situation (basically say that it was something you just somehow missed and don't dwell on it too much) and ask very kindly whether they could help you rectify the problem. From what I gather admissions staff are not allowed to alter applications, but what they can do is append something to an application, so if you have access to the page you filled in wrongly, edit it again correctly, print it and send it to them (or better yet, print to a PDF file and attach it to your email). Chances are they will be able to do that. You might want to give them a call and let them know that you've e-mailed if the deadline is close, just to make sure it's looked at in time. This isn't bad at all, don't worry. People are most of the time quite willing to help you out, especially if you ask nicely, so just e-mail them.

It seems unnecessary to me to argue why you want to have an education at all. You're applying to grad school, after all, that says something in itself. Don't waste space/time on arguing philosophical points and being profound, just get right to the point. This is the advice I was given when I wrote my statement, and what I found to yield the best result: Say what you've learned in your undergrad, what research you've done, what your academic interests are, why you have decided to commit to going to grad school and why you are applying at that particular place. Use strong, positive, non-passive wording, and emphasize your positive traits while making sure you don't dwell on any negative aspects (and only mention any if absolutely necessary). Don't tell them your life story, don't ramble, don't say anything that could irk someone or put them off. Keep it short (under 2 sides of A4 at single/1.5 spacing), space your paragraphs and use single-word sub-headings in order to guide the reader through the text. Above all, write well, be interesting and stand out. As for your specific questions: - Assume that they will look at your statement carefully and with interest, but keep in mind they have 600 more to read through. - They will not look for a good introduction only, it's not like you're meant to write an Abstract. They will most likely start by glancing through or speed-reading it, and then reading it more carefully. - You shouldn't brag, but you should display your achievements and your positive traits as clearly as possible. Make them stand out and make it immediately obvious why what you have written is positive (don't say something that you will then need another whole sentence to justify as a positive trait, that's like trying to convince them when you're trying to impress them). - There should be a balance, and it should be tipped towards academic reasons. If your personal reasons are quite disconnected from the subject then mention them briefly, if they are related then try to present them as something that boosts the interest you already have in your field. This may be obvious but have your statement proof-read, preferably by someone who will be honest with you, and someone who is very anal about grammar and spelling.

Well I just called that last school who "hadn't received my GRE yet" and asked them what exactly is going on... the very nice lady on the other end of the line asked for my surname, said she would check something, and in about 30 seconds she said "yes, we have it, i'll update your status page". :x

They won't even notice.

Well I didn't say any of those things, I was just wondering whether you had seen it because it sounds like something you might be interested in... but more to the point it's an example of something that I'm pretty sure someone in your position a few years ago was saying could never ever be done and is completely impossible. Who even knew someone was trying to extract live images from human brain? It sounds completely insane, yet here it is. So I don't see any point in having to decide right now what the future of science will be. Funny how you try to apply determinism to science but don't allow science to apply determinism to you 8) As for free will, something I read in a post on another forum has stuck in my mind as all that needs to be said about free will: "The illusion of having free will is much more important than whether we actually have free will." From a pragmatic viewpoint, that should fully satisfy you. If you aren't into pragmatism then we have other things to talk about, but if you are, then this should make you re-consider how important a question free will really is. I would also recommend that you listen to the song "Veil of Maya" by Cynic, as it directly addresses this issue. (or you can just read about the Veil of Maya, but listening to the song is a lot more fun)

I just sent short e-mails thanking them and saying that I'd let them know how it goes. I'll probably thank them more "properly" if I get accepted anywhere... if I don't then who knows, it might have been their fault 8)

It annoys me so much that they do this. One of my applications says they haven't received my GRE scores yet, and I sent them almost 2 months ago now. All other schools I sent scores to at the same time got them. I asked them and they told me not to worry about it, but to be honest I do worry about it because it's my application and not theirs, and I don't understand what the point of having an online status page is if it isn't actually up to date?! Anyway, I have a receipt from ETS for this so at least I won't have to fork out another ridiculous $20.

grex, have you seen this? Visual Image Reconstruction from Human Brain Activity using a Combination of Multiscale Local Image Decoders http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=h1Gu1YSoDaY

How strange, I just woke up from a dream in which I was in church and was stood across the room from an old friend so I stared at him until he looked over and recognized me... but he looked over and it turned out to be someone else, so I had to explain why I was staring. And after that I accused the pastor of running a mental home... but that's a different story. The point I am trying to make is, I have also read holy books and taken guidance from them, I have also (albeit briefly) been part of such a community and so on (although I must say I never really did "get" religious ritual, but I realize that's just me). I never once believed in anything supernatural or had even a slight change in my philosophical agnosticism or practical atheism. You might think that sounds crazy (an atheist in church?!) but I'm sure I wasn't the only one. And that was in an evangelical church, let's not forget the Unitarian Universalists who are quite openly non-theistic or the Quakers who might as well be.

Maybe you should try reading more science and less philosophy? There are plenty of hypotheses out there. No, I think the answer is "who knows? why do we have to decide this? let's just wait and see". As for your repeated attempts to describe anything related to science as faith... I find that curious and interesting. Do you want to discuss semantics? People don't have the time or the interest level to read every single scientific journal out there and be up to date with all the "-isms" philosophers (post-modern ones, mainly) have come up with lately. Obviously you will trust that someone will figure something out... if you actually care about whether it will be figured out. An example is a cure for a disease. Science-based medicine has cured many diseases in the past. This gives people a very good excuse to trust that they will eventually figure out the disease they care about. Do you want to say that they have faith that it will be figured out? Go ahead, use whatever word you like! As for the consciousness thing that people just keep banging on about, why exactly do you care so much? I'm not saying I don't care, I'm just wondering why you think it so devastatingly important that it infuriates you and makes you want to reject science all over the place! Finally, as for being brought up to have faith in science, well I am quite proud to be one of those children brutally indoctrinated into "scientism"! Why am I proud of it? Because it happens to be based on evidence and pragmatism. Name one other faith that is based on evidence. Actually, from now on I consider myself to be a person of faith. In science.

You haven't really shown how the two views are equally tenable, or even addressed the issue, you just stated it. When your argument begins with "this is something that science cannot touch", then naturally your answer to the question "can science touch this?" will be "no!". Stop! Hammertime.

Hmm.. sounds like I should read past Children of Dune!

There are friendly people and not-so-friendly people anywhere you go. It's quite ridiculous to suggest that people in a particular city (let alone in an entire group of states!) are less friendly than in others. You'd be surprised to find that the number of friendly people you meet is quite well correlated with how friendly YOU are.

I don't necessarily have a problem with "agnosticism", but ambivalence is not what I have. I forgot to mention that I am in the exact same place with regards to God as I am with regards to the Flying Spaghetti Monster, the Invisible Pink Unicorn, the Loch Ness Monster (I would say I am more inclined towards believing that one than God!), fairies, and all sorts of other things proposed to exist but having no evidence to support their existence. There are two aspects of this. One is what your "philosophical" position is, which is mostly what we have been talking about here. But the other, and IMO the more important aspect, is how you go on to APPLY this philosophical position to the way you live your life. This can sometimes be completely different to the philosophical position itself. For example, I am philosophically an agnostic, but in practice I am an atheist. Some people call this "agnostic atheism" and is the label I tend to opt for. Why do I "practice atheism"? Because it's intellectually easier and more comfortable to me, and I don't see any sort of cognitive dissonance here. My other options would be to be an "agnostic agnostic", which is extremely difficult, and people tend to go through this phase transitionally in their teenage years as they begin to reject religion. One can practice agnosticism by constantly evaluating every single thing that happens against these two hypotheses: "God exists", and "God does not exist". Although philosophically viable, this is a very tiring way to live your life, especially if you have better things to do, such as worry about your grad school applications. The final option would be "agnostic theism", which means that I have ambivalent doubt as previously described, but I choose to "play it safe" by practicing a theistic religion. Once again there is no philosophical discord here in my view, and in fact I think a substantial portion of the religious community are in this camp, especially younger folk. These are the people that are actually willing to converse with you about faith and will express doubt. So, to recap, here are my options: 1. Theistic theism: Thanks, but no thanks. Only Sith deal in absolutes. Sith and Fundies. Show me some evidence and I'll think about it. 2. Atheistic atheism: See above. Although I should say that there is plenty more "evidence" to support this than the former. 3. Agnostic agnosticism: Confusing, takes too much effort, although philosophically sound. Grew out of it about 8 years ago. 4. Agnostic theism: This is the vast majority of people... I see the appeal, but personally don't buy it. (What if I'm wrong? What if YOU'RE wrong?) 5. Agnostic atheism: Ah, now we're talking. Yes please.

If atheism is a faith, then what is a lack of faith? Because that's what I have, a lack of faith.

There's your answer.

Thanks.. let's hope it doesn't come to that. :

Thanks for the very encouraging words, lauras. I was wondering whether you could answer this question, since you know someone involved in admissions: I currently have a fairly low GPA (3.3), but I am about to receive a bunch of grades that I expect will push my GPA up considerably. However, that won't be till March, and I've of course already sent all my applications in and all deadlines have passed. Do you know whether it would be acceptable for me to try to send my new grades to schools that may have rejected me or not yet accepted me by then, and ask them to re-evaluate my application with the new grades in mind? I know that GPA isn't everything and my credentials are otherwise pretty good (1410 GRE, good research experience, top 5 undergrad school etc) but if this is something that is generally done then I will definitely pursue it.

My criticism was offered constructively. It saddens me that several people have perceived it otherwise. The intention remains good, and what I mentioned about keeping negative things as far away from your SoP as possible is something you would have heard from any SoP advisor anyway. You can still mention that you're a high school drop out if you think it's that necessary, but even if you have an amazing life story about how you bounced back and conquered the world, admissions officers read personal statements to evaluate you as a candidate, they don't care about your life story. Give them your credentials, argue why you are good at what you do, show your interest in what you do, and show that you are confident about what you are getting yourself into. If they wanted to hear your life story, they would ask for it (and some do, for example UMichigan). As for the suggestion that I "feel threatened", I don't really see the reasoning behind saying that, since I am giving you advice that will INCREASE your chances against me (if I had in fact been competing with you for a place).

I don't think it even matters what the rest of the story is, most people would probably stop reading even after that introduction. Not only should you NEVER start off by drawing attention to your negative aspects, but you should in fact mention them as little as possible, if at all. Everyone has some sort of baggage they are not hugely proud of (although high school dropout is quite bad, really) but you should only talk about it if it is strictly necessary. We all have "excuses" for why things have happened but when you're competing against someone who didn't drop out of high school then it really doesn't matter at all what your excuse is for dropping out. I'm not saying you should lie, but I am saying you shouldn't bring your negative past right up to the start of your PS where it will be most obvious and most memorable! Make a GOOD impression, not a bad one with excuses for why it's bad.