2016 Rejection/Plan B Thread

[pecado]

1 minute ago, bravesball said:

So on the topic of rejections, we're presuming rejections for Carnegie Mellon, right? Or is there still hope?

So on the topic of formal epistemology, what is formal epistomology?

[Schwarzwald]

Just now, pecado said:

So on the topic of formal epistemology, what is formal epistomology?

So on the topic of questions, what is "is"?

[bravesball]

2 minutes ago, pecado said:

So on the topic of formal epistemology, what is formal epistomology?

Formal epistemology is the study of knowledge within formal frameworks such as mathematics and logic.

[pecado]

1 minute ago, Schwarzwald said:

So on the topic of questions, what is "is"?

Whatever it is, I am doing it right now.

[bechkafish]

4 minutes ago, bravesball said:

So on the topic of rejections, we're presuming rejections for Carnegie Mellon, right? Or is there still hope?

That's kind of a tricky one... It looks like the three acceptances on file are from over a week ago, but that doesn't mean they haven't waitlisted / won't be sending out a second round of acceptances. So I would say, stay hopeful!

[pecado]

1 minute ago, bravesball said:

Formal epistemology is the study of knowledge within formal frameworks such as mathematics and logic.

So do you study how one knows mathematics or logic? Or do you study knowledge with mathematics and logic as tools for your investigations?

[bravesball]

1 minute ago, pecado said:

So do you study how one knows mathematics or logic? Or do you study knowledge with mathematics and logic as tools for your investigations?

Oh yeah my bad that was ambiguous. The latter. The former would fall more under philosophy of math. 

[ScaredyCat]

Should I assume that I have been rejected from Vanderbilt since I have not heard anything?

[pecado]

Just now, bravesball said:

Oh yeah my bad that was ambiguous. The latter. The former would fall more under philosophy of math. 

Great. May I continue talking about this?

I find really impossible to make epistemology without logic. Since Plato I can quote examples of epistemology being made with mathematics and logic. If I am right, at one dialogue (I think it was Meno but I could be wrong) Socrates calls a slave and asks him questions about geometry and the slave eventually answers them correctly, thus supposedly proving that the theory of reminiscence is true.

Hence all epistemology should be formal, though not exclusively formal. Am I right?

[bechkafish]

4 minutes ago, Hermione27 said:

Should I assume that I have been rejected from Vanderbilt since I have not heard anything?

I would continue to hope, if I were you... Only two acceptances from Vanderbilt for this season so far!

[bravesball]

2 minutes ago, pecado said:

Great. May I continue talking about this?

I find really impossible to make epistemology without logic. Since Plato I can quote examples of epistemology being made with mathematics and logic. If I am right, at one dialogue (I think it was Meno but I could be wrong) Socrates calls a slave and asks him questions about geometry and the slave eventually answers them correctly, thus supposedly proving that the theory of reminiscence is true.

Hence all epistemology should be formal, though not exclusively formal. Am I right?

I wouldn't think so. For example you could look at the question "What is knowledge?" And this is inherently not a formal question. It could definitely be analyzed within formal frameworks but it does not need to be. 

[Schwarzwald]

6 minutes ago, pecado said:

Great. May I continue talking about this?

I find really impossible to make epistemology without logic. Since Plato I can quote examples of epistemology being made with mathematics and logic. If I am right, at one dialogue (I think it was Meno but I could be wrong) Socrates calls a slave and asks him questions about geometry and the slave eventually answers them correctly, thus supposedly proving that the theory of reminiscence is true.

Hence all epistemology should be formal, though not exclusively formal. Am I right?

The Meno's slave experiment only shows that the slave has the ability to infer patterns given elementary rules. If I tell you there is a logical system with 2 elements: a, b and 1 operator, =, that denotes identicality, assuming you already know what identicality is, and I say a = b, and you infer that b = a, you've not immediately proven an innate knowledge of the system, but instead an ability to infer a pattern given basic rules. That ability is not necessarily innate though.

[pecado]

2 minutes ago, bravesball said:

I wouldn't think so. For example you could look at the question "What is knowledge?" And this is inherently not a formal question. It could definitely be analyzed within formal frameworks but it does not need to be. 

It is not an inherently formal question. And I am sure that knowledge is related to other things besides logic -or at least we research hoping that be true-. But the detail is, how would one study that question without using logic at all? I try to think about a manner to do it, and I think perhaps thinking about experience and how it feels and how that is part of what conforms knowledge might be something that could be done without using too much logic, but I still cannot find a way to do it without logic at all.

I always thought that the logic was, in part, the organisation and the relation of the thoughts. Of course you can create a myriad of logical systems, and there are uncountable ways of organising the thoughts, but whatever organisation your thoughts currently have, that organisation is its logic. And, as epistemology inquires knowledge, it is hard to not consider the organisation of thoughts in a research about what is knowledge.

Perhaps people usually call formal epistemology to those researches that make an extensive use of logical symbols and similar things? But this would not be very rigorous. I analysed one argument with symbolical logic at some article about epistemology, but I would not really like to call my article a "paper about formal epistemology".

However, I am delving in trifles, I only wanted to have some philosophical chat as it has been a long time since my last philosophical discussion. All this "application" thing takes a lot of time and it is really a waste of it, as we could be advancing in our philosophical development instead of using our energies in making a dozen of repetitive applications and feeling bad with every rejection. Why can't they simply give automatic admission to the postgraduate level to all their graduates? 

[bravesball]

Yeah I think the distinction mainly comes down to how much formal tools are used within the paper. For example, Goldman's "A Causal Theory of Knowing" is very different than   " 'Knowable' as 'Known After an Announcement' " by Balbiani et. al (is that how et. al is supposed to be used?) so it's natural to want to create a name for the papers that are more mathematically/logically oriented for organization's sake. 

[psm1580b]

1 hour ago, philosophe said:

If you already have negative reputation, you may want to consider that it has to do with the content of your posts. 

How come I can't give people negative reputation at conferences? 
 

Like, when they ask a question after the presentation--how awesome would it be if we could just press a button on the podium...

[TheChosenOne]

Virginia rejections are out - no email, check the portal.

[philstudent1991]

5 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:

Virginia rejections are out - no email, check the portal.

Weird, I got an email. At 2:00 am too. Anyway, I'm 0a/0w/3r of 9 now...Two weren't my best fits and one was the highest ranked I applied to....but I'm still getting that feeling that I'm trapped in a trash compactor and the walls are closing in and there's some sort of snake monster rubbing against my legs underwater. 

[philosophe]

Goodmorning and welcome to a new day in hell! Presumed rejection to UCLA

Edited February 16, 2016 by philosophe

[bravesball]

2 minutes ago, MickeyRay said:

Raise your hand if you still haven't gotten in anywhere. ?

?

[jjb919]

5 minutes ago, MickeyRay said:

Raise your hand if you still haven't gotten in anywhere. ?

?

[SamStone]

?

[bechkafish]

?

[Dialectica]

Rejected from Virginia. Suppose I should have expected this after the waitlists were released. 

 

So count me in @MickeyRay et al., I'm still anxiously waiting for an acceptance.

[gughok]

? I still haven't heard anything at all from anywhere. Presuming a rejection from UCLA, I guess.

[ScaredyCat]

?

Edited February 16, 2016 by Hermione27