especially

Um. I started my SOP with "It is common knowledge that, since the beginning of time, jobs for academics in the humanities have been getting more and more common." Do you think that will be a problem?

Jesus H. Christ, you all. What has happened to this forum in the last few days?

A friendly piece of advice: faculty and grad students read this website. You all are a lot more identifiable than you think you are, especially when you post stats, personal details, and the other bits of information that are often included in "What are my chances?"-type posts. And we recognize you when you come to visit or interview with our programs. It's easy. So, when you are a jerk on this forum, or you throw up red flags that you might be a bad colleague (like you divulge that you may be on the verge of starting an affair with a married professor, or display general and inexplicable belligerence, or are quick to judge/pile on other people), we are less likely to want to be your colleague, and therefore your chances of becoming our colleague diminish significantly. So be careful.

This is not directed toward any one person. There have been a lot of folks being less than collegial around these parts in the last few days. Watch a movie, drink a beer, do some yoga. Whatever will calm you. Don't be a jerk on the internet, because we can see you.

1Q84, can I ask why you chose those particular programs (in your signature)? Also, I hated 1Q84, particularly Murakami's portrayal of women in the book, which was downright offensive, if i do say so. A truly awful example of his work. I prefer his short stories.

I can see why.

And yes, I get the Team America reference. My thoughts on that? Lololo ahahha Asians can't pronounce the letter L! It's satire, guys!

oh god, seriously, lighten up. it's a puppet kim jong il, not a real asian. for christ's sake

Actually, my answer was 'yes' - if you read my post above. I have been friends with my professors in the past (though not at my current institution). Your original post asked about having friendships with professors (nothing 'salacious,' you said). Now, your posts seem to imply something more than platonic friendship... so, which is it?

Thank you. I am not very popular among the English peeps on here. I'm glad a science person can come along and be objective

I have a very close relationship with my thesis chair. We've worked together for about 5 years (undergrad into grad school), and we've traveled abroad together twice. We've definitely moved into the "friendship" realm of our relationship esp. since I graduated and we're now more "colleagues" than "student/teacher." I think it's really nice and beneficial to see profs as people.

Of the opposite sex? Ummm yes, with one prof. We've also worked together for a long time (undergrad/grad), but he's much older (early 60's) than me so there's never really been any "tension" between us as far as that goes. A lot of girls in the program tend to think he's attractive for an old guy, but I've never really seen it so that also helps haha! We have a dynamic more of like if we were closer to the same age we'd probably hang out but I don't think it would ever get weird or anything -- we just have a lot in common.

Long story short, once you work with profs for a while (which you do at the grad level) you tend to grow closer together. There's, of course, the sterotype of grad student affairs with that sexy older prof, but I've never really seen a lot of that. The age differences mostly make that hard (hehehe) to come (hehehe) by. The only young male profs in my department are either jerks or medievalists (so that sums that up ).

I think this depends on what you want to do and where you want to work. For example I know that it is more typical in the US to go to a PhD directly after a BA if you intend to enter academia, while here in Canada doing an MA is not typically seen as terminal and many students go on to PhDs after (it is, in my experience, quite rare to see a philosophy student go straight from BA to PhD up here). So that's something to take into consideration.

If your philosophical texts were read in more philosophical courses (political science, comp lit, rhetoric?), I think it won't be a major problem, but if they were less formally embedded you might be asked to do a 'qualifying year' of upper-level philosophy courses to solidify things.

FWIW, I am currently funded at a Canadian university and my research is on the continental side, with some intersections with analytic tradition, so it's not impossible - though I am a Canadian citizen so that likely affects funding.

Hope this helps a bit!

Hi all,

I have recently decided to apply to MA programs in philosophy. Although applications are far away (I will be applying for fall 2013), I am now researching on what programs offer funding for the MA. I understand that there are probably very few programs that fit into "funded" and "continental," especially in the US (though Canadian and UK universities are on the list too). There are some threads on here that discuss one or the other but not their intersection.

Secondly, I want to ask about the very necessity of obtaining an MA degree for my circumstance. I am switching disciplines into philosophy from anthropology. My UG university's philosophy program was strictly in the analytic tradition (so no Hegel, Heidegger, Marx, etc.). However I managed to read a significant deal of philosophical texts in my other courses. Should I only apply to MA programs to get a "philosophy" degree, or should I take the risk of applying to continental-based PhD programs and explain this situation? It seems that a great deal of PhD students at continental programs came from the same continental-based universities, so I wonder how easy it is to break into the discipline given the circumstances. If it makes a difference, I attended a very highly-ranked UG university and obtained a near-perfect GPA (of course, in non-"philosophy" courses).

Thanks!

Because the first response to the thread was an immediate assumption that this woman is a liar intent on destroying his life and reputation because of her worship of this false goddess called "feminism".

It is a patriarchal society. And there is no "bandwagon". Evidence overwhelmingly proves male dominance in all aspects of society (except homemaking lololololo!!!!)

These "feminists" that make you ashamed to be a feminist (I should probably reverse those quotation marks) are the ones that are fighting for a woman's right not to be harassed without being labeled a "slut" or "asking for it".

Again, you're hearing this gentleman's side of the story yet you're immediately willing to jump in the fray and blame the woman. I'm not making any judgement calls either way: he could be right or she could be right but, clearly, your bias is showing.

ETA: I apologise to the OP. I didn't mean to hijack your thread. My $0.02: people will talk and that's the way of the world, but if you behave as if you believe what happened happened (ie. your version of the story), then it'll become a nonissue. Not much else you can do about it... if you go around protesting and trying to get people not to talk about well... that won't look very good.

and in regards to "feminists," I'm talking about women who will do and say anything to justify their position of victimization in a -- so they want to emphasize -- "patriarchal society". so they jump on the bandwagon when cases like this leak, as they get to suspect a man for being oh-so-evil! they tend to disregard the fact that men 1) have their unique feelings and insecurities and 2) women can make up stories precisely to take advantage of a "victim" position. these "feminists" make me ashamed to be one myself.

Wow... take a chill pill, dude and read his text. He said: "And knowing the nature of rumors, it will probably turn into 'he was accused of rape' rather than 'he was a victim of a false accusation.' Doesn't this support what I'm saying about society's tendency to villainize men? See, the truth is clearly that "he was a victim of false accusation," but because (along the lines of my conjecture) some people automatically assume men are in the wrong in these matters, the case will be spun to "he was accused of rape omg let's stay away from him." People will more than possibly not be able to view the case objectively, jump to judgments and shun him -- unfortunately. Thus, this shows how we're dehumanizing men by not being able to view cases such as this one objectively but are rather inclined towards our pre-conceived notions of what men are like -- which equals rapists in this case.

What is this supposed to mean?

You don't even know the full story yet you're willing to blame this on "feminists"? Disgusting. You're what's wrong with rape culture.

Brush it off man. You're really making it seem like a big deal which will result in other people thinking it's a big deal and then thinking stuff like "what is he hiding?" or "is he really guilty?"

Just brush it off like it's nothing (it IS nothing) and don't worry about it. People won't make such a big deal out of it if you don't.

I'm so sorry to hear about this! I think this story shows how our society (especially self-righteous "feminists") is so willing to villainize men to the point that men are dehumanized. i really think men have feelings equally as women do.

i don't know what to tell you except to keep insisting on your innocence and tell them that you'd be in jail, instead of in academia, had you really been guilty?

How many to bring? As many as you can fit.

What to cut? Inevitably, the ones you leave behind, sell, and give away will turn out to be exactly the books you want. More practically, and as someone in a field very similar to you: I find it most useful to have my own copies of primary sources in translation, so I can make my own notes in them. (Original language is of course most excellent, but I mean, a single volume of the Corpus Christianorum is like $350). As far as academic books go, I rely very very heavily on the library and scanned chapters, but find it useful to have a personal copy of many of the most popular works that I use. They are the ones most likely to be checked out from the library or placed on 2-hr reserve by a professor, so if I need quick access, that's the way to go.

I am also a fan of reference handbooks like the Cambridge Companion series, when I need background or bibliography on a topic but don't need to go seriously in-depth. However, many schools (including mine, which is on your list) subscribe to the Cambridge Online database so you have PDF access to the whole shebang.

Humanities grad school is the process of learning how many books you are in fact totally dying to read--while being faced with a mountain range of books that you, in fact, are required to read. (Some of which will wind up being worth it.)

A couple other pieces of book advice, for the other end of things:
Don't buy anything from the bookstore. Amazon Marketplace, Abebooks, half.com. Don't buy books for your classes unless they relate pretty directly to your field or are foundational for your discipline as a whole; library, scan, swap with someone else in your class, or ILL if necessary. This is a good way to help combat book glut. (You probably knew all this already, but it's still worth pointing out.)

I'm in my first year of graduate school and I can't remember the last time I felt this lonely. I spent my undergraduate years in many different clubs and teams, so it was easier to make close friends. Luckily I do have a great cohort and we all get together occasionally, but between the craziness of our classes and practicum, it's difficult to find much time to hang out and do something that isn't school related.

Although I have friends in my program, they aren't the same friendships I used to have. We all enjoy each other's company, but I can't say that I have a best friend or someone I can completely confide in. My roommates and I are also not close; we simply cohabitate. I desperately miss having someone near all the time that would bring out the fun in me and help me destress. I think it's just a part of learning to cope with life changes.

In my first day of class with a famous sociology prof as an undergrad freshman, she basically explained the breakdown of our class and what she expected our performance to be based on where we went to high school and which part of the country we were from. This professor looked at myself and another male student (out of 12 people total) and said, "You two will do worse than anyone. In all likelihood, you won't even graduate from here and if you do, it will take more than 4 years." To our faces in front of everyone in the middle of class. Why? Because we went to public high schools and were both from the US South. Was I offended? Hell yes. Even more so when she basically reiterated the statement when I met with her in office hours to discuss my paper. In my second semester at that school, a professor flat out told me that I was not and never would be capable of writing at the collegiate level. So yea, I can believe that a professor would say something about blacks and race or anything else because I've heard it happen.

But, as fuzzylogician has astutely pointed out, it isn't our place to judge the veracity of the OP's claim. For what it's worth, I think the advice to learn what you can both from the class and from your classmates and get out of there with a good grade, no negative evaluation from the professor, and with your departmental relations intact is the best thing you can do. No one is going to force you to work with this professor in the future so just avoid her if that's what you believe is necessary. That said, I will say that I have had some bizarre undergrad and grad experiences (for evidence, read my posts). I once asked a professor why I didn't get the checkmarks and comments that everyone else got on their weekly response papers. Her answer? My writing was clear and concise and she didn't write much because she didn't have as many critical comments to make. Had I never asked, I might not have known or might have assumed something that wasn't true. Just some food for thought.

Would calling the first student a muppet help?

I don't know, I don't find it that much of a stretch to imagine that someone might ask for non-race-specific advice for dealing with a professor who (they think) doesn't like them, and not bringing up the race issue until after others remark that they don't see what the problem is.

On a more general note, I don't see how telling someone to their face that you think they're lying does anyone any good. Like I wrote in the other thread, if you have constructive advice then you should go ahead and give it but you have this habit of putting people down and leading the conversation down unhelpful paths. Don't you see that diverting the focus from someone's obviously distressed question to a discussion of their credibility hurts everyone involved?

I'm not sure why some people choose not to believe the OP - what's to be gained by lying like that on an anonymous internet forum? It'll only make the advice the OP receives all the less relevant for their situation.

OP - this is a shame but it doesn't change my opinion. We still don't know that this prof has anything against you personally; but either way, the best thing you can do for yourself is keep your interactions with her to a minimum and stop them altogether once you're no longer in her class. Sounds like you can't win this one, but the loss won't be too great either. I know it's hard to let it go but it's really the best way to help yourself through this situation.

Well anyway, I just got the sense that she found the whole post hard to believe, and yeah the prof REALLY DID SAY WHAT THEY SAID. If I came across as confrontation or "troll-ish," ... it's because I'm a little bit sensitive about the fact that I'm a black female in a predominantly white-male academic field (another reason I didn't mention the event in the intro), as well as the whole situation in general.