Acceptance Thread

[Monadology]

Maybe I'll post mine later. I'm afraid few would be sympathetic to my argument, though. The argument is essentially that all naturalistic conceptions of mind collapse into eliminative materialism, and that eliminative materialism doesn't have the necessary resources to maintain a realist construal of science more broadly. So the argument lands upon a disjunctive: reject naturalism and maintain scientific realism, or maintain naturalism and adopt some anti-realist outlook on science.

 

That's a really cool sounding argument, and anything that makes naturalists uncomfortable is good in my book!

[MattDest]

Maybe I'll post mine later. I'm afraid few would be sympathetic to my argument, though. The argument is essentially that all naturalistic conceptions of mind collapse into eliminative materialism, and that eliminative materialism doesn't have the necessary resources to maintain a realist construal of science more broadly. So the argument lands upon a disjunctive: reject naturalism and maintain scientific realism, or maintain naturalism and adopt some anti-realist outlook on science.

 

Wow - that's quite an ambitious paper. How do you address all naturalistic conceptions of mind in one paper?! I'd be interested to see this. 

[philstudent1991]

Wow. All of these writing samples are very organized. I just write and don't bother with the subheadings. 

You didn't use subheadings? Dang your apps were sunk from the start.

[philstudent1991]

I've skimmed all the samples that everyone has posted. Everyone's is well organized, well written, and deals with a complex philosophical issue from a mature perspective. I see why admissions is so competitive

[dgswaim]

Wow - that's quite an ambitious paper. How do you address all naturalistic conceptions of mind in one paper?! I'd be interested to see this. 

The specific views I take on are Jaegwon Kim's supervenience arguments (mental and epistemic supervenience), Nancey Murphy's version of multiple-realizability, William Hasker's emergentism, and then the eliminativism of the Churchlands and Rosenberg (including Rosenberg's version of naturalized epistemology). I make note of the fact that it doesn't cover every naturalistic conception out there, but that the argument may be sufficient to show that other versions of naturalism with respect to the mind would have similar difficulties. 

 

 

I would have liked to have had more time to polish, though.

Edited March 5, 2014 by dgswaim

[humean_skeptic]

The specific views I take on are Jaegwon Kim's supervenience arguments (mental and epistemic supervenience), Nancey Murphy's version of multiple-realizability, William Hasker's emergentism, and then the eliminativism of the Churchlands and Rosenberg (including Rosenberg's version of naturalized epistemology). I make note of the fact that it doesn't cover every naturalistic conception out there, but that the argument may be sufficient to show that other versions of naturalism with respect to the mind would have similar difficulties. 

 

 

I would have liked to have had more time to polish, though.

 

Sounds like you know the literature quite well. Still seems like a very broad scope for just one 15-20 page paper, though.

 

My paper was just on a single sentence, namely, 'This sentence is false'. 

[zblaesi]

I've skimmed all the samples that everyone has posted. Everyone's is well organized, well written, and deals with a complex philosophical issue from a mature perspective. I see why admissions is so competitive

 

I think I can pinpoint why my writing sample isn't doing me well. I'm too tired to write up my thoughts right now though. I'll do so later...

For those who are interested, it might be nice to check out my aesthetics paper - because in retrospect, I think it would make a better sample.

[dgswaim]

Sounds like you know the literature quite well. Still seems like a very broad scope for just one 15-20 page paper, though.

 

My paper was just on a single sentence, namely, 'This sentence is false'. 

You may be right.

[DHumeDominates]

In case people want to see, here's my writing sample. I spent a pretty long time polishing it. (Except the last two paragraphs of the intro, which were just added last week.) Hope you dig.

 

https://www.academia.edu/6287019/Reason_Passion_and_Conflict_Non-Naturalism_and_Humes_Arguments_in_T_2.3.3

 

It kind of reads like Parfit's writing: simple, elegant, confident prose. I enjoyed it.

[v_e_r000]

I was kind of disappointed yesterday because I hadn't heard from NYU. I woke up and saw this email from Stephen Schiffer!!! "I  wanted to speak with you personally by telephone but couldn't find a number for you.  So this is to tell you that we were very impressed with your application and that we have recommended to the Graduate School that you be accepted into our entering PhD class of 2014" This is the best day of my life!

[zblaesi]

I wonder if that means Schiffer was on the committee (=explains why I didn't get an offer). Oh, and congratulations!!!!

Edited March 5, 2014 by zblaesi

[wakeupright]

I wonder if that means Schiffer was on the committee (=explains why I didn't get an offer).

 

zblaesi - do you think it might be anything to do with your fantastically low quantitative score on the GRE? NYU is the top school, and there are probably many candidates that have qualifications just as good as you, except with better GRE scores. What do you think? 

[bar_scene_gambler]

You didn't use subheadings? Dang your apps were sunk from the start.

I hope you're being sarcastic. At any rate, I don't really like the convention of using subheadings. Anyway, here's what not to do if you want to get accepted:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/210749665/WS

[zblaesi]

zblaesi - do you think it might be anything to do with your fantastically low quantitative score on the GRE? NYU is the top school, and there are probably many candidates that have qualifications just as good as you, except with better GRE scores. What do you think? 

 

Definitely, it could be playing a role. If I decide to apply again, it's something I need to work on. I just hate the idea of spending so much time on something so silly when I could, you know, be producing new work.

[Cottagecheeseman]

Here's another example for writing sample you shouldn't use, considering my luck so far. https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B2bL0eoS4wTxNTZ5dEZXVE5xRXM/edit?usp=sharing

[TheVineyard]

Definitely, it could be playing a role. If I decide to apply again, it's something I need to work on. I just hate the idea of spending so much time on something so silly when I could, you know, be producing new work.

 

Yeah that excuse doesn't really fly anymore, although we all agree. In order to get into these top PhD programs from undergrad, you have to have your focus on creating the best application possible, not necessarily being the best philosopher possible. The adcom will see your low GRE scores and most will hold it against you in some respect, whereas they won't bump you up the list due to your 5th reading of Critique of Pure Reason, because they won't even know you did it.

Also, the sentiment that ModalFictionalist shared (one of the most successful applicants this year) is right...people expect that you should either be clever enough to score well off the bat, or you be dedicated enough to study. If you do neither, it looks bad. I would suspect that the GRE is the biggest problem with your app. Again, I agree that doing almost anything other than the GRE would/could make you a better philosopher, but it won't make you appear as a better applicant, and the latter is all that matters if you want to get in.

[Cottagecheeseman]

Yeah that excuse doesn't really fly anymore, although we all agree. In order to get into these top PhD programs from undergrad, you have to have your focus on creating the best application possible, not necessarily being the best philosopher possible. The adcom will see your low GRE scores and most will hold it against you in some respect, whereas they won't bump you up the list due to your 5th reading of Critique of Pure Reason, because they won't even know you did it.

Also, the sentiment that ModalFictionalist shared (one of the most successful applicants this year) is right...people expect that you should either be clever enough to score well off the bat, or you be dedicated enough to study. If you do neither, it looks bad. I would suspect that the GRE is the biggest problem with your app. Again, I agree that doing almost anything other than the GRE would/could make you a better philosopher, but it won't make you appear as a better applicant, and the latter is all that matters if you want to get in.

I agree, the first time I took the GRE my scores were almost similar to Zach's, but I studied my ass off and were able to raise each section by over 5 points, so that's saying something. I still have dismally low quant scores, but at least it's above average, if only very, very, very barely. 

[zblaesi]

I agree, the first time I took the GRE my scores were almost similar to Zach's, but I studied my ass off and were able to raise each section by over 5 points, so that's saying something. I still have dismally low quant scores, but at least it's above average, if only very, very, very barely. 

 

I don't like making excuses, but here are the factors that contributed to my low scores:

(1) I took the GRE my final semester, while polishing my writing sample, assembling my applications, and dealing with regular courses.

(2) I struggled with chronic health issues as a kid and missed a great deal of school. As a result, my basic math skills suck, so I move much slower with math (though I seem fine with logic). A problem that might take the average person 30 seconds might take me over a minute just because it doesn't come naturally. I don't think this is an issue that can be easily corrected without significant work in addition to standard GRE practice.

 

(3) I haven't taken a math course since community college, which was nearly three years ago.

 

My biggest issue is that I totally underestimated how difficult the GRE would be for me, and that was my blunder.

Edited March 5, 2014 by zblaesi

[Cottagecheeseman]

I don't like making excuses, but here are the factors that contributed to my low scores:

(1) I took the GRE my final semester, while polishing my writing sample, assembling my applications, and dealing with regular courses.

(2) I struggled with chronic health issues as a kid and missed a great deal of school. As a result, my basic math skills suck, so I move much slower with math (though I seem fine with logic). A problem that might take the average person 30 seconds might take me over a minute just because it doesn't come naturally. I don't think this is an issue that can be easily corrected without significant work in addition to standard GRE practice.

 

(3) I haven't taken a math course since community college, which was nearly three years ago.

 

My biggest issue is that I totally underestimated how difficult the GRE would be for me, and that was my blunder.

Yeah I understand, it just takes some work, and planning. I was 'religiously educated' until college, and my math skills suck as well, and I hadn't had math courses since community college either. 

You have a super hand up though with your letter writers and prestige of NYU, which probably explains your waitlisting at better schools than a lot of people with similar stats, so if you try this again, getting your scores up and everything else polished would make yourself an even more attractive candidate. Also I was nowhere near as proactive with sending my writing sample to tons of people, and maybe I should have, but ah well we can't redo this year only do next time better (if I don't get into UVA). 

This isn't against you zach - but I find it sad that prestige of school and the prestige of your letter writers is so important. I'm sure there's this guy at Iowa Country State University with letter writers most people have never heard of and a sample that could be better because of the position he's whose just as good as the people getting into the top places right now. I'm in a similar position perhaps, the only school that has come close to accepting me is one that knows who my letter writers are, because I come from a state school with no graduate programs in philosophy. But then, my sample also sucks which is my fault for not being more proactive and sending it to preeminent philosophers. 

Edited March 5, 2014 by zizeksucks

[zblaesi]

This isn't against you zach - but I find it said that prestige of school and the prestige of your letter writers is so important. I'm sure there's this guy at Iowa Country State University with letter writers most people have never heard of and a sample that could be better because of the position he's whose just as good as the people getting into the top places right now. I'm in a similar position perhaps, the only school that has come close to accepting me is one that knows who my letter writers are, because I come from a state school with no graduate programs in philosophy. But then, my sample also sucks which is my fault for not being more proactive and sending it to preeminent philosophers. 

 

No, I agree. It's silly. Luckily, it's working to my advantage.

[Cottagecheeseman]

University Of Miami Philosophy, PhD (F14) Accepted via E-mail on 25 Feb 2014 A 25 Feb 2014

• report spam
• First admit. 1a/3w/9r out of 25. Finally.

Any claimants ?

 

I emailed today asking them, soooo I'll say what I find out here.

[Establishment]

Oh wow, I hadn't noticed that. Yeah, I thoroughly recommend redoing the GRE.

 

I took it my freshman year and got (what is now equivalent to) 164V/158Q, yet I plan on re-taking it this summer because I feel my scores are still too low.

[ungerdrag]

I was kind of disappointed yesterday because I hadn't heard from NYU. I woke up and saw this email from Stephen Schiffer!!! "I  wanted to speak with you personally by telephone but couldn't find a number for you.  So this is to tell you that we were very impressed with your application and that we have recommended to the Graduate School that you be accepted into our entering PhD class of 2014" This is the best day of my life!

 

Wow! Congrats

[Gnothi_Seauton]

Since we're all sharing, the link to my sample is in my signature.  Comments welcome!

 

EDIT:  Sorry, should be working now.  I had it set to private initially.

Edited March 5, 2014 by Gnothi_Seauton

[TheVineyard]

Oh wow, I hadn't noticed that. Yeah, I thoroughly recommend redoing the GRE.

 

I took it my freshman year and got (what is now equivalent to) 164V/158Q, yet I plan on re-taking it this summer because I feel my scores are still too low.

 

That is the average score for people Duke accepts. You probably have nothing to worry about with that score.