Login
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:
I graduated from a top US undergrad almost 20 years ago, and I took a few philosophy courses that fascinated me but did not major in the subject. Many years later, I am passionate about philosophy and philosophical questions and have done a lot of thinking and theorizing on my own. I fundamentally want to "do philosophy" and attempt to answer the great questions. I am fortunate enough that I could self-fund any formal education.
I'm not sure where I should go from here. There are online masters programs at certain UK schools, and there is also the option of writing on my own and submitting it informally for comment and critique. I don't have the "proper" resume to gain admission at most philosophy graduate programs because I didn't explicitly major in philosophy, but I did do well in the courses I did take and I have engaged with the subject a great deal on my personal time. Even my professional work has had an element of "applied epistemology" to it.
I would ultimately like to pursue a PhD for its own sake and I would like to engage with others who are working on philosophy and who are passionate about it.
Should I take an online philosophy MA at The Open University (UK) and then apply to PhD programs? I've also seen more specialized online masters programs at Edinburgh and Birmingham. Should I just write as much as possible on my own and submit it in different places? Should I look for a philosophy "mentor"?
These are all good questions. I'd suggest trying to begin by taking some graduate-level courses as a non-degree-seeking student. My spouse did this after undergrad because she wanted to go to a top PhD program in another discipline, and it worked like a charm. Although I could be wrong, I expect good grad programs will want to see that someone who has been away from academia for a while can cut it in grad-level courses--and also, taking some courses as a non-degree-seeking student may be important for getting recommendation letters, which I suspect one needs to apply to most grad programs.
But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?
Hats off to all the wonderful new talent in U.S. intellectual history! We had an impressive slate of contenders for our reimagined Henry F. May Fund awards this year. So. Read more
The post Meet the 2023 Henry F. May Fund Fellows first appeared on Society for US Intellectual History.
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
What are the norms (in the US) for expressing gratitude to your dissertation advisor/dissertation committee upon completing your dissertation? A handwritten card seems appropriate. Should you give a small gift as well?
Good questions. Another reader submitted the following reply:
The important thing is to keep the relationship professional. Where I worked before (in the USA), we had an awkward situation where students from some countries would give professors expensive gifts as they left an exam 8in the Business School) - quite expensive bottles of wine, etc. This is wholly inappropriate in the USA, especially at a public university, even if it would be expected in tehir home country. The greatest gift you can give a supportive professor is to have a great career yourself - if you publish a book in 10 years, and your feelings are still really warm, then send them a copy of the book.
Do any other readers have any helpful tips?
Professors (and graduate students) occasionally get asked, “should I go to graduate school in philosophy?”
In a recent episode of the Overthink Podcast, philosophy professor co-hosts Ellie Anderson (Pomona) and David Peña-Guzmán (San Francisco State) take up this question. Watch below, and feel free to comment with points you think someone asking this question should consider.
Some related posts:
The post “Should I Go To Graduate School in Philosophy?” first appeared on Daily Nous.
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, an aspiring philosopher asks:
I am a prospective PhD student from the Global South. I have a BA and MA Philosophy from a the national university of my country (although virtually unknown outside). I aspire to study in the top UK and US philosophy departments became the philosophers I wanted to work with are there. I wanted to get some advice on what can I do to possibly compete (or at least equalize the playing field) with PhD applicants from top Philosophy departments in the UK or US (say top 25 in Leiter’s PGR). I only have one publication so far (published in Synthese), but I am assuming that my degree and recommendation letters wouldn’t be viewed as at par with those from my Western counterparts, and I am worried that this automatically disadvantages me. What do you think are my chances getting in the top Philosophy programs? What should be the things that I should highlight in my application that could help my case? Thank you and I appreciate your thoughts.
Fair questions, and I'm curious to hear from readers, particularly those who have experience in PhD admissions. Obviously, all things being equal, having a publication in Synthese should be a clear advantage, but aside from this, I'm not sure.
What do readers think? Any tips for the OP?
At institutions like Cornell University, first-year applicants are not required to submit SAT or ACT scores.
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
I am a second year PhD student wondering what the ideal timeline should be for publishing. I plan to be on the market my fifth year, and I know that it takes months (years?!) from first round submissions to having a publication accepted. If my goal is to have 3-4 publications, what's the best way to realistically achieve this?
I have one paper that my advisors agree is basically ready to submit to solid journals, and a second that should be ready in the fall. I am hoping to start drafting a third paper this summer, with the hopes of getting that sent out to journals about a year later (after conference submissions, etc.). Is this too slow? Are there other timelines or strategies that have worked best for other people while balancing other grad school duties?
Good questions. My sense is that if you want 3-4 publications three years from now, you probably need to get a bunch of stuff out to journals as soon as you can. Remember, rejection rates at many journals are upwards of 90%, and just the initial review stage can take anywhere from 3-4 months to 6 months or longer (which, obviously, doesn't include revise-and-resubmits). Publishing a paper can take a long time, particularly if you've never done it before. At the same time, there are some dangers to sending things out too soon. As one reader wrote in a reply:
One quick response to PhD Student on publishing timelines: a mistake I made a few times as a PhD was to send off papers 'too early' while trying to get some publications in. But ultimately this just delayed the process, because those papers were inevitably rejected after a few months and then had to be sent off again. It sounds like you already have a good system in place to avoid this, namely getting a second pair of eyes e.g. your supervisor, and making sure to present your papers at conferences at least a few times before you submit them. I definitely don't think this is too slow!
I had a similar experience in grad school, which was I think the result of me not getting enough "eyes" on my papers before sending them out. So, I guess this is my suggestion: try to send papers off as soon as you reasonably can--but work closely with faculty in your program to make sure the papers are in good shape before you do! But these are just my thoughts.
What does everyone else think?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:
I am an international student (ESL) currently completing an MA degree in a well-regarded terminal program in the US. I am reaching out to you for guidance and support as I recently received rejections from all 25 PhD programs I applied to, including some of the unranked ones. I am (well, I was) confident in my abilities as an aspiring philosopher, having consistently been a top-performing student, winning awards, and presenting at prestigious conferences. That's how I got into my current MA program, or at least that's what I used to believe. As far as my professors (who are v. experienced at getting people into PhD programs) could tell, my dossier had no red flags, and I should have received multiple offers, even from top programs. And again, my writing sample, which was the product of a year's research, received thorough feedback from my professors at every step of the writing process, and was polished to a really high standard, which was again confirmed by multiple people. However, I did not attend a Leiterrific undergraduate school nor did I have any publications, which I suspect are the only two apparent things that made me less favorable. In any case, I am beginning to think that the best explanation of getting 25 independent rejections is that I simply lack whatever kind of talent I needed to have, as it seems that, contrary to what anyone I know, including myself, thought, my application was not good enough. Based on my situation, do you think that reapplying would make sense at this point? Or should I explore other paths? I welcome any feedback or suggestions that you may have.
I'm sorry this reader is having to grapple with this, and I empathize. When I initially applied to PhD programs, I think I applied to some 20-odd programs and only got into two relatively low-ranked ones. This was several decades ago, when (or so it seems) competition to get into grad programs was less intense than it is today. So, I'm not at all sure that the OP should take their performance in admissions this year to be evidence of lack of talent. It could be many things. For example, did they only apply to top-25 programs? Is there something about their application materials that didn't come across well? Could some kind of bias against non-native English speakers have been at work? Obviously, it's hard to say without knowing more. But I guess what I would do, if I were them, is to try to figure out the answers--perhaps by getting some philosophers outside of their MA program to look over their materials, or perhaps even by asking for feedback from a few admissions committees that rejected them (though I don't know if this is feasible).
Anyway, these are just my thoughts. What are yours? Any tips, insights, or experiences of your own that you think the OP might find helpful?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
I'm a student preparing to apply to PhD programs in philosophy. Many programs specify that they want letters of recommendation from philosophers. My question is: for the purpose of recommendation letters, who counts as a "philosopher"?
Does "philosopher" solely supervene over individuals with PhDs in philosophy? Would individuals with PhDs in, say, Ethics or Theology qualify? Does it matter if an individual with a PhD in these philosophy-adjacent fields teaches in a philosophy department, or publishes in philosophy journals? Or is this too far into the weeds, and students should ask the faculty most acquainted with their work and research capabilities to serve as recommenders?
Good questions. I'm not 100% sure, but I expect that admissions committees at philosophy PhD programs will want letters from people with philosophy PhDs who are able to comment in a well-informed manner on one's philosophical abilities and work. Although people in philosophy-adjacent fields (such as Theology) may be able to write on an applicant's general academic abilities and ability to put together well-reasoned work, my guess is that people on philosophy PhD admissions committees will be more likely to trust the judgment of someone who has a PhD and publishes in the field.
But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?
Carnegie Mellon University in Pittsburgh and the Norman and Ruth Rales Foundation recently announced a transformative new initiative to help address the Missing Millions — individuals whose personal circumstances have presented a significant obstacle to careers in the science, technology, engineering, and math fields (STEM).
The CMU Rales Fellows Program aims to increase access to STEM graduate education and help cultivate a new generation of STEM leaders. The program will eliminate cost as a barrier to select master’s degree and Ph.D. programs for students from under-resourced and underrepresented backgrounds by providing full tuition and a stipend. The program also will support students through a distinctive, holistic ecosystem of developmental and networking opportunities that will benefit Fellows both during their time at CMU and as they advance in their careers.
The Rales Foundation gift will provide an endowment of $110 million to support the program, and the university has committed a further $30 million in endowed funds. The two organizations also are jointly establishing a $10 million fund to support the program’s developmental years. The first cohort of students will enroll in the fall of 2024. The CMU Rales Fellows Program is expected each year to underwrite 86 graduate students in STEM fields in perpetuity, educating thousands of research and industry leaders in the coming decades.
“Addressing the challenges of our modern world will require the concerted efforts of a highly talented pool of STEM trailblazers who can bring a diversity of ideas and experiences to engender solutions,” said Farnam Jahanian, president of Carnegie Mellon University. “At the heart of the CMU Rales Fellows Program is a commitment to remove existing barriers and empower this next generation of domestic talent so they can apply their skills and ingenuity to realize new scientific and technological breakthroughs for the benefit of humanity.
The Norman and Ruth Rales Foundation was established in 1986 by Norman and Ruth Rales, two children of immigrants who grew up in modest circumstances. Norman Rales was the founder of Mid-South Building Supply Company. The Rales’ goal in creating the foundation was to continue their shared, lifelong desire to help people in need, as they had once been helped, and create opportunities through which others might thrive.
In our January "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
I have been wondering the potential drawbacks of applying to a PhD program several years after completing an MA program. Might such a delay reflect unfavorably upon an applicant in the eyes of admissions committees? Additionally, what steps can one take to mitigate any negative perceptions, aside from pursuing further academic credentials? Could publishing one's work be a viable alternative?
Fair questions, and I confess that I don't know the answers! Anyone have any insights?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
Should you write letters of recommendations for undergraduate students who took you for a 300-student lecture, whose work you didn't personally grade and with whom you had no interaction?
I'd have thought the answer is obviously no, but then I wonder whether this disadvantages students, who need the letters and who can't always find a way to get to know professors... Is refusing at least a decent thing to do, or is it unfair to vulnerable, shy or otherwise struggling students?
Good questions. I'm not sure that I've encountered this kind of situation before, so I'm not sure exactly what I think. I suppose you could always ask such a student to provide you with some of their work to review, and then go from there. But again, I don't think I've ever encountered this situation. To the best of my recollection, I've only been asked to write letters for students who have taken multiple courses with me, and all of our courses are 25 students or less and we have no TA's, so I always feel well-positioned to decide whether I can write a good letter.
Anyway, what do you all think?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
Why doesn't anyone give honest grad school application advice? It's pretty much common knowledge, and confirmed by accessible online data (programs' grad student list that displays their background), that prestige simply matters more than anything else in applications. Despite this, it's told as if one can write a brilliant writing sample and get in anywhere. People who get in everywhere are usually NOT people with brilliant samples; it seems neither necessary nor sufficient to have even a good writing sample. Most people get cut in the initial stages before their writing samples get a careful look. The so-called *elite* schools should just state on their website that they most likely won't admit you if you're not coming from another elite institution. Whatever they say, the statistics are obvious that that's who they are admitting. Instead, everyone goes on and on about how important writing samples are, misleading, or even worse, stealing from and scamming hundreds of people every year. Why is that advisors, programs' websites, etc. don't make this extremely clear?
Fair questions. As unfortunate as it may be, I suspect that the data on this is not nearly as widely known as the OP assumes. Time and again, I've been surprised at things that many people in the profession aren't all that aware of--in large part, or so it seems, because some people don't appear to spend nearly as much time online (on blogs, etc.) as other people do. Of course, all of this is consistent with the fact that people advising undergrads and grad applicants should be aware of the relevant data, and be honest with grad applicants about their chances. But then one salient question is perhaps how to best incentivize this. Perhaps the APA could do more here? Any other ideas?
The American Bar Association is debating whether a standardized test should still be mandatory for people applying to law school.
A reader writes in:
I am a faculty member at a (currently) unranked PhD department, and we've been considering numerous ways to improve our program. Some of these improvements will be internal - making sure we provide quality courses, excellent instruction, guidance on professional development, doing whatever we can for our job candidates to improve job placement, etc. Yet some improvements depend on us increasing our initial applicant pool.
In conversations with faculty at other (ranked) institutions, we've heard complaints that they receive far too many graduate applications. Meanwhile, we generally receive far too few. Some of this, of course, has to do with the rankings/quality of the relevant departments. But the rankings, while helpful in some respects, also function as a clearinghouse for what applicants’ options are, resulting in unranked departments not being “search engine optimized” to receive applications. Many undergrads do not know which grad schools they could apply to, or which ones they have a realistic shot at getting into, or just generally not having enough information about grad school options. I suspect that at least some of those applicants who are competing against so many at higher-ranked or ranked institutions would be happy to apply at other grad programs, including our own, if they knew about them and knew that their odds of getting accepted at these programs is much higher than at other programs. We imagine that it would be helpful if applicants could know which grad programs to apply to (if they were all linked or listed in one place, for example), and if they had some information about approximately how many applicants there are on average each year at each program.
One (infeasible) way to do this would require a huge amount of institutional uniformity, something along the lines of law school applications using SLAC, where all applicants could submit using a single portal, then pick which schools to send their application materials to. Another (more feasible) way might be having grad applicants self-report - something along the lines of how job applicants self-report on job-reporting threads. This led us to wonder whether this would be something to ask others about at the Cocoon. Maybe there is already something like this that exists that we aren't aware of. If not, does anyone have any ideas about how something like this might be implemented? Is this something that other programs would be interested in, too?
Good questions - what do readers think?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:
The DailyNous posted about a hidden syllabus and asked grad students to say in what ways their behaviors differed from what professors actually expected. That assumes that we know what professors expect, but at least in my program there aren't really clearly stated expectations except boilerplate requirements. I would like to know what professors in fact expect from grad students, and also what type of things they looked out for in writing recommendation letters.
Interesting query (the Daily Nous post is here). Another reader submitted the following reply:
Clearly, the most important things to comment on are your research - ideally, your published research, for then your letter writer does not look like a bozo who is just supporting his student (even with lies), and teaching. That is what hiring departments want to know about. And evidence based remarks are really what are wanted - "she is a great teacher", means less than reporting on her evaluations or classroom observations of her teaching. But softer things might include evidence of their involvement in a department - do they attend and participate in colloquia? I went to a lower ranked program, and everyone of the people from my programme who ended up with a decent career was actively involved in the life of the department.
It would be great to hear from other faculty who work in grad programs: what do you expect from grad students in your program, and what types of things do you look for in writing recommendation letters?
In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:
Now that some PhD application results are coming out, what advice is there for how to prepare for a graduate campus visit? Should I read articles written by some of the faculty I hope to work with and specifically ask questions about it? Should I email graduate students ahead of time to ask if I can take them out for coffee to ask questions, or should I let the department handle arranging conversations with students? What sort of questions should I be asking these students and professors anyway?
Excellent questions! Anyone have any helpful tips to share?
FreshRSS