Karlito

Wow. All that because of my silly joke? I did not read the whole thing. Maybe it's time to close this thread. Humanomics, I will be in a department with strong econ soc next year so you can always pm me if you need info or anything, I won't bite you (or "attack" you again, I promise). No hard feelings, and good luck

Thanks for the lecture. You'll excuse me for the misspelling of "condescendence" (something you sure seem to know quite well), as I learned English in high school and yes, still make a few mistakes. As for my message, it was intended as a joke on the antagonisms that cross the discipline, especially the eternal debate about the "rigor" of quant methods against the "level of meaning" provided by qual. methods. Take it easy, this is just a forum.

Yes! An interesting movement, too bad it is not represented in the US.

Make sure you take into account the location and cost of living there. 20,000$ in Bloomington is probably very different compared to 20,000$ at NYU (extreme example but you get the idea). This being said, top schools stipends are in the 20-25k range most of the time (a few Ivies being above that)

It all depends on what subfields of sociology you are interested in. Edit: Re-reading your post, if it's an MA and not a Ph.D you are interested in, interests are probably less relevant. What are the reasons behind the fact that you are applying to an MA you are probably going to have to pay for and not a fully funded Ph.D?

Stanford or Berkeley? These are such poor choices. I suggest you turned down both and apply during the next season to get better offers.

Yes the perspective of numbers only is very limited. But what can you expect from economists? (haha, condescendance and provocation of the qualitative sociologist inside)

Good one splitends. The more I spent time on this board, the more stressed and desillusioned I got...Seriously. By the way, where did you end up splitends? I am curious. It went well for a lot of us, but it was horribly stressful. No need to add unnecessary competition on there by comparing yourself with the profiles people post online...and here is just a self selection of stressed out and overachieving people anyway - you won't be the best, I guarantee you. At best you will feel average - at worst you will feel like a crappy student

Thank you S&P for your input, too!

With regards to what Chuck said, at Oxford funding for master's degree is extremely scarce. So the norm is rather to be unfunded...Meaning that those who get the Clarendon scholarship for example are probably considered superstars, rather than others being looked upon for not being able to get funding, since being unfunded seems to be a norm there.

Not that I disagree and that I ignore Foucault. I am in fact relatively well acquainted with him, esp. the things on knowledge, the human sciences, etc. This being said, he is a general theorist to me, not a sociologist per se (not that this boundary is absolute but this topic was specifically about thinkers whose primary hat would be that of a sociologist). Also, DarthVegan, you are right about his influence on critical sociology; this being said, critical sociology (this label is fairly blurry anyway) does not equate postmodernism, I think.

Great post, I agree with all you said here...And yes post structuralism (ie Foucault) is often mixed up with postmodernism. It is a confusing label...I tend to use it in a derogatory fashion at times, especially for research with lousy conceptualizations. But I am still interested in reading good things about it.

I would put Foucault in the same boat as the authors as I mentioned above, ie not specifically sociology, but, by and large, philosophy. Thanks nevertheless

I know a bit of Latour's tuff on science. I agree with Ladril, he is probably not considered postmodern, but thanks for your input anyway! Edit: Thanks also to ci1717 for your suggestion...I will check Harvey's work

I think Essex has traditionally been the strongest soc department in the UK. I don't know much about Oxbridge...but you probably can't go wrong here.