Non-philosophy applicants stubbornly advising philosophy applicants...

[SelfHatingPhilosopher]

Is this like some new trend, or has this happened all the time in previous years?

[Cottagecheeseman]

Seriously, I really hope nobody is taking their advice. It's generally bad, and never consistent with what philosophers online tend to say. But who knows if its new or not.

[greencoloredpencil]

My guess is that some people just don't realize how different admissions are by subject/field. They likely feel like what they did made for a really strong application and are just trying to "help" others based on their own experiences not realizing that it won't work for another field.  

[fuzzylogician]

Every year there is a not insignificant contingent of posters on this site who assume that what they know based on the one little corner of whatever field they are applying to must be true for everyone everywhere, and will refuse to accept that conventions might differ across disciplines.

 

Your job, as responsible consumers of internet advice, is to recognize that not all advice is created equal. In particular, you should always consider the source and what their knowledge is based on. Otherwise, some well-meaning advice might cause you more harm than good. 

[MattDest]

I'm surprised at just how tenacious these advisors are. We're not just saying philosophy is different than biology because we want to be special little snowflakes. 

[bar_scene_gambler]

I'm surprised at just how tenacious these advisors are. We're not just saying philosophy is different than biology because we want to be special little snowflakes. 

Woah woah woah. Let's not be so hasty. I am a pretty special little snowflake.

[kant_get_in]

Woah woah woah. Let's not be so hasty. I am a pretty special little snowflake.

 

The Über-flake. 

[bar_scene_gambler]

I teach you the Über-flake! Your snowflake is something to be overcome! What have you done to overcome it?

[Loric]

Again.. but why does it matter? Most of you aren't getting in anywhere anyways.(to clarify, that's been stated by people in philosophy on these forums, i didnt just throw it out there as an insult.)

Edited December 31, 2013 by Loric

[fuzzylogician]

Again.. but why does it matter? Most of you aren't getting in anywhere anyways.

 

You are trolling again, and I am running out of patience. Consider this your final warning. If you continue, we will have to suspend you again. The next step after that is a permanent ban.

[Cottagecheeseman]

Because we want to give people the BEST CHANCE they have in getting in somewhere. Just because 293 of the 300 people that apply don't get in doesn't mean we should just give up, we need to have the best application we can so that we have the best chance of getting in. People like you are giving bad information, which lessens the chances from absolutely horrible to cosmically damning, and we don't want that. So please, unless you are in fact a philosopher applying to philosophy programs, don't give advice here.

[Loric]

You are trolling again, and I am running out of patience. Consider this your final warning. If you continue, we will have to suspend you again. The next step after that is a permanent ban.

 

 I already clarified, but that's what they said about the matter - it's not something I came up with.

[Loric]

Because we want to give people the BEST CHANCE they have in getting in somewhere. Just because 293 of the 300 people that apply don't get in doesn't mean we should just give up, we need to have the best application we can so that we have the best chance of getting in. People like you are giving bad information, which lessens the chances from absolutely horrible to cosmically damning, and we don't want that. So please, unless you are in fact a philosopher applying to philosophy programs, don't give advice here.

 

Exactly what bad information did i give? All i ever said was that i felt the WS was overrated in the rank of the overall application and that "fit" is important (and people in philosophy agreed.)

[fuzzylogician]

 I already clarified, but that's what they said about the matter - it's not something I came up with.

 

This is not kindergarten and I'm not going to have a "they started it" conversation with you. They are asking, and rightly so in my opinion, that you refrain from giving unfounded advice (or worse). Even people who will not get admitted deserve good advice and a fair chance. Getting in is a combination of some skill and some luck; there are more qualified applicants than spots in PhD programs. Not getting into a certain school does not mean you are not good enough or didn't fit. Even if it did, giving advice that will hurt a person's chances is unacceptable behavior.

[Loric]

This is not kindergarten and I'm not going to have a "they started it" conversation with you. They are asking, and rightly so in my opinion, that you refrain from giving unfounded advice (or worse). Even people who will not get admitted deserve good advice and a fair chance. Getting in is a combination of some skill and some luck; there are more qualified applicants than spots in PhD programs. Not getting into a certain school does not mean you are not good enough or didn't fit. Even if it did, giving advice that will hurt a person's chances is unacceptable behavior.

 

Which i never gave, thank you very much.

 

I asked questions and disagreed with their opinions on a few matters but never "gave" any advice. "They" said that most people who apply wont get in, and so my retort is "so what does it matter if the advice is bad?"

 

It's a valid question. I think most of the advice they are giving themselves (as not admitted people, thus they dont know the best route) is bad in the first place.

 

They just want no one else to play with their ball, so now they're asking you to take it away from the other kids so they can take it home.

[Loric]

And for the record, I have been told by people in philosophy on this forum that its a lottery and there's nothing an applicant can really do to overcome the total chance aspect of the process.

 

Hence, we can't change the outcome.

 

And -I- have been the one telling them it's a bad approach and that they should try hard and that the people who get admitted have the best applications and qualifications. Just so we're clear on what I did or did not say.

[bar_scene_gambler]

Which i never gave, thank you very much.

 

I asked questions and disagreed with their opinions on a few matters but never "gave" any advice. "They" said that most people who apply wont get in, and so my retort is "so what does it matter if the advice is bad?"

 

It's a valid question. I think most of the advice they are giving themselves (as not admitted people, thus they dont know the best route) is bad in the first place.

 

They just want no one else to play with their ball, so now they're asking you to take it away from the other kids so they can take it home.

I think the main reason why we're irritated with you and other non-philosophy applicants is because you're unqualified to speak about the applications process in philosophy in any meaningful way, given that you are neither currently applying, nor have you ever applied for placement in a philosophy department. On top of that, the comments that you have made, especially in relation to your confusion over why there aren't more positions available to philosophy applicants, betray not only an ignorance of the way that graduate programs function in philosophy, but also a basic ignorance of the way academia and the economy function. Frankly, your comments are unwanted and unwarranted. I don't know how I or fuzzylogician could possibly make ourselves more clear.

Edited December 31, 2013 by bar_scene_gambler

[Loric]

You aren't accepted anywhere - so neither are you "qualified."

 

I have been admitted to a graduate program - multiple in fact. You have not. So you have no right to sit there and say I have no clue about academia while you claim to know everything, as someone who has not been admitted anywhere ever.

[Loric]

Long story short: You don't want to hear anyone else's opinion if it's not an echo chamber telling you that you're right all the time always.

 

You are asking others on the forum to respect that insane demand.

 

You are claiming "bad advice" is being given but can state ZERO instances where bad advice was given. You're made up a false statement to try and win your petty right to ignorance by claiming to be doing the right thing.

 

Your behavior is ridiculous.

Edited December 31, 2013 by Loric

[fuzzylogician]

I am done arguing with you.

 

People are allowed to post even if they are inexperienced. That includes you, by the way. But you are applying to a different field and therefore should recognize that you are speaking without even the most basic knowledge about the field that you are trying to give advice about. That's a dangerous situation, and people are correct to point it out as a potential pitfall. There are ways of talking about issues you know less about, for example by flagging that "in my field, X is the case." or "as far as I know, X." Another thing I have (unsuccessfully) invited you to do in the past is open a new thread to discuss "how things should be (according to my opinion)" instead of derailing someone else's thread with those thoughts, because I do think that some general discussion of accepted wisdom could be interesting to other posters as well.  But unqualified, confident-sounding bullshit runs the risk of confusing innocent posters, and that is what people are objecting to.

[Cottagecheeseman]

I'm pretty sure a ban is in order fuzzylogic! Ban the brony!

[Loric]

Cite an exact example. You are making things up to fit your opinion.

[Loric]

I am being accused of doing something I didn't do. This is patently unfair.

[fuzzylogician]

I am not banning anyone at the moment and I am also not about to waste my time "citing examples." I am (repeatedly) asking that you stop this.

[Loric]

If I did something wrong, you can find and cite the text and post.

 

I did not give bad advice. You are asking me to stop doing something I did not do. This is unfair.