Acceptance Thread

[dgswaim]

That was me. I believe I got an earlier notification because I'm fairly close in proximity to campus, and so they invited me to their upcoming graduate student conference.

thanks for the info.

[dgswaim]

I turned it down, it said I was "one of four.. out of 75" that stood out, so I imagine the initial acceptances are pretty few. Given our similar AOIs... hopefully you get something! 

Thanks for this.

[hopefulpessimiste]

I was accepted at UCLA and didn't get such an email, so I don't think anyone should despair just because she hasn't received one.

Congrats! You're really killing it!

[ungerdrag]

I spent all day checking my phone/email waiting to hear from Harvard. Crickets. Then I get a "Welcome to Harvard" email way late at night.

 

Moral of this story: just because you didn't get the first call, that doesn't mean you won't get in. Stay (cautiously) hopeful!

Edited February 27, 2014 by ungerdrag

[humean_skeptic]

I spent all day checking my phone/email waiting to hear from Harvard. Crickets. Then I get a "Welcome to Harvard" email way late at night.

 

Moral of this story: just because you didn't get the first call, that doesn't mean you won't get in. Stay (cautiously) hopeful!

 

You've been accepted by Harvard, UNC, MIT, Yale, Pitt, and Michigan? Slacker

[PhD applicant]

If you're in the same boat as me without an acceptance, here's a special haiku just for you:

 

Checking my email

A blank stare through weary eyes

Please bring good tidings

 

not much hope left now

desperation for emails

poverty awaits

[TheVineyard]

You need to tell us something about yourself. You literally ONLY applied to the top 13 programs, and you applied to all of them except Stanford, UCLA, and Columbia.

Then, you go on to get accepted to every single one of them first round? What kind of person does that? I don't mean that to sound mean, I'm just amazed. Who can be so sure that they will get in @ a top 10 school that they only apply to top 10 schools? I know some of the best applicants coming out of Princeton, etc, and even they will pick a couple schools in the top 30 or so for safety or fit. Nobody is a good fit at EVERY SINGLE ONE of the top 10 schools, which makes me wonder why you decided to apply to ALL of them. You certainly didn't apply to them to be "safe" because you knew that you would get accepted to whatever school you wanted with that school list.

Basically, I'd like to hear more about you and your history because this whole thing is just incredible. Did you apply to your undergrad institution? Are you the Saul Kripke reapplying for fun?

Edited February 27, 2014 by TheVineyard

[ungerdrag]

You need to tell us something about yourself. You literally ONLY applied to the top 13 programs, and you applied to all of them except Stanford, UCLA, and Columbia.

Then, you go on to get accepted to every single one of them first round? What kind of person does that? I don't mean that to sound mean, I'm just amazed. Who can be so sure that they will get in @ a top 10 school that they only apply to top 10 schools? I know some of the best applicants coming out of Princeton, etc, and even they will pick a couple schools in the top 30 or so for safety or fit. Nobody is a good fit at EVERY SINGLE ONE of the top 10 schools, which makes me wonder why you decided to apply to ALL of them. You certainly didn't apply to them to be "safe" because you knew that you would get accepted to whatever school you wanted with that school list.

Basically, I'd like to hear more about you and your history because this whole thing is just incredible.

 

Thanks for the flattering words, Vineyard!

 

Here's what gave me the edge up on other applicants—or at least this is my best guess: (i) I got serious about philosophy early on as an undergrad; (ii) I spent hours and hours talking to people around the department during my free time—walking into people's offices, introducing myself, and asking about their work; (iii) I go to talks and conferences; (iv) I took grad classes; (v) I spent time studying what I knew the least about (viz., logic, semantics, and history); (vi) I'm fairly good at both analytic and creative thinking.

 

So part of it's just dumb luck: I'm just a friendly person who talks to everyone. That helped me to learn a lot about the discipline—and a lot about the grad school application process—well in advance. The rest of the story is that I was a reasonably bright student who got help from some wonderful professors. (My school is PGR ranked around 20, so there are plenty of excellent faculty around.)

 

Hope that helps. If you have any more questions, or just want to network (since we're both going into philosophy!), just let me know!

[zblaesi]

I feel like I did all of the above and yet I'm getting rejected everywhere^

 

P.S. I'd be into that networking invite.

Edited February 27, 2014 by zblaesi

[dgswaim]

Thanks for the flattering words, Vineyard!

 

Here's what gave me the edge up on other applicants—or at least this is my best guess: (i) I got serious about philosophy early on as an undergrad; (ii) I spent hours and hours talking to people around the department during my free time—walking into people's offices, introducing myself, and asking about their work; (iii) I go to talks and conferences; (iv) I took grad classes; (v) I spent time studying what I knew the least about (viz., logic, semantics, and history); (vi) I'm fairly good at both analytic and creative thinking.

 

So part of it's just dumb luck: I'm just a friendly person who talks to everyone. That helped me to learn a lot about the discipline—and a lot about the grad school application process—well in advance. The rest of the story is that I was a reasonably bright student who got help from some wonderful professors. (My school is PGR ranked around 20, so there are plenty of excellent faculty around.)

 

Hope that helps. If you have any more questions, or just want to network (since we're both going into philosophy!), just let me know!

Damn it... I knew I should have been reasonably bright! 

[TheVineyard]

@ Ianfaircloud, you should include Indiana HPS, Pitt HPS, and Irvine LPS as separate entries on your blog and in your notification section. Don't forget, a large part of the strength of those schools' PGR rankings is due to the strength of the faculty in those separate departments.

[TheVineyard]

lol just got a 3am rejection to UCSD.

[dgswaim]

lol just got a 3am rejection to UCSD.

I don't think anyone knows what San Diego even means anymore. Scholars hold that the translation was lost millions of years ago.

[humean_skeptic]

I don't think anyone knows what San Diego even means anymore. Scholars hold that the translation was lost millions of years ago.

 

Anchorman quotation? Knights of Columbus!!

[philosopheme]

language/logic/epistemology/feminist ethics (in that order). how about you? good luck! my dad went to the university of oklahoma and is hoping i have a miserable time when i visit texas, you're welcome to wish that on me, too.

Hi there, 

 

Just wondering what your AOI is? I'm on the UT Austin wait list and just curious if you're interested in the same area.

 

Cheers. 

[stressedout]

Thanks for the flattering words, Vineyard!

 

Here's what gave me the edge up on other applicants—or at least this is my best guess: (i) I got serious about philosophy early on as an undergrad; (ii) I spent hours and hours talking to people around the department during my free time—walking into people's offices, introducing myself, and asking about their work; (iii) I go to talks and conferences; (iv) I took grad classes; (v) I spent time studying what I knew the least about (viz., logic, semantics, and history); (vi) I'm fairly good at both analytic and creative thinking.

 

So part of it's just dumb luck: I'm just a friendly person who talks to everyone. That helped me to learn a lot about the discipline—and a lot about the grad school application process—well in advance. The rest of the story is that I was a reasonably bright student who got help from some wonderful professors. (My school is PGR ranked around 20, so there are plenty of excellent faculty around.)

 

Hope that helps. If you have any more questions, or just want to network (since we're both going into philosophy!), just let me know!

 

I know the least about logic and semantics... Did you study on your own, following, say, the logic study guide that Peter Smith has on his "Logic Matters" blog?  Did you take/sit in on classes?  What is your writing sample on (if you're okay with divulging that information and if it hasn't been asked before!)?

[ungerdrag]

I know the least about logic and semantics... Did you study on your own, following, say, the logic study guide that Peter Smith has on his "Logic Matters" blog?  Did you take/sit in on classes?  What is your writing sample on (if you're okay with divulging that information and if it hasn't been asked before!)?

 

I started with a little solo study from Graham Priest's An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic. (It's impossible to learn logic without doing it, so if you go this route, be sure to do the exercises!) Next was an intro to logic class that used Dan Bonevac's Deduction, which is a better book to start with than Priest's.

 

After that, I took a grad-level semantics class. It wasn't too hard; it helped that I knew some logic and philosophy of language (e.g., I knew what presupposition was). But it's possible to flourish in a semantics class even without this background—especially if the textbook is Heim and Kratzer's, which one could probably work through alone. Now I'm taking semantics 2 on discourse representation theory.

 

So here's my advice: if you're going to study alone, pick the right book (can't go wrong with Bonevac's or H&K's). And no matter what, try to find people to work with or teach to. There's no better way to learn something than to teach it.

 

As for my writing sample, I wrote about moral non-naturalism and Hume's arguments that reason is the "slave of the passions." (My view: Hume's arguments miss their mark.) This was really a stroke of luck, since it allowed me to show off what I know best: ethics, action, metaphysics, and mind. It started as a paper for a class that went 3x over the word limit, and it ended up getting me into my dream schools.

 

I can't say that there was an easy trick I used, though. That paper was the product of years of serious study, not a one-off project. The best I can do is: write what you know. But the knowing is the hard part.

Edited February 27, 2014 by ungerdrag

[ungerdrag]

Hang in there, Vineyard.

[stressedout]

I started with a little solo study from Graham Priest's An Introduction to Non-Classical Logic. (It's impossible to learn logic without doing it, so if you go this route, be sure to do the exercises!) Next was an intro to logic class that used Dan Bonevac's Deduction, which is a better book to start with than Priest's.

 

After that, I took a grad-level semantics class. It wasn't too hard; it helped that I knew some logic and philosophy of language (e.g., I knew what presupposition was). But it's possible to flourish in a semantics class even without this background—especially if the textbook is Heim and Kratzer's, which one could probably work through alone. Now I'm taking semantics 2 on discourse representation theory.

 

So here's my advice: if you're going to study alone, pick the right book (can't go wrong with Bonevac's or H&K's). And no matter what, try to find people to work with or teach to. There's no better way to learn something than to teach it.

 

As for my writing sample, I wrote about moral non-naturalism and Hume's arguments that reason is the "slave of the passions." (My view: Hume's arguments miss their mark.) This was really a stroke of luck, since it allowed me to show off what I know best: ethics, action, metaphysics, and mind. It started as a paper for a class that went 3x over the word limit, and it ended up getting me into my dream schools.

 

I can't say that there was an easy trick I used, though. That paper was the product of years of serious study, not a one-off project. The best I can do is: write what you know. But the knowing is the hard part.

 

Thanks for your thorough and thoughtful reply!  As it happens, I own the Bonevac and Priest books (and a few others).  I attended a program that didn't offer a phil language (let alone semantics) class, and logic was only intermittently offered.

 

Your writing sample sounds right up my alley.  I wrote on non-naturalist responses to Sharon Street et al's evolutionary arguments.  I'd love to study with Berker or Setiya (now at MIT), or Jacobson at Michigan.  Good for you, sir.

 

Oh, and if you aren't aware of it already, you should check out Shafer-Landau and Cuneo's forthcoming paper in phil studies on new directions for non-naturalism.

 

Cheers.

[TheVineyard]

Maybe I shouldn't speculate about the sex/gender of applicants.

Edit: Nvm, already been quoted.

Edited February 27, 2014 by TheVineyard

[philosophe]

I think its interesting that you think underdrag is a guy. My feeling is that shes a woman. I don't really have a knock down argument, its just an intuition.

 

I feel like I'm guilty of thinking everyone's a guy unless their screenname indicates otherwise, if only because I know philosophy is dominated by men. As a woman, I'm not offended if, for example, I get "bro"ed, etc. on the threads.

Edited February 27, 2014 by philosophe

[Cottagecheeseman]

I feel like I'm guilty of thinking everyone's a guy unless their screenname indicates otherwise, if only because I know philosophy is dominated by men. As a woman, I'm not offended if, for example, I get "bro"ed, etc. 

It's a sad day that you can assume that the person on the internet you are arguing with about something that 100% matters is white, male, and heterosexual and be right most of the time. But I do it too

[dgswaim]

Pretty sure I'm just going to be in a state of partial cardiac arrest all day waiting on word from Rice.

[Cottagecheeseman]

Pretty sure I'm just going to be in a state of partial cardiac arrest all day waiting on word from Rice.

Virginia Tech should've been out by now, the last few years they have. They are pretty much my top choice now, if they fund me, because after getting so many rejections/assumed rejections an MA seems like a good choice for me. I can barely contain myself at work just waiting for an email or phonecall from someone! PLEASE ADMISSIONS GOD HAVE MERCY ON ME!

Edited February 27, 2014 by zizeksucks

[Gnothi_Seauton]

Virginia Tech should've been out by now, the last few years they have. They are pretty much my top choice now, if they fund me, because after getting so many rejections/assumed rejections an MA seems like a good choice for me. I can barely contain myself at work just waiting for an email or phonecall from someone! PLEASE ADMISSIONS GOD HAVE MERCY ON ME!

Don't give up on UVA!