Current UT-Austin student - questions?

[zblaesi]

Hello everyone,

 

I was an applicant during the 2013 season (nearly shut out!), and thegradcafe community was very helpful throughout the whole process. So, I figured I'd try to give back. This may not be the best time to start a thread like this, since the 2014 season just ended. However, since I tend to be fairly swamped during the semester, this seemed like the best time for me to actively participate. 

 

First, some background. I was a transfer to NYU, where I completed a double major in film production and philosophy. I imagine this is sort of rare, as philosophy applicants tend to major primarily in philosophy or in some other related major (like mathematics or science). So, my undergraduate experience was somewhat atypical: I only had two years to take philosophy courses, and my film degree bogged me down with a bunch of extra work. 

 

I was ultimately admitted from wait-lists to UT-Austin and UW-Madison. At the time, my main AOI was metaethics. So, UW-Madison was very appealing. However, I sided with UT for a few reasons. First, UT was a more well-rounded program for my interests (which also included mind, language, and epistemology). Second, UT seemed to have a reputation for being an underrated department that was gaining momentum. Third, Austin seemed like a better place to live. And finally, I was really impressed by a phone conversation with David Sosa, as well as emails I exchanged with UT graduate students. Nowadays, I believe I made the right decision, especially since Russ Shafer-Landau announced his leaving UW.

 

At UT, I just completed my first year. I have taken courses with Adam Pautz/Katherine Dunlop, David Sosa, John Deigh, Josh Dever, Jonathan Dancy, and Mark Sainsbury/Michael Tye. 

 

So, at this point, if you guys have any questions about the program or my experiences thereat, I'd be happy (to try my best) to tackle them! 

Edited May 24, 2015 by zblaesi

[thatsjustsemantics]

I have a few questions:

 

I have a great research interest in modality (counterfactuals, "might," "ought," etc). I also have broad interests in noncognitivism, deflationary theories of truth, specific Platonic dialogues, and lastly (and least of all) French philosophy and intellectual thought.

Do you know any professors whose current and sustained research interests overlap with my research interests? I most definitely want to apply to a program in which some professors are really interested in modality at the least, but it's hard finding out which departments will continue to offer courses in modality by the time I apply to them (2015-2016 applicant).

 

What's the climate like at UT-Austin? Any general advice for applicants to this specific program? -- or, in other words, do you know what the admissions committee valued most out of your application, especially since their admission contrasted the fact that you were almost shut-out?

Thank you for any and all guidance!

Edited May 25, 2015 by thatsjustsemantics

[zblaesi]

Hi thatsjustsemantics (great username, btw),

 

Your first question is difficult for me to answer, since I don't do any work in modality, and I'm not close with any students who do. My impression is that Josh Dever, Daniel Bonevac, and maybe Cory Juhl would offer support in this area. But my answer is pretty speculative, and you could get a better answer by emailing them directly. 

 

For non-cognitivism, you might find support with Jonathan Dancy and John Deigh. Dancy, who is our main ethics guy, is here during the spring. As far as I know, he hasn't written much on non-cognitivism, but I'm sure he'd be helpful to discuss it. Deigh taught my History of Analytic Ethics course, and we spent a fair amount of time on non-cognitivism. But Deigh has a unique (historically-minded) approach to ethics. I think between the two you'd have some great resources, but again, as far as I know, there aren't any experts on that topic. 

 

Deflationary theories of truth--no one in particular comes to mind. Again, Dever and Bonevac might be helpful. Mark Sainsbury seems like he might know about that stuff as well. 

 

I don't do any ancient, so it's likewise hard for me to make a judgement on Platonic dialogues. But I do know there are two students here who are almost exclusively interested in ancient philosophy, and Matt Evans (an associate professor) is supposed to be really good. As for French philosophy, no one comes to mind. 

 

I don't have any specific advice for applying to UT. In fact, my application wasn't tailored to UT at all, because I decided to apply at the last minute. And no one has spoken to me about my application since being admitted. For what it's worth, I think I was almost shut out because my writing sample was an awful choice. (You can find it in my signature.) I imagine my letter-writers played a huge role in UT accepting me. Actually, when I was wait-listed, I had two professors send a follow up email to some people at UT on my behalf. The grad coordinator mentioned this in an email (something to the effect that a few were speaking highly of me), so maybe that played a role. 

 

Let me know if you have any other questions.

Edited May 27, 2015 by zblaesi

[yusufkh]

Hi!

I have lots of questions i just dont know how to begin!

- I want to know about the funds that have been given to the graduate students, (how much, tuition waver, sort of the fund (TA, fellowship, RA, is there any fund at all?!), what percentage of students have granted funds?

- The chance of Asian students to get admitted?

- The average toefl and gre scores that admitted students have?

thanks for your help, ill asl rest of my questions.

[shinigamiasuka]

1. https://www.utexas.edu/hr/student/compensation.html

2. Adcoms do not care about your race.

3. TOEFL 79, GRE scores vary from one department to another.

[ianfaircloud]

1. https://www.utexas.edu/hr/student/compensation.html

2. Adcoms do not care about your race.

3. TOEFL 79, GRE scores vary from one department to another.

 

In my experience, admission committees care a great deal about race and other features of a person's background. (Certainly the evaluation goes beyond the writing sample, transcripts, letters of recommendation, etc.) Philosophy departments very much want to increase the number of students from underrepresented groups. Race is one factor among many factors, but generally it's an important consideration.

[shinigamiasuka]

In my experience, admission committees care a great deal about race and other features of a person's background. (Certainly the evaluation goes beyond the writing sample, transcripts, letters of recommendation, etc.) Philosophy departments very much want to increase the number of students from underrepresented groups. Race is one factor among many factors, but generally it's an important consideration.

 

Okay, but as international students aren't all of us treated the same? At least that's what I thought. Doesn't the underrepresented category belong to racial minorities within the US?

 

@zblaesi Sorry this got off-track.

[zblaesi]

Hi!

I have lots of questions i just dont know how to begin!

- I want to know about the funds that have been given to the graduate students, (how much, tuition waver, sort of the fund (TA, fellowship, RA, is there any fund at all?!), what percentage of students have granted funds?

- The chance of Asian students to get admitted?

- The average toefl and gre scores that admitted students have?

thanks for your help, ill asl rest of my questions.

 

I imagine ianfaircloud has information about funding somewhere. As for GRE scores, you'll notice that mine are pretty bad, and that didn't stop UT from putting me at the top of their wait-list. Then again, my institution and letters likely played a big role in that. 

[yusufkh]

1. https://www.utexas.edu/hr/student/compensation.html

The link was very helpful, but i cant find how many of students has granted,

@zblaesi 145Q isnt good but 161V or W5,  considered bad? can you say generally the GRE scores?

[zblaesi]

The link was very helpful, but i cant find how many of students has granted,

@zblaesi 145Q isnt good but 161V or W5,  considered bad? can you say generally the GRE scores?

 

Well, you're right: 161v isn't bad. But I've gotten the impression that most people who land offers from top-10 institutions have amazing scores across the board. And my math score is pretty bad, and while my verbal score isn't bad, it's not ideal. 

 

For what it's worth, a friend of mine got into a number of top institutions and ultimately settled at Rutgers, and his GRE scores were similar. 

I think my advice to future applicants would be to prepare for the GRE as early as possible. You don't want to give committees an excuse to fault you if you can avoid it. 

I took the GRE my final semester while I was applying to schools, and that was a big mistake. 

Edited June 4, 2015 by zblaesi

[philstudent1991]

zblaesi, 

 

1. Besides Dancy, who are you planning on working with in metaethics?

2. So, if you can, shoot straight with us. Texas does not have a good reputation as far as climate goes. Have things changed or is it still a "snake pit" as I've repeatedly heard it called? 

[zblaesi]

zblaesi, 

 

1. Besides Dancy, who are you planning on working with in metaethics?

2. So, if you can, shoot straight with us. Texas does not have a good reputation as far as climate goes. Have things changed or is it still a "snake pit" as I've repeatedly heard it called? 

 

1) As far as I can tell, Dancy and John Deigh are the only ones who actually do work in metaethics. Nicole Smith, who is a lecturer, does ethics, but I haven't interacted with her much. But I get the impression that there are a number of professors who don't work in metaethics but who would still be very helpful, such as David Sosa.

 

I should mention that I'm less interested in metaethics these days. I'm actually much more interested in the philosophy of mind. I chose UT mainly because I wanted room to explore my options as a graduate student. That turned out to be the right choice: for one, Shafer-Landau left UW-Madison, and he was the only reason I was considering UW over UT. 

 

So, that's something to consider. Are you certain that your AOI's will remain the same? Or do you anticipate broadening your interests? The thing I love about UT is that the department is well-rounded, and I feel like I can get amazing support in almost all of the areas I find interesting. I heard stories about graduate students changing interests over time, and I'm one of them. Even Stephen Schiffer once told me that he started out wanting to do metaethics as a grad student before shifting to language. 

 

Another PhD student also told me that sometimes advisers will promise to take their students with them if they switch departments. I never heard of this before, but it's worth looking into. Regardless, I'd recommend trying to get a feel for the professors you plan to work with. This never occurred to me: I talked on the phone with Shafer-Landau, but I never considered asking him if he might move departments. I should have done that; maybe the decision would have been easier.

 

2) "Snake pit"? You're going to have to elaborate. Are you referring to the department, or Texas as a state? 

[philstudent1991]

Thanks for your insights! I mean the department, not Texas in general. I can't really elaborate any more than that; I don't know the details. I just hear it's not a good climate, especially for women but really for anybody. Is that just crazy rumor or is there something to it? 

[zblaesi]

I just thought to mention two more considerations related to (meta)ethics: 

1) There seems to be a shared feeling at UT that the department is lacking in ethics. As a result of this, the department tends to focus on ethics in other ways. For instance, a number of our conferences are dedicated to ethics: we have the Royal Ethics Conference, plus last year some students organized the first annual AGENT conference. There are also a number of talented students working in ethics. So, even if there aren't many experts on the faculty, I think the environment is a good one for ethics.

I'm also of the opinion that metaethics is heavily dependent upon considerations in other fields (language, epistemology, metaphysics), so I think some students will become better at metaethics at a place like UT as opposed to some departments that excel in ethics but are lacking in other areas. 

 

2) Adam Pautz is leaving for Brown, so we're going to need to replace him eventually. I wouldn't be surprised if we end up hiring someone working in ethics, for the reason mentioned above. 

 

Thanks for your insights! I mean the department, not Texas in general. I can't really elaborate any more than that; I don't know the details. I just hear it's not a good climate, especially for women but really for anybody. Is that just crazy rumor or is there something to it? 

 

I asked another grad student about the "snake pit" label. He's heard the label applied to colloquia Q&A. I think our department tends to put speakers through the ringer, at least some of the time. (Consider the legendary Deverstater: a crushing objection-in-the-form-of-a-question delivered by Josh Dever on certain occasions.) I personally love this aspect of the department; it makes me feel like a member of some formidable team. 

 

I could imagine an outsider worrying that such an environment might produce a feeling of competition among students. But in my experience, that's not the case. We're sometimes hard on speakers, but very supportive of each other. I've never felt in competition with any other students, and I've received valuable feedback from a number of students. 

As for the climate for women, I think UT is actually more concerned about the climate for women in philosophy than other departments. I also like that my incoming class is a 50/50 split of men and women. If anyone else is interested to hear a more detailed assessment of climate, please PM me. 
 

Edited June 23, 2015 by zblaesi

[dgswaim]

Do you know (or know anyone that specifically works with) Sahotra Sarkar? Just wondering if I can get some partial impression of what he might be like to work with.

[overoverover]

Do you know (or know anyone that specifically works with) Sahotra Sarkar? Just wondering if I can get some partial impression of what he might be like to work with.

I have a friend who worked closely with Sarkar and has said positive things. That's about all I know, but my friend seemed satisfied with the experience.

[zblaesi]

Do you know (or know anyone that specifically works with) Sahotra Sarkar? Just wondering if I can get some partial impression of what he might be like to work with.

Not as far as I know. I haven't interacted with him at all really. He doesn't tend to come to colloquia or conferences often, and I haven't taken a course with him yet. You might check the grad student page and see who is working on philosophy of science and send him/her an email. Sorry I can't be more helpful. 

Edited June 26, 2015 by zblaesi

[yusufkh]

is it important to email (or phone) to some of professors and persuade them to help you getting admission? is that work at all?

i mean specifically in philosophy and in austin, because as i know its important for applied science majors

[philosophe]

Hey, I have a question. I'm really into epistemology and planning on applying to UT Austin, but I was wondering if you could tell me -- do you feel like it's a good place to be for someone with that AOI? I see that that's partially your thing too, do you feel like there's enough advanced coursework / faculty advisors to be happy there as an epistemology focused grad student?

 

Thanks in advance!

[dgswaim]

Hey, I have a question. I'm really into epistemology and planning on applying to UT Austin, but I was wondering if you could tell me -- do you feel like it's a good place to be for someone with that AOI? I see that that's partially your thing too, do you feel like there's enough advanced coursework / faculty advisors to be happy there as an epistemology focused grad student?

 

Thanks in advance!

David Sosa is certainly a pretty big name in epistemology right now.

[zblaesi]

is it important to email (or phone) to some of professors and persuade them to help you getting admission? is that work at all?

i mean specifically in philosophy and in austin, because as i know its important for applied science majors

I'm not sure I understand your question. 

[zblaesi]

Hey, I have a question. I'm really into epistemology and planning on applying to UT Austin, but I was wondering if you could tell me -- do you feel like it's a good place to be for someone with that AOI? I see that that's partially your thing too, do you feel like there's enough advanced coursework / faculty advisors to be happy there as an epistemology focused grad student?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

I don't do much epistemology these days. But my impression is that UT is a great place for epistemology.

 

David Sosa is indeed awesome. He's super energetic and inspiring. You get the sense that he's trying to build a systematic worldview or something--i.e., for him, the issues are all connected: agency/activity, epistemology, mind. However, since he's the department chair, he can be hard to get ahold of. He also sometimes takes research leave. (He's currently on leave for a year.) I know he has been on a number of students' committees though. 

 

I hear Sinan is really good, but I haven't taken a course with him. This previous semester, he co-taught a course on Bayesian epistemology. He also sat in on Dancy's course, and his contributions were very interesting and helpful. He also happens to be friendly and has an offbeat sense of humor that is refreshing in an academic setting. 

 

Miriam Schoenfield also does epistemology, but she's at NYU for research right now. I think she'll be returning, but I forget when. 

And Dancy started out doing epistemology, apparently, and he has some things to say about the relationship between practical reasons and epistemic reasons. I think he'd be helpful in ways, though he isn't up to date with contemporary epistemology literature. 

 

Edited August 1, 2015 by zblaesi

[yusufkh]

I'm not sure I understand your question. 

I meant in the process of applying, does it help that you email to one of the faculty members which one have common AOI with you, and s/he probably could be in favour of you in admission committee?

[zblaesi]

I meant in the process of applying, does it help that you email to one of the faculty members which one have common AOI with you, and s/he probably could be in favour of you in admission committee?

 

My first instinct is to advise against it.

 

Don't get me wrong. It definitely can be a good thing for a professor to know you. So, for example, I sent a draft of my writing sample to Josh Knobe at Yale. He sent me comments, and we had an email exchange about them. But this is because (1) I had met him when he visited NYU and asked him if he could read it and (2) my paper was related to some of his work. 

By contrast, I hadn't emailed anyone at UT, since I wasn't familiar with the faculty. If I had emailed someone at UT in a similar fashion, I imagine it might have seemed disingenuous.

 

So, my advice would be to not email a professor just to try to get brownie points for admission. I would email a faculty member under conditions such as...

• The professor is a frequent citation in a paper you're working on, and you're looking for advice/comments
• You have a legitimate question (about his/her work, the department, or whatever) 
• You've met this professor and he/she has encouraged you to engage him/her through email. (This has happened to me with a number of professors--Josh Knobe, Elizabeth Camp, Galen Strawson.) 
• You do so far enough in advance for the conversation to be a real conversation

I bold the last point because the whole advantage here is for the professor to get a sense of your philosophical ability and personality over time and long before he/she (potentially) sees your application. If you email a professor a month before submission deadlines, this probably won't happen. The best case scenario is that the professor feels he/she knows you (and knows you to be a good student).

 

In fact, there's one student at UT who had virtually no philosophical background or training. Two highly preeminent philosophers wrote him letters of recommendation, despite the fact that he had not taken a single course with either of them. Why? Because he had been emailing with them for years, interacted with them at talks, sent them papers for feedback, and so on. They knew he was talented, despite his lack of the educational background. This is a rare example of the power of being social and proactive. 

There is one thing I did do, which seemed risky at the time. When I was wait-listed, I had two professors follow up with UT on my behalf. I believe they emphasized that I had much less time than other students to work on my writing sample and that I was capable of much better, or something to that effect. I did get off the wait-list, so who's to say if that helped. (The grad coordinator made a comment to me that "a lot of people were saying good things about me" or something to that effect -- she may have been referring to this.)

Edited August 2, 2015 by zblaesi