Is graduate school for philosophy a vicious environment?

[desu_desu]

I am not a graduate student but I have heard from more than one graduate student in philosophy that they have to deal with very calculating, back-stabbing, opportunistic, or resentful peers and superiors. They told me that it is akin to working in a corporation, where everyone is trying to climb up the ladder and will use what they can to sabotage or use others. That peers or superiors whose thesis or projects are criticized will hold a grudge against you and actively try to make things more difficult for you, or even steal your ideas and get them published without crediting you.

If you're a graduate student in philosophy, or were one, is this true from your experience?

[PokePsych]

I have a friend who is, and I don't think this resembles her experience. Rather, she feels like she lacks contact and supervision and nobody is really interested in what you or others are doing...

[lth]

I'm not in grad school (yet) but I would add that I've never heard anything negative about phil grad programs other than this post. 

 

[goldenstardust11]

I love my program and my colleagues. But I've heard that it can be cutthroat in general, so I imagine ymmv. I think what @psygeek indicates about lack of supervision and interest is the normal negative experience, though. Hyper-competition happens but (thankfully) not ubiquitously. 

 

[jeanxxlqz]

At my current institution, that is not the case at all. In fact, compared to other graduate departments I’ve seen at this institution, the philosophy grad students are exceptionally friendly, collaborative, and supporting. There is a similar congeniality among faculty, though, and I think the grad students tend to model their behaviour after those faculty. 

Ive heard it can be more like what you describe at Ivy and some top Leiter programs (but I wouldn’t know which). Seems like the sort of thing you might be able to figure out at campus visits.

[maxhgns]

A few departments are indeed like this (at least at one school I know, faculty actively encourage this kind of "sorting" and train students to reproduce it wherever they end up). But it's not like that at most departments. Most departments have very supportive and healthy graduate student communities.

That said, it doesn't take much to poison a graduate student community for a long time. A single sexual harasser can easily destroy a grad student community that's 30-strong, and it takes years after his departure to fix the damage he's wrought (I know from experience). Similarly, a single cutthroat cohort can do a lot to change the department's atmosphere (and encourage subsequent cutthroat cohorts).

[TruthInFiction]

I'm at a top-ten Leiter department, and this isn't the case at all, nor at any other departments that I have any knowledge of. I'm sure there are some departments like this, but I don't think it's the norm. Grad school is definitely extremely stressful, and it doesn't always bring out the best in people, but my department at least is not at all competitive. We're each other's greatest supporters, and often celebrate individual successes as a community. Use your time visiting departments to try to get a sense of the environment, and honest assessments from students about the atmosphere. But I really don't think cutthroat environments are the norm.

[dgswaim]

Definitely not. At least not here at Penn. It's a really supportive community. Students like to talk about what they're interested in and working on, and others are happy to listen and give feedback. I have lots of friends in other departments, and I think their experiences are, in general, quite similar.

[Stencil]

Started this year at a department in the PGR top 25, and no, it's not at all. Everyone here is extremely friendly and interested in discussing each other's work, classes, interests, etc. There's a strong collaborative spirit here, and I can't say that I've had a single bad experience with another graduate student so far. I've heard some bad things about a couple of departments, but such places are by far the exception and not the norm. It does seem like department culture largely dictates the way that graduate students treat one another (with some exceptions of course), which is why it's so important to talk to as many people as possible on campus visits in order to try to gauge such things.

[quineonthevine]

I haven't heard of graduate schools being like that, but I do know that graduate school in philosophy is often a hostile environment for people of color and women, although it depends on the program. In that sense it can be a vicious environment. 

[Duns Eith]

On 11/18/2018 at 10:16 PM, desu_desu said:

I have heard from more than one graduate student in philosophy that they have to deal with very calculating, back-stabbing, opportunistic, or resentful peers and superiors.

I can think of some calculating and resentful peers and superiors.

Backstabbing? Opportunistic? Not so much.

On 11/18/2018 at 10:16 PM, desu_desu said:

They told me that it is akin to working in a corporation, where everyone is trying to climb up the ladder and will use what they can to sabotage or use others.

I can think of some individuals who, if you don't get on board with their program, they will socially oust you or ignore you. Basically, if you aren't on their "side" on some departmental politic, or some party idea, or some national political issue, then you're dead to them.

But for these individuals I wouldn't exactly call them people who are trying to succeed at your expense. They just aren't professional enough, and their insecurity manifests itself in petty things.

On 11/18/2018 at 10:16 PM, desu_desu said:

That peers or superiors whose thesis or projects are criticized will hold a grudge against you and actively try to make things more difficult for you, or even steal your ideas and get them published without crediting you.

Oh man, grudges are so stupidly common I don't know what to say. I usually think of these individuals who hold grudges to be incompetent (or insufficiently competent), such that they think your criticism is a personal evaluation.

Stealing ideas? Haven't seen or heard.

Edited December 2, 2018 by Duns Eith

[loffire]

7 hours ago, quineonthevine said:

I haven't heard of graduate schools being like that, but I do know that graduate school in philosophy is often a hostile environment for people of color and women, although it depends on the program. In that sense it can be a vicious environment. 

This seems rather ironic to me hahah

[bluwe]

I've heard that terminal MA programs are like this. Imagine a department filled with people who are battling (essentially) for the opportunity to get into a Ph.D. program that more or less guarantees you a job at the end of your Ph.D. So, does some crazy stuff happen that you'd rather not happen? Yeah, but if you want to be a contender for top programs and thus an academic job, you absolutely need to strategize and game out your moves. Does this mean you need to participate in the viciousness? No, but you must take it into account during your strategizing, and, depending on your program, it may very well require you to participate depending on your assessment of your particular state of affairs. It really is horrible, but if you don't recognize this, then you will not succeed unless you get lucky or your writing sample solves some long-standing philosophical problem.

[Prose]

3 hours ago, bluwe said:

I've heard that terminal MA programs are like this. Imagine a department filled with people who are battling (essentially) for the opportunity to get into a Ph.D. program that more or less guarantees you a job at the end of your Ph.D. So, does some crazy stuff happen that you'd rather not happen? Yeah, but if you want to be a contender for top programs and thus an academic job, you absolutely need to strategize and game out your moves. Does this mean you need to participate in the viciousness? No, but you must take it into account during your strategizing, and, depending on your program, it may very well require you to participate depending on your assessment of your particular state of affairs. It really is horrible, but if you don't recognize this, then you will not succeed unless you get lucky or your writing sample solves some long-standing philosophical problem.

Or you could, you know, be a hardworking student and just try to be the best philosopher you can be, coming from someone who's in a terminal MA.

[RequiredDisplayName]

7 hours ago, bluwe said:

I've heard that terminal MA programs are like this. Imagine a department filled with people who are battling (essentially) for the opportunity to get into a Ph.D. program that more or less guarantees you a job at the end of your Ph.D. So, does some crazy stuff happen that you'd rather not happen? Yeah, but if you want to be a contender for top programs and thus an academic job, you absolutely need to strategize and game out your moves. Does this mean you need to participate in the viciousness? No, but you must take it into account during your strategizing, and, depending on your program, it may very well require you to participate depending on your assessment of your particular state of affairs. It really is horrible, but if you don't recognize this, then you will not succeed unless you get lucky or your writing sample solves some long-standing philosophical problem.

An anecdote:

I have a terminal MA, and I would not be in a position to even think about doing a PhD if it were not for my cohort. My peers were exceedingly supportive of my work, and I of theirs. Our co-operation made us all better students and better philosophers, and therefore better applicants for PhD programs than we otherwise would have been.     

[dgswaim]

8 hours ago, bluwe said:

I've heard that terminal MA programs are like this. Imagine a department filled with people who are battling (essentially) for the opportunity to get into a Ph.D. program that more or less guarantees you a job at the end of your Ph.D. So, does some crazy stuff happen that you'd rather not happen? Yeah, but if you want to be a contender for top programs and thus an academic job, you absolutely need to strategize and game out your moves. Does this mean you need to participate in the viciousness? No, but you must take it into account during your strategizing, and, depending on your program, it may very well require you to participate depending on your assessment of your particular state of affairs. It really is horrible, but if you don't recognize this, then you will not succeed unless you get lucky or your writing sample solves some long-standing philosophical problem.

I did a terminal MA. None of this was the case. Everyone just tries to do good work and hopes for the best for themselves and everyone else. That's it.

[Rose-Colored Beetle]

You're concerned about a pretty large cocktail of negatives... I'll just say that I agree in essence with everything Duns Eith said above.

Personally, I've grown jaundiced to any specific reports about departmental climate, whether positive or negative; in my experience, they're just too colored by anecdotal evidence.

And now to be anecdotal: I had a great seminar this past fall in which I disagreed with just about everything the professor said. He told me flat out that he thinks (what I secretly wanted to argue) was false, "but so what?" Of course, not every prof is like that.

As for the treatment of women and people of color, I'd be interested to hear more from quineonthevine. My experience has been that academic philosophers are quite sensitive to minority issues, both at the official level (MAP chapters, concerns over syllabus inclusivity, etc.) and at the personal level. Of course, my experience is anything but a systematic study.

[bluwe]

13 hours ago, dgswaim said:

I did a terminal MA. None of this was the case. Everyone just tries to do good work and hopes for the best for themselves and everyone else. That's it.

Yeah I did one too and can tell you that is why I gave the response I did.

[The_Last_Thylacine]

On 11/18/2018 at 7:16 PM, desu_desu said:

I am not a graduate student but I have heard from more than one graduate student in philosophy that they have to deal with very calculating, back-stabbing, opportunistic, or resentful peers and superiors. They told me that it is akin to working in a corporation, where everyone is trying to climb up the ladder and will use what they can to sabotage or use others. That peers or superiors whose thesis or projects are criticized will hold a grudge against you and actively try to make things more difficult for you, or even steal your ideas and get them published without crediting you.

If you're a graduate student in philosophy, or were one, is this true from your experience?

While there is competition, I am not sure that this competition necessitates hostility. 

Think of the factors that are important to your application to Ph.D. programs from a terminal MA: (1) GPA; (2) GRE; (3) Writing Sample; (4) SOP; (5) LOR's. 

Only one of these factors, GPA, is something that enables you to directly compete with your classmates, and of course, this measure will likely affect LOR's as well (but not necessarily). Other than this, the rest of the work that you do to gain admittance to a Ph.D. program is something that you can do in the privacy of your own home. It isn't as though you are furiously composing a writing sample to compete with your classmates. You're likely just trying to produce the best possible sample, commensurate with your abilities and independent from what your classmates are doing. Moreover, competition does not necessarily cause hostility. That's largely dependent upon the personalities involved. In my terminal MA program, the most hostility I've encountered has been my classmate reminding me of the respects in which his application is better than mine, but is this really hostility or is just projection of apprehension (or maybe even statement of fact)? With the GRE, you just go home and study (hopefully harder than your classmates). With the statements of purpose, you just do your best to research the faculty and follow the examples of SOP's from successful applicants you know. If you've invested your time and done your research, there is no need to engage in hostility. In fact, I think something of the opposite. I think it's important to help those who don't perform as well as you do. I have a classmate who was scrambling a bit toward the deadline for applications, and it was genuinely my pleasure to help him polish up his writing sample. I sincerely hope he does well this application season, and if he does better than I do, well, that just reflects positively on my department (I'd probably still be a little jealous though!). 

TLDR: if there is hostility, it is due to the personalities involved and not graduate work itself. There's plenty of healthy competition. Other students' boasting can be discouraging, but it can also motivate you to be a better student as well. 

[quineonthevine]

On 12/28/2018 at 12:14 AM, Rose-Colored Beetle said:

As for the treatment of women and people of color, I'd be interested to hear more from quineonthevine. My experience has been that academic philosophers are quite sensitive to minority issues, both at the official level (MAP chapters, concerns over syllabus inclusivity, etc.) and at the personal level. Of course, my experience is anything but a systematic study.

I get the sense that many academic philosophers are well-meaning, but there are many reasons (many of them institutional) that can make philosophy an inaccessible and/or hostile environment for people of color and women. One reason has to do with demographics: something like 75% of practicing academic philosophers are white men, and 10% or so are white women. That lack of representation among faculty often dissuades people of color and women from participating in academic philosophy. Another reason is lack of diversity in what is taught at major universities (both with respect to content, such as restricting material to major topics in analytic philosophy, as well as the philosophers discussed in classes, who by and large tend to be white men). Moreover, academic philosophers tend to continue teaching throughout most of their lives. So there are many prominent philosophers who are just from a different time period, and tend to be less cognizant of the need to be inclusive than the younger generation. Also, I think the rigor of academic philosophy allows for an environment where it is permissible to be dismissive of unorthodox views/dissenting voices. This is something that's sure to vary from place to place, but I think this a problem in the culture of academic philosophy. I've seen undergraduates talking over other voices in the classroom, especially undergraduates who are women and people of color. I've seen undergraduates talk over graduate students, or even professors, who are women or people of color. I've also heard of philosophers from diverse backgrounds getting hate mail because they are minorities (even explicitly). It's hard not to notice these things, and it's very clear what impact it has on people from these groups, even if actions like these are unintentional. And I know plenty people of color and women in philosophy (from various departments) who have felt unwelcome in academic philosophy for various reasons.

Those are some reasons why I don't think it's plausible to say that philosophy is very inclusive as things stand. For if it were, we should be seeing much more participation from people of color and women. Organizations like MAP are fighting the good fight, but there's a lot of work to be done to make philosophy more inclusive. 

With all of that said, I don't get the sense that philosophy is generally vicious in the way OP was asking about. I just think it can be vicious in different respects. I hope this clarifies what I meant @Rose-Colored Beetle & @loffire.

[Rose-Colored Beetle]

Thanks for the clarification, @quineonthevine. I'm not sure I agree with everything you say, so I may start a new thread entirely so as not to hijack this one. For the moment, I will certainly agree that when men dominate things, things tend to go wrong in particular ways, and I can't help but think that this has something to do with the current state of academic philosophy. With the affectionate humor of one who has a hearty degree of respect for men, I would have us consider the ease with which we can imagine seven or eight men in a circle smoking pipes or cigars, telling each other how profound they are.

[Very Hungry Caterpillar]

On 12/31/2018 at 7:41 AM, quineonthevine said:

Those are some reasons why I don't think it's plausible to say that philosophy is very inclusive as things stand. For if it were, we should be seeing much more participation from people of color and women. Organizations like MAP are fighting the good fight, but there's a lot of work to be done to make philosophy more inclusive. 

This reminded me of a bunch of research done on attrition of underrepresented philosophy students from intro classes to philo majors, and then from undergrad to grad. I think there's a bunch of annoyingly subtle stuff going on here. I've perceived being talked over by male classmates several times. However, whenever I also perceive myself talking over them, I tell my professors/instructors not to call on me/ask if I should maybe shut up a little. (I am *quite* obnoxious in the classroom.) Perhaps it's that self-consciousness that has been more ingrained in me, which is also a function of my minority status? There's also stuff like impostor syndrome, which has been said to hit underrepresented groups far more than the majority.