[Informal topic] On Philosophical Maturity

[gradcoffee]

Firstly, how does one know whether one is philosophically mature for post-grad? Beyond the (presumably good) grades one receives for his/her undergraduate philosophy modules and polished writing sample, what is that extra element which marks his/her philosophical maturity? 

 

Secondly, wouldn't it be better to accumulate some life experiences first rather than diving straight into post-grad right in your early 20s? As the saying goes, "with age comes wisdom"...

 

Any thoughts on this? 

[philophilosopher]

Interesting question. I am not really sure how to respond to it directly because I am not sure what the "extra element" is exactly. I can tell you that I do not think of myself as exceptionally philosophically mature. In fact, much of the reason I applied to graduate school is to gain that maturity. I am currently in a gap year between undergrad and (hopefully) graduate school next year. I chose to do the gap year so I could a) really polish my application and to see what life outside academia is like (which perhaps relates to your question on accumulating life experience). In this gap year, I have been constantly asking myself if I am happy where I currently am (working at a small nonprofit) or if I absolutely must return to grad school. As I am writing this, I stand with the latter option. So, perhaps it is a little presumptuous to assume you are philosophically mature (because that is part of what grad school is for) or perhaps it is something too difficult to self-assess because it is something very nuanced. Obviously, I'm aware you are qualifying the notion of philosophically mature as philosophically mature for an undergrad, which I think, ultimately, is something beyond your ability to self-assess completely. I would imagine that if you really thought about how you performed in class and the kinds of interactions you had with your profs and peers, you should be able to glean something revealing towards understanding if you are ready.

 

Though if you are prepared, it will surely come through in the writing sample and letters of rec.

Edited February 18, 2014 by philophilosopher

[Silly_Socrates]

Personally, I found that my 'philosophical maturity' came about during my masters program. I think that undergrad is an opportunity to gain interest in philosophy, and you should be able to show on your grad apps the potential you have at being a devoted and evolving philosophy student. The beginning years of a grad program are to develop your interests and abilities quickly (at least they were for me). In undergrad, I was never required to do a senior thesis or the like, so I felt a bit disadvantaged going into a masters program. Surprisingly enough, my masters does not require a thesis or comp exams either, but I have pursued the opportunity of working one on one with professors in my AOI. Within the first semester of my masters, I felt I had found the area of philosophy to which I would be most devoted and interested in.

 

To address the second part of your post, I think it is good to gain life experience and recommend it to the highest degree. I ended up graduating a year early (and unexpectedly) from undergrad. I did not have time to apply to grad programs, and I am now quite thankful I had not. I was 20, almost 21, and I had a lot of energy to get out of my system first. I used that year to get a job in a law firm, which made me realize that I wanted to pursue philosophy and not law. I got to go abroad and take a few grad level classes which also helped to affirm my decision to do philosophy at the graduate level. I got to travel, live with new people, make new friends, etc. You have the luxury of free time, which allows you to learn new topics not because you are required to, but because you have an actual interest in them. Perhaps you’ll find new areas of philosophy that you never had come across before, but which you wish to learn more about. Heck, maybe you’ll get really interested in a completely different area and decide to go get another bachelor’s degree. I am glad I had time to have some great experiences, mature, save up some money, and to develop personally. I think if you applied to graduate programs, you probably have a pretty good idea of what you’re getting yourself into. It is a huge commitment. You have to know you’re ready and able to handle such a commitment. But also to note, grad school can supply a lot of the experiences I got from having a year off. You make new friends, get to travel all over for conferences, perhaps save money (assuming you’ll go out less cause you need to spend more time researching/writing, etc.), and most importantly, you develop intellectually.

[Monadology]

I doubt anyone is philosophically mature until some time after their PhD. I say this because my experience with philosophy is definitely of a 'light dawns gradually over the whole' character. I also say that because a number of faculty members have told me that their interests and sense of philosophical identity had changed quite a lot by the time they were done with their PhD.

 

I do think a lot of philosophical maturation will come with more general maturation and I know I matured a lot during my years between undergrad and my MA as well as at my MA program (though I don't think I'd say I'm philosophically mature). 

 

Maturity as a professional academic, I suspect, is much quicker to come once you become serious about it: you just practice at the professional skills.

Edited February 18, 2014 by Monadology

[philophilosopher]

Yeah but the question is about philosophical maturity for an undergraduate, which is distinct from philosophical maturity as an academic philosopher with a PhD. Regarding his question, I am not really sure how to know if you are philosophically mature enough for graduate studies. You have to ask yourself if this is what you want and, if you decide it is, then submit the best crafted applications that you can. I think that is it unless I am missing something (which is always possible!).

 

Alasdair MacIntyre gave an excellent criticism in a lecture he was giving about contemporary academic philosophy that is germane to our discussion. I don't remember it exactly, but one of his criticisms was that the current system of academic philosophy expects relatively novice students of philosophy to produce these massive dissertations, even though most students of philosophy at this stage really have nothing important to contribute to the history of philosophy yet.

 

I think he is right in that genuine maturity in philosophy demands comfort with and understanding of the entire history of philosophy, and such maturity requires much more than a decade of study to develop and create something of interest and value to philosophy.

Edited February 18, 2014 by philophilosopher

[Monadology]

Yeah but the question is about philosophical maturity for an undergraduate, which is distinct from philosophical maturity as an academic philosopher with a PhD. Regarding his question, I am not really sure how to know if you are philosophically mature enough for graduate studies. You have to ask yourself if this is what you want and, if you decide it is, then submit the best crafted applications that you can. I think that is it unless I am missing something (which is always possible!).

 

Oh, I see! Sorry I missed that aspect of your question. I don't think there is a clear answer. I think taking time off helps one get a sense of perspective, which can be quite valuable. On the flipside, the young (and I include myself in this number) are pretty bad at knowing who they are or what they really want. A large part of it, as you point out, just boils down to whether you decide it's what you really want to do. Plus, I don't think one necessarily needs much philosophical maturity to go to grad school (though, having never been to a PhD program, I might be wrong about that). 

[MattDest]

I don't think one is expected to be "philosophically mature" in graduate school, nor should they be. That's precisely what graduate school is for. I will confess that I don't actually know what 'philosophical maturity' refers to, but I suspect it means something like these two conditions: (1) is able to contribute to philosophical research and (2) has reached a certain threshold of knowledge in the field.

 

Far more important is personal maturity, which will go a long way in helping one with the rigors of graduate school. I think for some taking time off to "accumulate life experiences" is a good thing, but for others it may not be necessary. It's especially good for those who may not know if philosophy is something they want to pursue for the rest of their lives, or haven't had any other types of jobs, etc.  I don't think there are any reliable 'markers' of maturity that will tell one when they are ready to pursue graduate school. 

[objectivityofcontradiction]

'Philosophical maturity' is a phrase used by Schwitzgebel in his blog post on applying to graduate school (I think in the discussion of writing samples)... maybe that is where the original poster found it. Either way I think philosophical maturity is actually one of those things that can be gleaned more from conversation, classroom behavior, and interviews, rather than in written work. To be philosophically mature in your writing would seem to suggest a basic cover concept for, among other things: clarity, familiarity with relevant lit, strong analytic skills, etc. I think it may also refer to a general way of carrying yourself and going about the daily business of being a young academic or grad student, for example, conferencing, have a good writing schedule, and all that jazz. 

Edited February 18, 2014 by objectivityofcontradiction

[burroughs]

It seems to me that one has to distinguish between philosophical maturity & something more akin to graduate-level philosophical maturity. So, the latter would require that one possess the capacity to express assent & dissent in graded terms, to read charitably, to identify precisely the premiss/inference that one rejected in an argument & to be able to present sensible objections & counterarguments. All of this is a reasonably general sort of academic maturity that could apply to most programs (most of it cribbed from something that Oakeshott once wrote). Given that, one would also need to know some philosophy. If one has those capacities, then one can at least succeed in a graduate program. We might say that one has to be philosophically competent. Philosophical maturity, though, strikes me as something more hard-won.