Opinion on master's in bioethics or philosophy

[randoperson]

One of my main areas of interest is the concept of mental disorder, how it is defined, the role of values, etc. Though my undergraduate degree was in psychology, I have dipped a fair amount into scholarship from the philosophical study of psychiatry/mental health. I am considering applying to some sort of master's program in philosophy to give myself a more solid foundation in that scholarship. I want to take courses where I read the important texts on topics like the fact/value distinction, with the goal of refining my approach philosophically.

 

Part of the problem is that a lot of the people in the field of philosophy of psychiatry were originally trained as psychiatrists themselves, and therefore are embedded in MD programs (which I have no interest in).

 

I'm wondering, first off, your opinion on bioethics programs. I'm somewhat worried that a lot of bioethics programs seem very focused on the practical questions that arise in medical practice and that this focus wouldn't be relevant to me at all. Do you see a bioethics master's as valuable to someone who is not looking to become a doctor?

 

Another possibility I've looked at is a master's in Philosophy of Science. Do you think that would align more closely with my interests?

 

Do you think there is any point for me to get a master's at all? (Honestly, part of my willingness to get a master's has to do with the fact that I have very very few loans from undergrad, so I'm less worried about taking out loans for a master's.)

[tuv0k]

One of my main areas of interest is the concept of mental disorder, how it is defined, the role of values, etc. Though my undergraduate degree was in psychology, I have dipped a fair amount into scholarship from the philosophical study of psychiatry/mental health. I am considering applying to some sort of master's program in philosophy to give myself a more solid foundation in that scholarship. I want to take courses where I read the important texts on topics like the fact/value distinction, with the goal of refining my approach philosophically.

 

Part of the problem is that a lot of the people in the field of philosophy of psychiatry were originally trained as psychiatrists themselves, and therefore are embedded in MD programs (which I have no interest in).

 

I'm wondering, first off, your opinion on bioethics programs. I'm somewhat worried that a lot of bioethics programs seem very focused on the practical questions that arise in medical practice and that this focus wouldn't be relevant to me at all. Do you see a bioethics master's as valuable to someone who is not looking to become a doctor?

 

Another possibility I've looked at is a master's in Philosophy of Science. Do you think that would align more closely with my interests?

 

Do you think there is any point for me to get a master's at all? (Honestly, part of my willingness to get a master's has to do with the fact that I have very very few loans from undergrad, so I'm less worried about taking out loans for a master's.)

 

 

Hmm, what *are* you intending to do with the Masters - is it primarily for self-enrichment, or something else? I don't think an MA in Philosophy of Science is a good fit for your interests. If I'm not mistaken, the King's College philosophy department has close ties with the psychology / psychiatry / medical departments. They appear to offer MAs in philosophy of medicine, and philosophy of psychology: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/depts/philosophy/study/pgt/index.aspx

[randoperson]

Hmm, what *are* you intending to do with the Masters - is it primarily for self-enrichment, or something else? I don't think an MA in Philosophy of Science is a good fit for your interests. If I'm not mistaken, the King's College philosophy department has close ties with the psychology / psychiatry / medical departments. They appear to offer MAs in philosophy of medicine, and philosophy of psychology: http://www.kcl.ac.uk/artshums/depts/philosophy/study/pgt/index.aspx

 

I plan on going on to get a PhD, probably in another field -- psychology or sociology, or some sort of interdisciplinary science studies program (like UChicago's "Conceptual and Historical Studies of Science" program). Basically, my approach is very interdisciplinary, but I have no training in philosophy -- I have literally never even taken a philosophy course. All of my experience with philosophical scholarship has come out of or been motivated by my independent research into the conceptual debates over mental illness. I started expanding my reading to philosophers whose work was more broadly related to my interests. For example, I found Hilary Putnam's book "The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays" very stimulating for my thinking on the concept of disorder.

 

My eventual goal is to become a professor. I believe solid interdisciplinary work requires (or at least is greatly helped by) rigorous training in multiple fields, which is what makes me interested in a Master's in Philosophy.

 

Yes, King's College is definitely one of the places I am looking at. Sadly, they used to have a specific Master's in the Philosophy of Mental Disorder, but the program is being discontinued starting in the 2015 application season. (Just my luck ) I don't know exactly what the loss of that program signals -- presumably they still have a lot of support for people interested in that direction, but I can't tell.

Edited February 8, 2015 by randoperson

[ianfaircloud]

One of my main areas of interest is the concept of mental disorder, how it is defined, the role of values, etc. Though my undergraduate degree was in psychology, I have dipped a fair amount into scholarship from the philosophical study of psychiatry/mental health. I am considering applying to some sort of master's program in philosophy to give myself a more solid foundation in that scholarship. I want to take courses where I read the important texts on topics like the fact/value distinction, with the goal of refining my approach philosophically.

 

Part of the problem is that a lot of the people in the field of philosophy of psychiatry were originally trained as psychiatrists themselves, and therefore are embedded in MD programs (which I have no interest in).

 

I'm wondering, first off, your opinion on bioethics programs. I'm somewhat worried that a lot of bioethics programs seem very focused on the practical questions that arise in medical practice and that this focus wouldn't be relevant to me at all. Do you see a bioethics master's as valuable to someone who is not looking to become a doctor?

 

Another possibility I've looked at is a master's in Philosophy of Science. Do you think that would align more closely with my interests?

 

Do you think there is any point for me to get a master's at all? (Honestly, part of my willingness to get a master's has to do with the fact that I have very very few loans from undergrad, so I'm less worried about taking out loans for a master's.)

 

So much to say to this.  I have a master's in philosophy and specialized in normative branches in the field (political, ethics, metaethics).  I TAed Biomedical Ethics as an MA in philosophy.  Now I'm getting a JD and an MBE (Master of Bioethics) at University of Pennsylvania. 

 

My initial reaction is that you ought not to get a master's in bioethics.  The question you raise is solidly philosophy of psychology, cognitive science, or philosophy of mind.  (These aren't my areas.)  There are bioethics programs with philosophers on faculty, philosophers who can help you on these questions.  But the thrust of most bioethics programs is bio rather than ethics.  By that I mean that you're right to think that the focus is practical questions in medicine.  Also, in my experience, many programs are heavily oriented toward policy questions.

 

You may be wondering why I'm bothering with it.  Well, Penn Bioethics is quite good, perhaps the best.  I already have an MA in philosophy.  And I think bioethics could use more philosophers/ethicists who happen to be interested in medical ethics.  Right now, the field has plenty of biologists or doctors who happen to be interested in ethics. Every Kantian philosopher in ethics knows that (and I mean this in the friendliest sense possible) biologists, scientists, and doctors too often are (how do I say?) narrow-mindedly utilitarian, when it comes to ethics. Whew! That's bound to be controversial. But I think it's true.

 

If you're going to pursue a master's, my initial reaction is that you ought to take a look at the MA programs at Tufts and Georgia State.  Both excel in philosophy of mind or cognitive science.

 

It sounds like you're interested in what's called moral psychology.  (I'm not trying to be condescending. But I think that's what you're talking about, maybe.) Look that up on Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Is that about right? This is an amazing area full of growth and exciting developments. It's the new frontier in ethics and metaethics (maybe).

 

Do Washington University in St. Louis or University of Wisconsin Madison offer MA programs for someone with your narrow interests? Either would be good for this. I have a friend at WUSTL's grad program who studies moral psychology. (Edit: I think the answer is no. But I always wonder whether a special request may be honored, particularly when the request comes from someone who is quite serious.)

Edited February 8, 2015 by ianfaircloud

[Griswald]

If you're going to pursue a master's, my initial reaction is that you ought to take a look at the MA programs at Tufts and Georgia State.  Both excel in philosophy of mind or cognitive science.

 

It sounds like you're interested in what's called moral psychology.  (I'm not trying to be condescending. But I think that's what you're talking about, maybe.) Look that up on Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Is that about right? This is an amazing area full of growth and exciting developments. It's the new frontier in ethics and metaethics (maybe).

 

This is good advice. Also, the Georgia State philosophy department has George Graham, who specializes in mental disorder and philosophy of psychiatry. It looks like GSU has a new neuroethics program as well, though I've only just glanced at the website. 

Edited February 8, 2015 by aduh

[jailbreak]

I plan on going on to get a PhD, probably in another field -- psychology or sociology, or some sort of interdisciplinary science studies program (like UChicago's "Conceptual and Historical Studies of Science" program). Basically, my approach is very interdisciplinary, but I have no training in philosophy -- I have literally never even taken a philosophy course. All of my experience with philosophical scholarship has come out of or been motivated by my independent research into the conceptual debates over mental illness. I started expanding my reading to philosophers whose work was more broadly related to my interests. For example, I found Hilary Putnam's book "The Collapse of the Fact/Value Dichotomy and Other Essays" very stimulating for my thinking on the concept of disorder.

 

My eventual goal is to become a professor. I believe solid interdisciplinary work requires (or at least is greatly helped by) rigorous training in multiple fields, which is what makes me interested in a Master's in Philosophy.

 

Yes, King's College is definitely one of the places I am looking at. Sadly, they used to have a specific Master's in the Philosophy of Mental Disorder, but the program is being discontinued starting in the 2015 application season. (Just my luck ) I don't know exactly what the loss of that program signals -- presumably they still have a lot of support for people interested in that direction, but I can't tell.

 

Have you considered anthropology? Berkeley Anthropology has Paul Rabinow, for instance, and I know anthropology departments have plenty of people working on this topic. For one anecdote, a friend of mine majored in anthro and is now working on a project in China on the differences between perceptions of Western and Chinese medicine and hospice care there. Given your topic's connections with Foucault, I think your project would be equally well-embraced. Plus the shift from psychology to anthropology will be easier than from psychology to anthropology. Hilary Putnam is solidly in philosophy, that's true, but my impression is that anthropologists are open to a variety of approaches and won't have any qualms about your being influenced by Putnam (in fact, that might help set you apart). 

[randoperson]

So much to say to this.  I have a master's in philosophy and specialized in normative branches in the field (political, ethics, metaethics).  I TAed Biomedical Ethics as an MA in philosophy.  Now I'm getting a JD and an MBE (Master of Bioethics) at University of Pennsylvania. 

 

My initial reaction is that you ought not to get a master's in bioethics.  The question you raise is solidly philosophy of psychology, cognitive science, or philosophy of mind.  (These aren't my areas.)  There are bioethics programs with philosophers on faculty, philosophers who can help you on these questions.  But the thrust of most bioethics programs is bio rather than ethics.  By that I mean that you're right to think that the focus is practical questions in medicine.  Also, in my experience, many programs are heavily oriented toward policy questions.

 

If you're going to pursue a master's, my initial reaction is that you ought to take a look at the MA programs at Tufts and Georgia State.  Both excel in philosophy of mind or cognitive science.

 

It sounds like you're interested in what's called moral psychology.  (I'm not trying to be condescending. But I think that's what you're talking about, maybe.) Look that up on Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. Is that about right? This is an amazing area full of growth and exciting developments. It's the new frontier in ethics and metaethics (maybe).

 

Do Washington University in St. Louis or University of Wisconsin Madison offer MA programs for someone with your narrow interests? Either would be good for this. I have a friend at WUSTL's grad program who studies moral psychology. (Edit: I think the answer is no. But I always wonder whether a special request may be honored, particularly when the request comes from someone who is quite serious.)

 

I am familiar with moral psychology, and I was actually surprised that the Stanford Philosophy page mentioned mental disorders as an example of a moral psychology question. In my experience, researchers studying the empirical piece of mental illness concepts are primarily psychiatrists, clinical psychologists, and other mental health professionals. I don't think they typically think of themselves as "moral psychologists," even though one could argue that they are, in a way.

 

So you get into a strange situation where the people who primarily think in terms of moral questions are the philosophers attempting to understand the evaluative elements of the concept of mental disorder, or those who are attempting to argue that evaluative elements can or should play a limited role.

 

One area where philosophers of psychiatry/mental health have taken up empirical approaches is in the study of the way different people -- experts and non-experts -- define and reason about mental illness. Which is something I'm interested in, but it's not the main thrust of my approach.

 

My work up until this point has focused primarily on good ol' fashioned conceptual analysis -- analyzing influential definitions of mental disorder and the values underlying them, piecing apart the complex relationship between facts and values in previous debates over the definition of disorder, often focusing on the language and argumentation I find in primary historical sources.

 

To put it another way: I'm more interested in value theory than I am in the philosophy of mind, though I imagine those things are connected in some ways.

 

I haven't considered anthropology, because I'm not really interested in ethnographic approaches. Also, I acknowledge Foucault is important but I don't want to have to worship him, if that makes sense (and anthropologists sure do love their abstruse theorists these days).

 

I'm not very worried about spending time across disciplinary boundaries from psychology to philosophy -- to be honest, even my empirical studies have always been influenced by my strong interest in conceptual rigor. I'm constantly examining the way psychologists build their arguments and define their terms, as well as the implicit assumptions underlying their empirical approaches. So, I'm not worried about stepping out of the wheelhouse of empiricism.

 

Also, thank you everyone for your responses, I really appreciate you taking the time.

Edited February 9, 2015 by randoperson

[ianfaircloud]

My work up until this point has focused primarily on good ol' fashioned conceptual analysis -- analyzing influential definitions of mental disorder and the values underlying them, piecing apart the complex relationship between facts and values in previous debates over the definition of disorder, often focusing on the language and argumentation I find in primary historical sources.

 

To put it another way: I'm more interested in value theory than I am in the philosophy of mind, though I imagine those things are connected in some ways.

 

Your desire to approach the issue by way of conceptual analysis suggests to me that you would at the very least appreciate the value of a philosophical education in an analytic department.  You'll have to weigh the costs and benefits, but if you find a program like we've described, my guess is that you would enjoy it.  I can't comment on whether it would help you meet any professional goals, unless your professional goal is to be a lawyer or professor of philosophy.  It would very likely be valuable to you in other ways, though.

 

Georgia State is an excellent choice for most people with your interests.  The funding is generous, and they have several people on faculty who would work with you.  There's a reason that Georgia State has a pipeline to Washington University in St. Louis (which excels in this subfield of philosophy).  Georgia State also has a fair number of students who do not plan to pursue the PhD.  You actually might like that about the program.

[randoperson]

Your desire to approach the issue by way of conceptual analysis suggests to me that you would at the very least appreciate the value of a philosophical education in an analytic department.  You'll have to weigh the costs and benefits, but if you find a program like we've described, my guess is that you would enjoy it.  I can't comment on whether it would help you meet any professional goals, unless your professional goal is to be a lawyer or professor of philosophy.  It would very likely be valuable to you in other ways, though.

 

Georgia State is an excellent choice for most people with your interests.  The funding is generous, and they have several people on faculty who would work with you.  There's a reason that Georgia State has a pipeline to Washington University in St. Louis (which excels in this subfield of philosophy).  Georgia State also has a fair number of students who do not plan to pursue the PhD.  You actually might like that about the program.

 

That sounds great. Thank you so much for your advice.