Venting Thread

[MVSCZAR]

15 minutes ago, metaphysician said:

Btw, did anyone watch Better Call Saul? I thought S2E1 was a bit disappointing.  

I missed it!!

[FoxAndChicken]

1 hour ago, bechkafish said:

Oh man. Still 6 out of 7 applications outstanding. I really, really need a win this week... I'm not getting any work done, I'm not sleeping well, my chest feels like it's in a vice all the time. This whole process is cruel and unusual.

I think I've caught a bit of a depression bug, too.  My "friends" have put me into a bit of a funk. The mathematicians I know have all found out many of their decisions and one who isn't actually applying for anything made a snarky comment like "You can sit at the grown up table when you've actually heard from graduate schools." And in an unrelated incident the next day, some other mathematicians wrote in the undergraduate math commons "No logic in this room please" and "Set Theory isn't a real math." I've been super depressed since then and unable to function normally. 

[bechkafish]

1 minute ago, FoxAndChicken said:

I think I've caught a bit of a depression bug, too.  My "friends" have put me into a bit of a funk. The mathematicians I know have all found out many of their decisions and one who isn't actually applying for anything made a snarky comment like "You can sit at the grown up table when you've actually heard from graduate schools." And in an unrelated incident the next day, some other mathematicians wrote in the undergraduate math commons "No logic in this room please" and "Set Theory isn't a real math." I've been super depressed since then and unable to function normally. 

Geez, some "friends". That's really awful; I'm so sorry to hear that's the kind of [non] support you're getting. Ideally: you'll hear back, get into someplace great, move away from these shitty people, and find some friends that are worth your time.

[MVSCZAR]

6 minutes ago, FoxAndChicken said:

I think I've caught a bit of a depression bug, too.  My "friends" have put me into a bit of a funk. The mathematicians I know have all found out many of their decisions and one who isn't actually applying for anything made a snarky comment like "You can sit at the grown up table when you've actually heard from graduate schools." And in an unrelated incident the next day, some other mathematicians wrote in the undergraduate math commons "No logic in this room please" and "Set Theory isn't a real math." I've been super depressed since then and unable to function normally. 

They sound like nerdbombs. Tell them I told them to go fuck themselves. 

[dgswaim]

26 minutes ago, FoxAndChicken said:

I think I've caught a bit of a depression bug, too.  My "friends" have put me into a bit of a funk. The mathematicians I know have all found out many of their decisions and one who isn't actually applying for anything made a snarky comment like "You can sit at the grown up table when you've actually heard from graduate schools." And in an unrelated incident the next day, some other mathematicians wrote in the undergraduate math commons "No logic in this room please" and "Set Theory isn't a real math." I've been super depressed since then and unable to function normally. 

No logic??? SET THEORY ISN'T REAL MATH!?!?! What do they work on partial differential equations or something? How boring.

Not only is foundations math (mathematical logic, set theory, category theory, proof theory, etc.) "real math," it is the best math. After all, these are what we do to prove that we can do all the other math. Geez. Assholes.

[jacbarcan]

2 hours ago, dgswaim said:

No logic??? SET THEORY ISN'T REAL MATH!?!?! What do they work on partial differential equations or something? How boring.

Not only is foundations math (mathematical logic, set theory, category theory, proof theory, etc.) "real math," it is the best math. After all, these are what we do to prove that we can do all the other math. Geez. Assholes.

Second that. THE BEST MATH! 

I guess it's time to get out my trench coat and ski mask again. 

[FoxAndChicken]

I have better friends in the department, but gosh I didn't realize how ridiculous some of the people were. Thank you @dgswaim for making me laugh with your "How boring." XD I liken my field (logic) to being to humanities what math is to science. Worth studying in its own right, but also for making the arguments of other fields more convincing and rigorous. 

Also, a squirrel I named Tree gave me a hug today. So now I guess I'm a Tree-hugger. http://m.imgur.com/H8zbZb4

[dgswaim]

8 minutes ago, FoxAndChicken said:

I have better friends in the department, but gosh I didn't realize how ridiculous some of the people were. Thank you @dgswaim for making me laugh with your "How boring." XD I liken my field (logic) to being to humanities what math is to science. Worth studying in its own right, but also for making the arguments of other fields more convincing and rigorous. 

Also, a squirrel I named Tree gave me a hug today. So now I guess I'm a Tree-hugger. http://m.imgur.com/H8zbZb4

Damn! That's one pretty daring ass squirrel! 

[FoxAndChicken]

Just now, dgswaim said:

Damn! That's one pretty daring ass squirrel! 

UMich squirrels will mostly all do this.  

[dgswaim]

4 minutes ago, FoxAndChicken said:

UMich squirrels will mostly all do this.  

LSU squirrels have a healthy (and probably justified) fear of humans.

[Cecinestpasunphilosophe]

14 minutes ago, FoxAndChicken said:

I have better friends in the department, but gosh I didn't realize how ridiculous some of the people were. Thank you @dgswaim for making me laugh with your "How boring." XD I liken my field (logic) to being to humanities what math is to science. Worth studying in its own right, but also for making the arguments of other fields more convincing and rigorous. 

Also, a squirrel I named Tree gave me a hug today. So now I guess I'm a Tree-hugger. http://m.imgur.com/H8zbZb4

I have always wanted to have a relationship like that with a squirrel. I'm jealous!

[502845824]

Fuuuuuuuck what's going on at UNC??? Someone plz inform me, I'm dyin'! 

[NathanKellen]

2 hours ago, dgswaim said:

No logic??? SET THEORY ISN'T REAL MATH!?!?! What do they work on partial differential equations or something? How boring.

Not only is foundations math (mathematical logic, set theory, category theory, proof theory, etc.) "real math," it is the best math. After all, these are what we do to prove that we can do all the other math. Geez. Assholes.

In general mathematicians (and math departments) aren't huge on logic. Hell, look at Cohen's attitude towards logic after he finished his independence proof for a great example of this attitude.

[TheChosenOne]

I'm here to vent about the severe racism and sexism among admissions committees. In an application to any sort of university, the only relevant features of the applicant should be those over which he has some control. (And back off, determinists.) Being a female or black or Latino or whatever should mean absolutely nothing. But this is not the case.

And it's no small matter. My white male friend and I have received only rejections and anticipate many more. I applied to a ton of schools and anticipate maybe one or two acceptances (but only after sitting for many weeks on a waitlist). But we know two gals at our program, of equal caliber with ourselves (perhaps lower), who each got into nearly every program they applied to, some within the top 10, with full funding. In fact, when one of these gals was flown out to a top university, they practically begged her to come.

Obviously, I don't think that every person on admissions committee is a racist bigot. They are pressured by the university, yadda yadda. But I think there are some spineless cowards out there for letting this crap get this out of hand. Some disparity will always exist -- whatever, not much anyone can do about that. But when it becomes pretty much the ticket for securing acceptance, it's obvious the system is corrupt.

Edited February 17, 2016 by TheChosenOne

[philosophe]

11 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said:

I'm here to vent about the severe racism and sexism among admissions committees. In an application to any sort of university, the only relevant features of the applicant should be those over which he has some control. (And back off, determinists.) Being a female or black or Latino or whatever should mean absolutely nothing. But this is not the case.

And it's no small matter. My white male friend and I have received only rejections and anticipate many more. I applied to a ton of schools and anticipate maybe one or two acceptances (but only after sitting for many weeks on a waitlist). But we know two gals at our program, of equal caliber with ourselves (perhaps lower), who each got into nearly every program they applied to, some within the top 10, with full funding. In fact, when one of these gals was flown out to a top university, they practically begged her to come.

Obviously, I don't think that every person on admissions committee is a racist bigot. They are pressured by the university, yadda yadda. But I think there are some spineless cowards out there for letting this crap get this out of hand. Some disparity will always exist -- whatever, not much anyone can do about that. But when it becomes pretty much the ticket for securing acceptance, it's obvious the system is corrupt.

I know many a lady not doing well this cycle, in my program and beyond. To say it's "the ticket" is unfair. I don't mean to be rude, but have you considered that these women simply had better applications (writing samples, gres, letters)? I don't think it's a kind assumption to say that they were admitted just because they're women. We really can't know what happens behind closed doors. This is the venting thread and I don't want to step on your toes. I see how this can be frustrating. But I also see how diversity is a real issue in the profession, and 90% of philosophy is still white and male.

Just some thoughts 

¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 

 

[TheChosenOne]

I know these two personally, know their scores, their letters, and their writing samples. I actually helped one write hers. I've also got better GRE scores, and an MA. (She's only an undergrad.) So it is frustrating to watch her get in to so many places while I've gotten pretty much nothing.

[philstudent1991]

1 minute ago, philosophe said:

I don't mean to be rude, but have you considered that these women simply had better applications (writing samples, gres, letters)? I don't think it's a kind assumption to say that they were admitted just because they're women.

But I also see how diversity is a real issue in the profession, and 90% of philosophy is still white and male.

 

He did consider that, and he said that based on his evidence, the best explanation of their success is not something philosophical. Maybe he is wrong, but he definitely took the time to address that possibility. 

Predominantly white and male certainly, but not 90%. In fact, some PhD programs have a target ratio of 50/50. And given this, one could certainly see how an otherwise less qualified female identifying applicant could slip past some otherwise better qualified male identifying applicants. Many female applicants are imminently well-qualified. But are all female applicants that beat out male applicants for spots head to head stronger? No. Is it a good thing to implement policy that will rectify gender imbalances in the discipline? Sure. But do these policies actively discriminate against males? Yes.  

[TheChosenOne]

And philosophe - your concerns about diversity are legitimate, and I appreciate the cordial tone of your posts. I will still say, however, it is still not clear to me that abandoning the principle of evaluating applicants based on academic merit alone is morally justified. Far from it.

[philstudent1992]

17 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said:

I'm here to vent about the severe racism and sexism among admissions committees. In an application to any sort of university, the only relevant features of the applicant should be those over which he has some control. (And back off, determinists.) Being a female or black or Latino or whatever should mean absolutely nothing. But this is not the case.

And it's no small matter. My white male friend and I have received only rejections and anticipate many more. I applied to a ton of schools and anticipate maybe one or two acceptances (but only after sitting for many weeks on a waitlist). But we know two gals at our program, of equal caliber with ourselves (perhaps lower), who each got into nearly every program they applied to, some within the top 10, with full funding. In fact, when one of these gals was flown out to a top university, they practically begged her to come.

Obviously, I don't think that every person on admissions committee is a racist bigot. They are pressured by the university, yadda yadda. But I think there are some spineless cowards out there for letting this crap get this out of hand. Some disparity will always exist -- whatever, not much anyone can do about that. But when it becomes pretty much the ticket for securing acceptance, it's obvious the system is corrupt.

Hey buddy, you're likely to get some backlash for making these claims, so I figured I'd say that I'm sympathetic to what you're saying. But I don't think that anecdotal experience (even though mine lines up with yours!) is enough to make broad statements about the impact of race/gender in admissions. Nothing makes any sense at all, and it's much easier to detect patterns that would explain why inferior people do better than you than to come to believe that something is lacking in your own application. 

[philosophe]

1 minute ago, philstudent1991 said:

He did consider that, and he said that based on his evidence, the best explanation of their success is not something philosophical. Maybe he is wrong, but he definitely took the time to address that possibility. 

Predominantly white and male certainly, but not 90%. In fact, some PhD programs have a target ratio of 50/50. And given this, one could certainly see how an otherwise less qualified female identifying applicant could slip past some otherwise better qualified male identifying applicants. Many female applicants are imminently well-qualified. But are all female applicants that beat out male applicants for spots head to head stronger? No. Is it a good thing to implement policy that will rectify gender imbalances in the discipline? Sure. But do these policies actively discriminate against males? Yes.  

The students themselves don't know what their letters say, let alone someone else's letters... not to mention grades, etc. So I find it hard to believe that someone else would be able to judge which application is "better," especially without having access to all the information, or knowing what kind of student the adcomm is looking for (which is notoriously difficult to know). Hell, I know plenty of info on other students in my program, but there's no way for me to objectively judge myself as superior or inferior. The whole thing is a crapshoot. 

And by 90% I was referring to the entire philosophical profession, not just current phd candidates. Although top programs might hit a target ratio of 50/50 many schools fail to enroll women in their cohort. I can think of programs without women in all of their years (Rochester) though they may have yielded one in the last year, I don't know. UCSB had no women in their entering cohort of 7 last year. The gender imbalance is real and nothing to laugh about. To say that adcomms actively discriminate against men is ignoring the larger issue. 

[TheChosenOne]

Fair enough, and thanks for the sympathy. I will say I have independent evidence for my broad statements besides the failure of my own application. I have anecdotes from others, first-hand knowledge of these girls' application quality, conversations with my professors to go off of.

[gughok]

11 minutes ago, philstudent1991 said:

He did consider that, and he said that based on his evidence, the best explanation of their success is not something philosophical. Maybe he is wrong, but he definitely took the time to address that possibility. 

Predominantly white and male certainly, but not 90%. In fact, some PhD programs have a target ratio of 50/50. And given this, one could certainly see how an otherwise less qualified female identifying applicant could slip past some otherwise better qualified male identifying applicants. Many female applicants are imminently well-qualified. But are all female applicants that beat out male applicants for spots head to head stronger? No. Is it a good thing to implement policy that will rectify gender imbalances in the discipline? Sure. But do these policies actively discriminate against males? Yes.  

"White and male" is, as a bunch of us discussed here and there a while ago, also a problematic demographic to cite because, legally, I'm "white", but in reality I was born in Iran and half-raised in Dubai, immigrated to Canada and subjected to no small amount of discrimination and social disadvantage due to my background. Sure, the colour of my skin is white, but that hardly means anything. The whole point of these ethnic labels is to factionize the population into discrete groups each with consistent socioeconomic backgrounds and that just fails miserably.

N.B. I'm not disagreeing with anything you've said, just venting on another issue.

Edited February 17, 2016 by gughok

[philosophe]

5 minutes ago, philstudent1992 said:

Hey buddy, you're likely to get some backlash for making these claims, so I figured I'd say that I'm sympathetic to what you're saying. But I don't think that anecdotal experience (even though mine lines up with yours!) is enough to make broad statements about the impact of race/gender in admissions. Nothing makes any sense at all, and it's much easier to detect patterns that would explain why inferior people do better than you than to come to believe that something is lacking in your own application. 

word. 

[philstudent1991]

1 minute ago, philosophe said:

The students themselves don't know what their letters say, let alone someone else's letters... not to mention grades, etc. So I find it hard to believe that someone else would be able to judge which application is "better," especially without having access to all the information, or knowing what kind of student the adcomm is looking for (which is notoriously difficult to know). Hell, I know plenty of info on other students in my program, but there's no way for me to objectively judge myself as superior or inferior. The whole thing is a crapshoot. 

And by 90% I was referring to the entire philosophical profession, not just current phd candidates. Although top programs might hit a target ratio of 50/50 many schools fail to enroll women in their cohort. I can think of programs without women in all of their years (Rochester) though they may have yielded one in the last year, I don't know. UCSB had no women in their entering cohort of 7 last year. The gender imbalance is real and nothing to laugh about. To say that adcomms actively discriminate against men is ignoring the larger issue. 

Sure, I don't disagree with any of that. 

[TheChosenOne]

I mostly agree as well. I do think though, based on the body of evidence I have, that my female friends and I are of the same caliber. I could have defeating evidence -- maybe there is some magic word present in their letters but not in mine -- but as best I can tell, we are pretty much equal.

Edited February 17, 2016 by TheChosenOne