Assessing qualification/readiness for an MA

[philosopuppy]

Hey everyone,

I'm a senior at a non-prestigious state school with a decently good Philosophy program (hovers around what would be #51-52 on the PGR). I'm planning to apply to a mix of funded MAs and mid-ranked PhD programs this fall. But I've done enough reading about how horrifically difficult it is to get in anywhere that I want to get as much input as possible. So I'm wondering if anyone might have some thoughts about how I'm doing.

I spent my first, say, five semesters focusing mostly on Area Studies/Religious Studies, and then on Continental philosophy. I did some research working with primary texts in [foreign language], took a bunch of graduate seminars with SPEP-type people in Philosophy and Comp Lit, and presented at a bunch of Area Studies and Religious Studies conferences. I have a peer-reviewed article coming out in an edited volume in Religious Studies, and my article is explicitly concerned with philosophy & is about philosophical topics. However, my interests nowadays are actually solidly analytic. What I really want to study is metaethics, reasons, that kinda stuff. So I'm now feeling like most of my best accomplishments aren't going to count for much, because they're not "real" philosophy.

I've since taken a couple graduate seminars in metaethics. I have at least two solid letters from philosophy professors, one of whom I've done several independent studies with and am now developing publications with. The other taught both grad seminars and can testify to my ability to handle grad-level work. My third letter would either be (1) a Continental professor who also had me in his grad class and with whom I've worked really closely since (reading groups and stuff), or (2) the professor co-teaching one of the analytic seminars, with whom I've not worked closely, but who could at least say that I'm holding my own in the grad class and am always at colloquia asking questions and stuff.

My GPA is approaching a 3.9, and is closer to like 3.96 in Philosophy. I'm not taking the GRE until later this month (weather delay... ?), but I'm studying a lot and feel well-prepared.

The main problem, I think, is (1) the letters situation, and (2) my sample. My sample is on a particular extension of expressivism which has become popular lately but is still quite new. So I'm referencing lots of current major figures, whose work I'd be expecting to deal with throughout my grad school career. But I haven't done a ton of original writing on analytic topics until fairly recently, so I'm afraid it's going to end up feeling amateurish. I'm basically just taking stock of what the objections to this view are, and trying to respond to each in turn, and then trying to say something about the direction in which those strategies of response will push the theory as a whole. But it sometimes feels like kind of biting off more than I can chew, and I know that my arguments aren't so original and clever as to be of publishable quality.

I feel like I have no chance next to people at much better institutions who have spent their entire undergrad working on analytic philosophy and writing good papers on it, and who have famous letter-writers vouching for them. So I'm mostly going to try to get into the best funded MA programs, like NIU, Georgia State, Simon Fraser, etc. What do you guys think? (Thanks so much for your help!)

[Duns Eith]

Sounds like you are an above-average applicant.  

I think you're over-worried about your prospects as an applicant. (though perhaps under-worried about your prospects in a career in philosophy, simply indicated by the fact that you are applying to grad school. haha)

I am obliged to mention, though: never accept an unfunded offer for an MA, even if the program says it is possible to get funding in the 2nd year. Just gotta get that out.

Edited October 15, 2018 by Duns Eith

[Duns Eith]

P.S. have you considered applying straight into a PhD program? I highly recommend it. It can save you time and energy and money.

[philosopuppy]

Thank you so much for the advice.  I'm gonna apply to some mid-ranked PhD programs, but seeing some of the people who post here and elsewhere about applying to top PhD programs with more stellar accomplishments than I'll probably ever have, I find it really easy to get nervous about it... And yes, I'm only applying to programs with funding.

By the way, we already know each other in person!

[Duns Eith]

27 minutes ago, philosopuppy said:

By the way, we already know each other in person!

Edited October 19, 2018 by Duns Eith

[Kantattheairport]

On 10/19/2018 at 11:27 PM, philosopuppy said:

Thank you so much for the advice.  I'm gonna apply to some mid-ranked PhD programs, but seeing some of the people who post here and elsewhere about applying to top PhD programs with more stellar accomplishments than I'll probably ever have, I find it really easy to get nervous about it... And yes, I'm only applying to programs with funding.

By the way, we already know each other in person!

Hiya! This is from a while ago (I'm popping back into TGC after a bit of a break) but just in case you haven't nailed down a list of places you're applying to yet, I'd just like to encourage you not to let your background deter you from applying to a couple of top-PhD programmes as well. I was similarly a latecomer to analytic philosophy as an undergraduate, and I was waitlisted at NYU and MIT last year. And your situation sounds better than mine in any case: you've done grad-level courses, you have a pertinent publication, you have at least two philosophy recommendations, and a much higher GPA! So it's probably worth at least having a chat with your recommenders about whether applying to some top programmes might be a good idea.