Final Decisions / Accepting Offers Fall 2018!

[eigenname]

Declined CUNY GC, will be going to UCSD. 

[SophiaIsBae]

I'll be going to Rutgers!

[downwardabsolute]

Unless I somehow miraculously get funding for Oxford between today and tomorrow, I'll be accepting my offer from Tufts. 

[downwardabsolute]

I've accepted Tufts! It's been fun, everyone. 

[AlanGibbardMegafan]

I accepted my offer from Indiana early this morning!

I only had another offer from Cincinnati, but I declined that on Friday when I heard from Indiana.

Edited April 15, 2018 by AlanGibbardMegafan

[quinessloopypun]

I have accepted Johns Hopkins's offer. I have no other offer. So, unfortunately, I will be causing no wait-list movement.

[Metanoia]

4 hours ago, downwardabsolute said:

I've accepted Tufts! It's been fun, everyone. 

Great - welcome!

[SlumberingTrout]

I'll be attending UVA in the fall!

[TorreAttack]

Accepted UT Austin.

[Rose-Colored Beetle]

Accepted Fordham over two MA's (WMU, Brandeis). An underrated program, I'd say. Large powerhouse faculty, access to classes at other NYC programs, and great placement.

Thanks for a good run, everyone!

[incredulous_stare]

I've accepted Oxford's offer for their MSt in Philosophical Theology!

[thehegeldialectic]

1 hour ago, Rose-Colored Dasein said:

An underrated program, I'd say.

Only because continental programs aren't placed on the ranking. Fordham is a great program with a strong reputation. 

Edited April 16, 2018 by iunoionnis

[Rose-Colored Beetle]

15 minutes ago, iunoionnis said:

Only because continental programs aren't placed on the ranking. Fordham is a great program with a strong reputation. 

Well, there's debate over whether they're truly continental... Also, Leiter has a feud with Fordham's Babich. Not that this directly impacts their unranked status, but it's at least iconic.

I think it's worth asking what Socrates would think of the PGR...

[syn]

Accepted University of Missouri.

[Neither Here Nor There]

9 hours ago, iunoionnis said:

Only because continental programs aren't placed on the ranking. Fordham is a great program with a strong reputation. 

and why is it that continental programs aren't ranked? it's bullshit.  But I guess it is somewhat of a blessing if programs arent' caught in the ranking crap. And yea, Fordham is a great placement. 

Edited April 16, 2018 by Neither Here Nor There

[Rose-Colored Beetle]

7 hours ago, Neither Here Nor There said:

and why is it that continental programs aren't ranked? it's bullshit.  But I guess it is somewhat of a blessing if programs arent' caught in the ranking crap. And yea, Fordham is a great placement. 

It really depends on what you mean by a "continental" program. Programs that study philosophers typically categorized as "continental" are one thing. Programs that do philosophy in a "continental" mode are another thing. And it's not really clear what "continental" philosophy is in the first place.

The rankings aren't so bad if you consider what they are actually ranking: not the best programs, but, as the PGR website makes explicit in many words, faculty reputation. That these do not necessarily correlate should be fairly obvious. Consider the reputation of various philosophers in Socrates' day, as reported by Plato's writings.

Faculty reputation seems to correlate quite weakly with job placement, strongly with job placement into PhD-granting programs, and (in a circular fashion) strongly with job placement into top PGR-ranked programs.

Faculty reputation, it may be argued, also correlates these days with a certain way of doing philosophy, that which seems to be common in many philosophy journals  and which is admittedly the opposite of what we feel continental philosophy is. Of course, whether there is a meaningful distinction between analytic and continental philosophy is controversial; one wonders, if the distinction is meaningless, what this bifurcation is that everyone seems to feel. I've been thinking recently that it has to do with which propositions a given philosopher chooses to leave implicit, and which terms he or she chooses to leave undefined.

 

[GuanilosIsland]

3 hours ago, Rose-Colored Dasein said:

It really depends on what you mean by a "continental" program. Programs that study philosophers typically categorized as "continental" are one thing. Programs that do philosophy in a "continental" mode are another thing. And it's not really clear what "continental" philosophy is in the first place.

The rankings aren't so bad if you consider what they are actually ranking: not the best programs, but, as the PGR website makes explicit in many words, faculty reputation. That these do not necessarily correlate should be fairly obvious. Consider the reputation of various philosophers in Socrates' day, as reported by Plato's writings.

Faculty reputation seems to correlate quite weakly with job placement, strongly with job placement into PhD-granting programs, and (in a circular fashion) strongly with job placement into top PGR-ranked programs.

Faculty reputation, it may be argued, also correlates these days with a certain way of doing philosophy, that which seems to be common in many philosophy journals  and which is admittedly the opposite of what we feel continental philosophy is. Of course, whether there is a meaningful distinction between analytic and continental philosophy is controversial; one wonders, if the distinction is meaningless, what this bifurcation is that everyone seems to feel. I've been thinking recently that it has to do with which propositions a given philosopher chooses to leave implicit, and which terms he or she chooses to leave undefined.

 

I'd argue that there isn't a meaningful distinction between continental and analytic philosophy. iunoionnis keeps lamenting the fact that "continental programs" aren't ranked, but the issue is that this category of philosophy does not even exist. As a category or "type" of philosophy it's a complete fiction; as a certain political grouping of philosophers, however, it is very real. And often these sorts of philosophers use their political grouping as cover to try and explain away why bad, uninteresting philosophizing isn't legitimized in academia in the US.

[ThePeon]

Deleted: I think I misunderstood the post or something.

Edited April 17, 2018 by ThePeon

[bridgephil]

45 minutes ago, GuanilosIsland said:

I'd argue that there isn't a meaningful distinction between continental and analytic philosophy. iunoionnis keeps lamenting the fact that "continental programs" aren't ranked, but the issue is that this category of philosophy does not even exist. As a category or "type" of philosophy it's a complete fiction; as a certain political grouping of philosophers, however, it is very real. And often these sorts of philosophers use their political grouping as cover to try and explain away why bad, uninteresting philosophizing isn't legitimized in academia in the US.

You would have to be exceedingly knowledgeable about 'continental' philosophy if this claim of yours is going to carry any authority. I'm going to be a good Bayesian and say that my prior that never in your life have you read and actively tried to understand and engage with more than two or three continental papers is...88%. 

Also, super weird considering your AOI? Maybe I didn't understand you.

Edited April 17, 2018 by bridgephil

[bridgephil]

On 4/15/2018 at 4:05 PM, TorreAttack said:

Accepted UT Austin.

Me too!

Lol I was on the waitlist at MIT too, which was also my top choice xD

[Neither Here Nor There]

20 hours ago, Rose-Colored Dasein said:

It really depends on what you mean by a "continental" program. Programs that study philosophers typically categorized as "continental" are one thing. Programs that do philosophy in a "continental" mode are another thing. And it's not really clear what "continental" philosophy is in the first place.

The rankings aren't so bad if you consider what they are actually ranking: not the best programs, but, as the PGR website makes explicit in many words, faculty reputation. That these do not necessarily correlate should be fairly obvious. Consider the reputation of various philosophers in Socrates' day, as reported by Plato's writings.

Faculty reputation seems to correlate quite weakly with job placement, strongly with job placement into PhD-granting programs, and (in a circular fashion) strongly with job placement into top PGR-ranked programs.

Faculty reputation, it may be argued, also correlates these days with a certain way of doing philosophy, that which seems to be common in many philosophy journals  and which is admittedly the opposite of what we feel continental philosophy is. Of course, whether there is a meaningful distinction between analytic and continental philosophy is controversial; one wonders, if the distinction is meaningless, what this bifurcation is that everyone seems to feel. I've been thinking recently that it has to do with which propositions a given philosopher chooses to leave implicit, and which terms he or she chooses to leave undefined.

 

Yes, continental philosophy, as in the study of European philosophy that is not Anglo-analytic, can be done in any program, and continental "modes," if by that you mean style, is certainly widespread, not necessarily that the majority use it but that its not uncommon and is found all around. However, I think it is fairly clear that a "continental school" is a program/school/department dedicated to studying continental philosophy and the history of philosophy. 

But does faculty recognition correspond with a certain way of doing philosophy? I will place aside your good rebuttal that it may not, since the so-called analytic style can be adopted by continentalists aside. To add another point, it seems to me that there are a number of very famous faculty in continental departments who have highly original thought. William Desmond at Villanova and Richard Kearney at Boston College come to mind, and then of course, there is Marion at Chicago, who may be best philosopher alive right now, although he is not in the philosophy department. 

[GuanilosIsland]

20 hours ago, bridgephil said:

You would have to be exceedingly knowledgeable about 'continental' philosophy if this claim of yours is going to carry any authority. I'm going to be a good Bayesian and say that my prior that never in your life have you read and actively tried to understand and engage with more than two or three continental papers is...88%. 

Also, super weird considering your AOI? Maybe I didn't understand you.

I'd like to consider myself pretty knowledgeable about continental philosophy –I regularly read Deleuze, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Husserl, Foucault – as well as more modern, self-styled "continental" philosophy. But today it seems like anyone who rejects Derrida and Lacan is deemed a continental heretic, so oh well.

[thehegeldialectic]

On 4/16/2018 at 8:34 PM, GuanilosIsland said:

 And often these sorts of philosophers use their political grouping as cover to try and explain away why bad, uninteresting philosophizing isn't legitimized in academia in the US.

Good luck with your career having this attitude. 

[bridgephil]

6 hours ago, GuanilosIsland said:

I'd like to consider myself pretty knowledgeable about continental philosophy –I regularly read Deleuze, Heidegger, Nietzsche, Husserl, Foucault – as well as more modern, self-styled "continental" philosophy. But today it seems like anyone who rejects Derrida and Lacan is deemed a continental heretic, so oh well.

Oh so you meant that you don't like stuff that comes out of the Derrida/Lacan tradition specifically? Normally I've heard the term 'continental' apply to Foucault, various marxists, phenomenology, existentialism, as well as postmodernism/posthumanism (whatever they're calling it these days) and all that stuff in the general Derrida/Lacan tradition.

I mean, I'm not going to lie, I'm not a huge fan of some of it, either. One of the things I love about analytic philosophy is how clear they are, and one of the things I hate most about continental stuff is how unclear and hand-wavy they can be. But I do think it's a bit unfair to just say that it's all uninteresting or that it's not really philosophy. Also, I thought that posthumanists were interested in *kind of* rejecting at least Derrida. But I could be wrong. It's not really my AOI. 

 

[lyellgeo]

From my limited experience, there are plenty of people in "continental" departments who aren't particularly interested in Derrida or Lacan. (If anything, I feel like Derrida is falling more out of popularity, though that could be my own bias.) More generally, there will be a huge amount of difference from department to department about which particular people are studied and focused on, and which are ignored. For example,  programs like Penn State, Stony Brook, Villanova, and Boston College each have very different approaches. But, especially given that there's at least a couple of hundred years of European work to sort through, including many diverse philosophical traditions across several different languages and countries, that shouldn't be too surprising. It's also a testament to why grouping those programs all together as "continental" can often be more misleading than helpful. 

Edited April 18, 2018 by lyellgeo