2019 Writing Sample Discussion Thread

[HomoLudens]

Hello 2019 applicants,

Like most of you, I am frantically trying to compile an application. Arguably the most important aspect is the writing sample, so I figured we could use this space to discuss topics we are submitting, strategies, and other useful information.

I am abroad right now, so I am having to study for the GRE, finish a full load of summer semester classes, and prep my thesis for next year. I currently don't feel like I have a strong sample at the moment, so I am planning on using one of my term papers this semester. My topic is on the notion of spirit and the aesthetic conception of human nature in philosophical anthropology (a topic you can only find here in Germany HA!). As you can see, it is heavy on continental theory. I am mainly using Max Scheler, Hannah Arendt, and Friedrich Schiller as my primary sources. I don't think I need to rely on too many secondary works (which might be a problem for adcoms). In fact, no scholars are writing about Scheler anymore, which I think adds to the novelty of my sample. Do you all think that that kind of originality matters for admissions, or are more esoteric topics like mine detrimental?

 

[quineonthevine]

@HomoLudens

Thanks for making this thread!

While I think novelty can be good, your topic may be too esoteric. If the only people who work on your topic are in Germany, most admission committees in the US won't really know what to make of your sample. I don't know. My letter writers told me to have a topic that people on the admission committees would be familiar with, so it might be detrimental in your case to write on something that admission committees will likely not be familiar with (although you'll probably be applying to places that work more heavily in continental philosophy, so this might not be so bad.)

On a different note -- what do you all think about having an ambitious writing sample? My paper basically argues that meaning is irreducible -- of course, that's a really controversial view, so I'm not sure whether it's a good idea to write about it. On the other hand, I think my topic is more interesting than what I'd write otherwise.

Edited June 13, 2018 by quineonthevine

[Rose-Colored Beetle]

I don't know your AOS, but would it be possible to present Scheler as worthwhile vis-a-vis more popular theorists? That might help make you seem less of a maverick.

On the other hand, my writing sample kept being shaped as I kept applying to more schools. The offer I ended up accepting (Fordham, PhD) receiced the first iteration of my sample, which I wrote just for my applications. I am not proud of that paper at all, but apparently it worked.

I barely engaged contemporary literature at all, save one paper from Chalmers. (My paper criticized Locke's theory of language, with help from Gadamer). In my estimation, continentally minded philosophers care less about how much you are salient in the academia de jour.

[mithrandir8]

I really like the idea of this thread, I've been struggling with my writing sample choice for a while.

My AOIs are in philosophy of language, metaethics, and philosophy of law. I wrote a 50 page fellowship paper in the intersection of those areas (concerning the semantics of moral terms in legal texts) that is more representative of work I might do in grad school. However, I wasn't able to get much substantive feedback on it, and my recommenders have emphasized using a paper that has received feedback so that I can have a better chance of really improving it. That, plus the length and difficulty of shortening the paper and the difficulty of making a shorter version that would be accessible without some background in law, has made me start working on improving a philosophy of language class final paper. That paper was well received and involves a new angle on the classic debates about the semantics of names. I'm just a little worried that people will ask why I didn't submit something more at the core of my interests. 

[Kantattheairport]

On 7/13/2018 at 10:46 PM, mithrandir8 said:

I'm just a little worried that people will ask why I didn't submit something more at the core of my interests. 

For what it's worth, I don't think this is too important. I've been told to just write whatever I think would be the best possible paper, whether or not it closely aligns with my listed interests.

[goldenstardust11]

7 hours ago, Kantattheairport said:

For what it's worth, I don't think this is too important. I've been told to just write whatever I think would be the best possible paper, whether or not it closely aligns with my listed interests.

Yup! I wrote on Hegel and Antigone while that's one of my interests most of my work in grad school so far has been on Plato and I highlighted my interest in ancient philosophy in my SOP, so I think the most important thing is submitting work that you're most confident in.