Platonist Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Yeah, I wish they would just let us off the hook. But i have a sad feeling that they will shortly. Re: Rochester v. Iowa, Rochester has made the process super personal, I would be one of two incoming students, and they offered me a lot of money. Also, I have a tie to that department (a former professor of mine is now tenure track there) so I have a number of reasons to be leaning that way. I honestly haven't heard a lot about Iowa's rep -- though Richard Fumerton is supposed to be an excellent epistemologist, and they don't make it into the PGR top 50. They offered me an additional fellowship, but it only provides real money for 4 years, and the additional year is only about $9,000 (although they would give me the first and last year without any TA responsibilities), which seems unacceptably low to me. Do you know something about Iowa that I don't? I'm definitely up for more info. Yes, but it would be better to get bad news early than holding up delusional hope. Thanks for the explanation. I am so sorry I cannot help as I do not know much about the Iowa's program either. If I were you, I would probably choose Rochester over Iowa too, because Rochester is higher PGR ranked, and is strong in epistemology and ethics. I bet Rochester has a better placement than Iowa too. So it is very reasonable to choose it over Iowa. Best of luck Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Platonist Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I bet if you contacted those schools, they'd tell you what's up. But I could be wrong. Thanks. I might email them, though I am not sure if such inquiries would be welcome. (Duke sent out acceptances and wait lists a quite while ago, and I do not understand why the rejections are so slow to reach us. ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhD applicant Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) I just had a phone call from someone surprising me from a spontaneous trip out of state. I saw an unrecognized out-of-state number and almost had a heart attack of happiness. I got all ready to say "hey, I totally accept your offer, WOOT!" Then I hear my dad on the other end and I'm like 'fuck you'. Edit: I mean, I didn't really say 'fuck you' to my dad. But I was totally thinking it. Almost had a heart attack. For serious. Edited March 6, 2014 by PhD applicant AcademicX, dgswaim, philosopheme and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
philosopheme Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I just had a phone call from someone surprising me from a spontaneous trip out of state. I saw an unrecognized out-of-state number and almost had a heart attack of happiness. I got all ready to say "hey, I totally accept your offer, WOOT!" Then I hear my dad on the other end and I'm like 'fuck you'. Edit: I mean, I didn't really say 'fuck you' to my dad. But I was totally thinking it. Almost had a heart attack. For serious. it's gotten to the point that every time i think my phone is buzzing for a call i start thinking of chris weber calling a time out that u-mich didn't have in their classic ncaa championship game against UNC. because i'll never think of whatever school i go to as beating UNC in basketball, but i'll think of them. and then it's just a double-text. or my dad calling from an unknown out of state number (seriously). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVineyard Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 it's gotten to the point that every time i think my phone is buzzing for a call i start thinking of chris weber calling a time out that u-mich didn't have in their classic ncaa championship game against UNC. because i'll never think of whatever school i go to as beating UNC in basketball, but i'll think of them. and then it's just a double-text. or my dad calling from an unknown out of state number (seriously). You could have had the dream. If only you went to Duke, Indiana, OSU...you might be able to live out the fantasy of defeating UNC.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
isostheneia Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 idk I guess all you need to do is write about Hegel and you get a couple offers, which is what I did. which is weird, I figure Nietzsche is somewhat more mainstream (or at least accessible) in general than Hegel If you have more thoughts on this, I'd love to hear them. I'll be applying this fall and using a writing sample on Hegel. Also, on the off-chance you'd be willing to share your sample, I'd be very interested to read it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greencoloredpencil Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Accepted to UCSB yesterday. Hypatience, dgswaim, stressedout and 2 others 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weltgeist Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 LOL! I remember buying Hegel's "Logic" when I was like 19 at a half price books. I didn't know anything about philosophy yet and I thought it was going to be a book about logic. I was wrong. what do you mean it's totally a book about logic. too much for ur "abstract understanding" huh? that's okay the rigors of speculative thought aren't for everyone Zukunftsmusik, AcademicX, bar_scene_gambler and 2 others 3 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheVineyard Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 what do you mean it's totally a book about logic. too much for ur "abstract understanding" huh? that's okay the rigors of speculative thought aren't for everyone The "rigors" oh that's precious. Philhopeful and ta_pros_to_telos 1 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgswaim Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Accepted to UCSB yesterday. Congrats! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhopeful Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) what do you mean it's totally a book about logic. too much for ur "abstract understanding" huh? that's okay the rigors of speculative thought aren't for everyone Having spent eight weeks once exclusively reading the greater logic, I'd be very curious to hear how exactly its about logic. Also.. doesn't Hegel actually say you have to basically accept the phenomenology to even have the framework in place to read greater logic? I definitely feel like that shouldn't be required to get logic... Edited March 6, 2014 by Philhopeful kant_get_in 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cottagecheeseman Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Having spent eight weeks once exclusively reading the greater logic, I'd be very curious to hear how exactly its about logic. Also.. doesn't Hegel actually say you have to basically accept the phenomenology to even have the framework in place to read greater logic? I definitely feel like that shouldn't be required to get logic... I have a feeling he's being facetious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhopeful Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I have a feeling he's being facetious. Oh, ok. I thought we were going to do that thing where analytic and continental people argue condescendingly towards each other. Maybe next time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cottagecheeseman Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Oh, ok. I thought we were going to do that thing where analytic and continental people argue condescendingly towards each other. Maybe next time. Ooo that's fun too, lets do that. kant_get_in 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Establishment Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) Having spent eight weeks once exclusively reading the greater logic, I'd be very curious to hear how exactly its about logic. Also.. doesn't Hegel actually say you have to basically accept the phenomenology to even have the framework in place to read greater logic? I definitely feel like that shouldn't be required to get logic... As someone whose main interest is in mathematical logic, I'd say that Hegel's Science of Logic is still logic. It's obviously not modern symbolic logic, but it's still a logic of sorts. There's interesting commentary by figures such as Houlgate, Pinkard, and others regarding Hegel's speculative logic if you're curious. Edited March 6, 2014 by Establishment Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kant_get_in Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Ooo that's fun too, lets do that. You continental philosophers are so on the wrong side of truth ( ) …..but some of us would really really like to borrow Merlau-Ponty for a couple of years. Can we propose a trade? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jailbreak Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 You continental philosophers are so on the wrong side of truth ( ) …..but some of us would really really like to borrow Merlau-Ponty for a couple of years. Can we propose a trade? What do you analytics like about Merleau-Ponty? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cottagecheeseman Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 You continental philosophers are so on the wrong side of truth ( ) …..but some of us would really really like to borrow Merlau-Ponty for a couple of years. Can we propose a trade? As an analytic, lets forget about Merlau-Ponty and instead try to borrow Husserl for a while. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bar_scene_gambler Posted March 6, 2014 Author Share Posted March 6, 2014 As an analytic, lets forget about Merlau-Ponty and instead try to borrow Husserl for a while. Fantastic! We'll just swap Husserl with Wittgenstein and everyone is happy. Differance 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Establishment Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Fantastic! We'll just swap Husserl with Wittgenstein and everyone is happy. Oh thank Jesus, I hate Wittgenstien. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cottagecheeseman Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 Fantastic! We'll just swap Husserl with Wittgenstein and everyone is happy. You guys can have the later Wittgenstein but I still want the early one. YAY! greencoloredpencil 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philhopeful Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) As someone whose main interest is in mathematical logic, I'd say that Hegel's Science of Logic is still logic. It's obviously not modern symbolic logic, but it's still a logic of sorts. There's interesting commentary by figures such as Houlgate, Pinkard, and others regarding Hegel's speculative logic if you're curious. I can't find my copy. But I'm pretty sure he says it in the "with what must science begin" section Edited March 6, 2014 by Philhopeful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgswaim Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 what do you mean it's totally a book about logic. too much for ur "abstract understanding" huh? that's okay the rigors of speculative thought aren't for everyone I'll admit to a love-hate relationship with Hegel. A large portion of my undergraduate training was conducted under a pair of Hegel scholars, one more traditional, the other a student of Malabou... so yeah. Anyway, the thing about the Logic was more of a joke than anything, but it is true that I bought the book thinking it was going to be about logic in the way people usually think about logic. Personally I prefer to leave speculative philosophy to Hegel and his Owl, but that's just me. I do like his earlier stuff (theological writings) and his lectures quite a bit, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dgswaim Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 I can't find my copy. But I'm pretty sure he says it in the "with what must science begin" section Pinkard is wonderful. His commentaries are very clearly written and are very well developed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kant_get_in Posted March 6, 2014 Share Posted March 6, 2014 What do you analytics like about Merleau-Ponty? I know some contemporary analytic philosophers of mind are interested in The World of Perception (I've never read it, and I don't know what for). Having read The Phenomenology of Perception, I can comment that his arguments against naturalism are interesting and so are his discussions of things like intentionality and qualia. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now