objectivityofcontradiction

Should I do it? Here's where I am coming from. I graduated in May 2011 from a public state university in the US. I owe a moderate amount of $$ from various loans that helped me finance my undergrad. Less than 50k. I've been accepted to a university in the UK for an MA in Philosophy and am waiting to hear back from a university in Ireland about acceptance into an MA program there as well. However, I come from a very very modest incomed family, and thus the only way for me to finance my MA year is through various loans. In either the UK or Ireland I'm looking at about 35k for the year: tuition, living, food, transportation, etc. People might now ask, well, if you can't afford graduate school, and with the job market being what it is for PhDs, why dig yourself deeper in debt? Many reasons, the only one that matters being that there is nothing else I want to do. I want to get a PhD, teach and write. Period. I've already been accepted to a top 15 UK university and thus when it comes time to apply to PhDs. I am fully confident that with my previous pedigree, plus the quality of my work, that i'll be accepted into a decent PhD program with a solid job placement record. Thus, when I finish my PhD I'll be in an ideal position, (ill have a fixed income) to start paying back my loans. Now, I know you can defer loans while you're a postgraduate. So I figure I can sit on what I owe from undergrad and my masters year (despite it accruing interest) whist a fully-funded PhD. student. Lots of hypotheticals here--but my bottom line question is: Should I get my masters overseas if that requires me to put myself further in debt. Or should I wait and apply to funded Masters programs in the states this coming fall? My main reason for applying in the UK and Ireland, I should note, is because they have several more departments with people working in my area of interest, namely, continental philosophy. And the few schools I've applied to, and the one I've already been accepted at, have great people in this regard. Thanks a lot.

Looking for any information that would be pertinent to living in these two cities. I could not find a thread about Dublin and got very little response when I posted the same question in the IHOG thread. Rent price for a simple studio? Outdoor stuff? Music scene? etc. Thanks.

Regarding the part from the Berkeley Career Center... leaving words/phrases like "interested" "appealing to me" "excited about" out of an SOP seems strange. I've had two former professors and two friends who are already in PhD programs go over my statement and they've said nothing about eliminating these phrases. If you are interested in working with a certain member of faculty, why beat around the bush trying to find another way of saying that? If the departments strengths is one of the reasons you were attracted to the department in the first place, why not say that that is why the department appeals to you. I'd be very curious to know why in a statement about you, you should leave these things out. Seems way off base.

I'm curious about the school of philosophy if you know anything.. about the campus itself.. the part of the city it is located in.. if you have any input on student-faculty relations.. the research facilities, especially the library. I'd love to hear about anything you feel is worth sharing.

Hey All, I'm applying to University College Dublin for their 3rd round of admissions in May. Just curious if there is any one on here who either attends UCD or knows a thing or two or three about the school. I'm also applying to Warwick, U College London, and Sussex in the UK. Any information regarding those schools would be appreciated as well. I'll be studying philosophy. Thanks.

Would any one care to PM there statement of purpose? Preferably some one who has applied to departments that are more continentally oriented. Thanks a lot.

muffins, A few weeks before I took the test I wrote one argument task, one issue task essay each day (taken from the ets website pool), for ten total practice essays in a week and was 100% prepared for the writing section. Just figured I'd share that.

Here's the thing: i'm sure plenty of us on here would agree with you that how well one does on the GRE is not a very accurate reflection of a student's chances for success as a grad student. Doesn't matter. The test is all but a requirement for the pursuit of a PhD. And not to sound churlish, but if you attempt to get a PhD. or even an MA at a low-ranking university simply because they don't require their students to have taken the gre well then you're only hurting yourself and good luck finding a job afterwards. I'm terrible at standardized tests and yet I've done my studying and will be taking the gre on Wednesday; probably bombing the quantitative section. But there's really no way around it. Take it, get it over with, and describe in your statement of purpose why you didn't do well--whose to say you won't do well? What's more important than finding ways around it is just taking the test and moving on to the much MUCH more important facets of your application: SOP, writing sample and recommendations.

Just curious as to how the 4.5 hrs actually feels while you're in the test center... and any advice people might have that doesn't involve test content but the experience of taking the test.

Thanks a lot for the reply. Do you have any personal experience or have you known any one who has taken an MA in the U.K.? My main interests are in German Philosophy and the philosophy of history. Ideally I'd like to develop a very sound base in Kant, Hegel, German Idealism, and especially Marx, in order to be in a position to better engage critically with the figures of the Frankfurt School. I'm also fascinated with the thought of Benjamin as a Philosopher--and am motivated to do work that will once and for all convince those in the community that despite the fact that he proclaimed himself as a literary critic, his work can really only be understood as a philosophy of history--and that studying him should not be left only to those in Comp Lit and Criticism. I ask about UK programs because my four top choices for an MA are Sussex, Warwick, U College London and U College Dublin.. all of which have departments that have very strong reputations in Continental Thought. I've heard, "good luck paying for an MA in Britain or Ireland," but I'm not sure that the cost over there is that much more than what it would cost were I to attend an MA program in the states that is unfunded.

Any one know anything about the department? I'm really having a hard time finding funded MA programs in the states that don't necessarily lean continental, but are at least marginally well equipped with a few people doing good work on such figures Kant, Hegel, Marx, Nietzsche, etc. I'm aware of GSU, Wisconsin-Milwaukee, New Mexico, and Marquette. But have been struggling to find others. I started researching SIU today and the department looks pretty strong. Thanks.

Is there such a thing? Taking the test next week; been studying 2-3 hours a day for the past six weeks, don't want to fry my brain this last week.

Princeton Review: 1,014 practice questions for the new GRE... it contains about 500 practice questions each for verbal and quant. Many people on here seem to not like the princeton review study guides but if you're just looking for practice questions I think it works fine.

I'm applying for grad school for the fall of 2013. I graduated college in May 2011 and I owe a decent chunk of change to my loan agencies. I was wondering how I am supposed to be able to make payments in grad school if I'm living a modest lifestyle and just getting by through the funding and assistantships/fellowships I am hopefully offered. I know I can defer If I receive a grad fellowship, but just curious if any one has any info on this or advice.

I just read through Schwitzgebel's take on applying to graduate schools for philosophy--and I found it pretty helpful for the most part, although, I found the underlying tone of the whole blog to be quite arrogant and pushing the idea that if you haven't been a great student since your exit from the womb than you probably won't get into a top 50 PhD. program. A typical Berkeley guy saying that well, unless you went to these 10 schools, your chances are pretty slim for graduate study in Phil. Rubbish. Anyway, the part that concerned me the most was his take on letters of Recommendation. I'm just curious about who you asked for your letters. Philosophy professors, duh, but did you also have a letter written from another professor in a different department for whom you did some solid work? Schwitzgebel emphasizes only getting letters from those professors who gave you As. Which makes sense. I'm wondering if any one on here who has recently been rejected from a program believes that it had more to do with their LORs than their personal statement and their writing sample. The three professors I'm going to ask consist of one professor who I took two upper level philosophy courses with during my senior year, I got an A- in the fall course and an A in the spring. My writing sample is going to be taken from one of his courses. Next is a professor who I took two courses with, one when I was a sophomore, one when I was a junior. I received a B+ soph year (a course on Kant, I worked my butt off for that B+) and an A- junior year. However, this professor and I are quite close and I must have visited his office 50+ times during my undergrad to talk philosophy. He's been blunt with me in my weaknesses, but I can't think of a better person to write me a letter. Should I be worried it'll be too negative? I plan to get my third letter from an art history professor who I took 4 classes with and received 4 As. This guys been teaching since the early 70s, did his grad work at Columbia and is a well-known art historian. Thoughts? Advice?

I've convinced myself that an MA year is going to be more beneficial to my study of philosophy than if i jump right into PhD. work. The reasons for this are 1) my undergrad university, though a great university and ranked well as a whole, did not house the strongest philosophy department and thus I think a year of study at another institution makes me a more attractive applicant. 2) I'll have been away from philosophy for almost two years by the time I'm back in school and I think the MA will ease me into academe better than doctoral work. However, I'm aware that I could get rejected from the 8-9 schools I apply to for my MA and so I'm considering applying to a few PhD. programs as well. Schools like Syracuse, Loyola Chicago, Michigan State, etc. which don't fund MAs, are on my list as some back up PhD. choices. Ideally, I'll get my MA and thus be able to apply to schools for my PhD. that I'd rather attend.. WashU, Notre Dame, New School, Vanderbilt, Stony Brook, Columbia, because with the MA I'll have a better chance getting into these schools. So I guess my question is just whether or not my logic is correct? Will my chance of getting admitted into some of the programs I mentioned suffer if I apply for an MA when they offer a PhD.? I've heard that several schools technically offer MAs, but really they expect you to complete the MA and move on to PhD. work in the department rather than elsewhere. My list of MA schools are: Sussex, Warwick, UCL, UCD, New Mexico, UW-Milwaukee, Marquette, GSU and Guelph. Any other good programs I should look at (I'm not interested in NIU, SFSU, Tufts or Brandeis)?

Thanks a lot. I've always been ok at the sort of math that I've run into in my prep so far, but it's been five plus years since I've done any math whatsoever and even in high school, though I was always able to complete the problems on the exams, I was an extremely slow test taker when it came to math. It's interesting what you say about the test testing a very specific and advanced type of problem solving ability because of course I've recognize this and am able to apply it to the verbal sections very well, but as soon as its numbers and symbols, my brain turns off and I can't quite seem to logic-my-way through the math sections because the type of problem solving, though I suppose in theory it is very similar between the V and Q sections, is miles apart in my mind.

So I've heard a few different things about how to approach the math sections. I'm wondering first of all if the majority of the problems can be completed on the calculator, w/o using scratch paper? This is what I've been told. This ties into my next question: a few friends of mine who have taken the test informed me that what's key about the Math section (this probably goes for verbal too) is to not spend too much time on any one problem. I'm terrible at math.. and in reviewing for the test have only been confusing myself more, though I am trying to fight through it and prepare myself the best I can. Just wondering if there are any "real" strategies out their for dealing with the quantitative section for those of us who are just flat out bad at math. I'm applying to Philosophy Masters programs in the fall of 2013 and am just hoping to bang my writing and verbal scores straight out of the park to complement what I'm sure will be a below avg math score.

My reasons for the three: UCL- Sebastian Gardner and Jonathan Wolff. I want my MA to be centered around the study of German Philosophers and I've read a bit of Gardner's work on Kant, which I like and he's well-known in the field of Kantian Studies. Also I'm interested in studying Marx, particularly because my primary interests lie in 20th century philosophy (Lucaks, Adorno and Benjamin) and thus having a solid grounding in Marx is crucial for further study and Wolff would provide me with this, I've read his short introductory book on Marx which is great and have heard from a former professor that he's one of the best. UCL is about as Analytic a department as I'm willing to apply to. Sussex - Again, the dept. has several faculty members who do work in Continental Philosophy. But they also structure their MA so as to allow students to either focus on one area (continental or analytic) or to take courses in both. I want to present myself as a well-rounded student when I go back to apply for my PhD. and I think the MA at Sussex would allow me the opportunity to present myself as such. Warwick - Stephen Houlgate, Keith Ansell-Pearson, and Peter Poellner. All three work in areas similar to my interest and Houlgate is known worldwide as doing some of the best work on Hegel these days. Getting a solid grounding in Hegel is my top priority during my MA year. Not to mention Warwick's Dept. is rated as one of the best in the UK and their MA in Continental Philosophy seems unrivaled. They've also got some good people doing work in the Analytic tradition as well. Of course, I say all of this knowing that some of these professors may not be around during my MA year but I've got my fingers crossed.

I'm applying to graduate school for the Fall of 2013 for my Masters in Philosophy. My top three choices for schools are Warwick, Sussex, and UCL. I'm going to be applying for a Fulbright Award and also for every international scholarship that these universities make available. I'm just curious if any one on here has conducted masters-level work in the UK or any course work for that matter in the UK and if they can clue me in to what the student experience is like and how it might differ from grad school in the US. I'm well aware that there is little to no funding or aid made available for international ma students, so I don't need to be reminded. I'm more looking for general information on the UK university system, student life, etc. I've been in touch with the philosophy dept. graduate advisers at each of the departments mentioned and they've done a nice job explaining to me exactly how the taught masters programs work, but you can never have enough feedback so I figured I'd ask around on here. Thanks

I'm looking to get my MA in '13-'14. My top three choices for schools are Warwick, Sussex, and UCL. I'm going to be applying for a Fulbright Award and also for every international scholarship that these universities make available. I'm just curious if any one on here has conducted masters-level work in the UK or any course work for that matter in the UK and if they can clue me in to what the student experience is like and how it might differ from grad school in the US. I've been in touch with the philosophy dept. graduate advisers at each of the departments mentioned and they've done a nice job explaining to me exactly how the taught masters programs work, but you can never have enough feedback so I figured I'd ask around on here. Thanks.

I do not have a problem with Deleuze's reading of Nietzsche generally. In fact, lately, I find myself agreeing more and more with Deleuze's idea that the eternal return is not a return of the same but rather, of difference, owing to Nietzsche's fierce dislike of all forms of "identity" and "identifications." What's always been unsettling with me however, is French interpretations of German philosophy. I haven't quite worked out why this perturbs me. I acknowledge that Deleuze is one of the better philosophers of hermeneutics of the 20th century and so I do respect his craft. The one thing that bothers me most about his reading of Nietzsche is his handling of Nieztsche's aphoristic form. I'm not sure Deleuze himself fully understands the purpose of the aphorism, as many do not (myself included, obviously) but seeing as how it is such a crucial feature of Nietzsche's philosophy, I always find myself a bit annoyed when I encounter those who swear by Deleuze's reading, simply because I see mistakes in it. I remember particularly one point in Nietzsche and Philosophy when he mentions that the aphorism is not a mere thought, which is true. However, I think he under values the role the thinking process plays in constructing thoughts as aphorisms and in Nietzsche's philosophy as a whole. But, like I said above, I shouldn't have even mentioned it. When it comes to secondary reading, one proceeds at their own peril. I'm sure we've all read our fair share of interpreters who on a second or third glance didn't quite have it as right as we thought.

Leiter's collection of essays, Nietzsche and Morality, are great. Lots of good philosophers from both analytic and continental departments contributed. I'd recommend staying away from Deleuze's biography of Nietzsche. But who am I to say.

Stanford's program in Religious Studies is strong and has courses taught by professors of philosophy and religion. Here's a link to Brian Leiter's (U of Chicago) Philosophical Gourmet--the link is to a breakdown of the best philosophy of religion programs in the US, UK, and Australia. Just remember to take the rankings with a grain of salt. http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/breakdown/breakdown7.asp

I just finished writing an issue task essay. I took a topic from the ets website and gave myself 30 minutes to complete the essay. When re-reading it I was comparing it to the sample essay from the site which received a 6/6 and noticed that my issue task essay read more like a response to an argument task essay. Just curious if any one on here has any helpful advice as to what really differentiates the issue essay from the argument essay. I was a philosophy major in college and will be pursuing grad work in philosophy, so I'm not sure if my writing style is the problem (meaning I only know how to respond to questions if I treat it as an argument) or if it's something else. Thanks a whole lot in advance.