I've been stressingoutlatelyabout what to do for my PhD. If I get accepted to both spots that I applied for, I'll have a major choice to make
( Read more... )
Out of curiosity, did you end up applying for both psych and HPS? I am actually in almost the same boat (phil of Mind instead of neuroscience, but close enough) so it was cool to read your post in the philosophy group.
I am a first year MA and I can totally relate to what you said (especially about the readings--even though I know nothing of stats). I am (at least today) leaning to mind, but I like the historical readings (in general I like the history of philosophy; but I may veer that way later in my career). Hume, Nietzsche, and James were always fascinating for me and it is a bit of a jump to the dense and dull analysis of "cognitive architecture" and "concepts"; however, I also think that there are some profound implications in the stuff (for the very patient reader) and the possible employment options are a plus...
cheers and good luck!! (and try not to stress out anymore!!)
Out of curiosity, did you end up applying for both psych and HPS?
Yup.
I should find out about my Honours results around the end of November; PhD and scholarship offers should come in not too long after that.
I haven't the faintest idea which way I'll jump. Two weeks before handing in my psych thesis, I would've said that I was 90% likely to jump to HPS. Now it's back to pretty much 50/50, although it may be 51/49 either way at any particular point in time.
At the moment, I'm mostly deliberately not thinking about it. I traditionally end every year up at the Woodford Folk Festival, and that usually provides ample opportunities for lying on the grass under a nice tree and having a good think. I'd be a bit surprised if I didn't have a much better idea of where I'm going by the end of the festival.
I am actually in almost the same boat (phil of Mind instead of neuroscience, but close enough) so it was cool to read your post in the philosophy group.So is it a philosophy vs history thing, or a Philosophy of Mind vs History &
( ... )
Philosophy of Mind vs History & Philosophy of Science thing?
yes
Incidentally, with Philosophy of Mind (and philosophy in general), I'm heavily in agreement with Pat Churchland and company: making philosophical arguments about how minds work without paying attention the findings of modern cognitive psych and neuroscience is ridiculous.
It's akin to a 17th-century astronomer saying that he can't be bothered with all of this new-fangled telescope stuff.
Philosophy needs to pay attention to empirical data. It's the Mythbuster's approach to philosophy: "you say that qualia must work like that? Well, let's put it to the test...".
I agree with this almost entirely (the last two sentences I totally agree with). We need to get out of our armchairs (playing the a priori games), but I am skeptical of the Churchland's eliminativism.
I urge you to read Peter Carruthers's "The Architecture of the Mind" which synthesizes a LOT Of empirical data in presenting a view of the mind.
Comments 3
Out of curiosity, did you end up applying for both psych and HPS?
I am actually in almost the same boat (phil of Mind instead of neuroscience, but close enough) so it was cool to read your post in the philosophy group.
I am a first year MA and I can totally relate to what you said (especially about the readings--even though I know nothing of stats).
I am (at least today) leaning to mind, but I like the historical readings (in general I like the history of philosophy; but I may veer that way later in my career). Hume, Nietzsche, and James were always fascinating for me and it is a bit of a jump to the dense and dull analysis of "cognitive architecture" and "concepts"; however, I also think that there are some profound implications in the stuff (for the very patient reader) and the possible employment options are a plus...
cheers and good luck!!
(and try not to stress out anymore!!)
Reply
Yup.
I should find out about my Honours results around the end of November; PhD and scholarship offers should come in not too long after that.
I haven't the faintest idea which way I'll jump. Two weeks before handing in my psych thesis, I would've said that I was 90% likely to jump to HPS. Now it's back to pretty much 50/50, although it may be 51/49 either way at any particular point in time.
At the moment, I'm mostly deliberately not thinking about it. I traditionally end every year up at the Woodford Folk Festival, and that usually provides ample opportunities for lying on the grass under a nice tree and having a good think. I'd be a bit surprised if I didn't have a much better idea of where I'm going by the end of the festival.
I am actually in almost the same boat (phil of Mind instead of neuroscience, but close enough) so it was cool to read your post in the philosophy group.So is it a philosophy vs history thing, or a Philosophy of Mind vs History & ( ... )
Reply
yes
Incidentally, with Philosophy of Mind (and philosophy in general), I'm heavily in agreement with Pat Churchland and company: making philosophical arguments about how minds work without paying attention the findings of modern cognitive psych and neuroscience is ridiculous.
It's akin to a 17th-century astronomer saying that he can't be bothered with all of this new-fangled telescope stuff.
Philosophy needs to pay attention to empirical data. It's the Mythbuster's approach to philosophy: "you say that qualia must work like that? Well, let's put it to the test...".
I agree with this almost entirely (the last two sentences I totally agree with).
We need to get out of our armchairs (playing the a priori games), but I am skeptical of the Churchland's eliminativism.
I urge you to read Peter Carruthers's "The Architecture of the Mind" which synthesizes a LOT Of empirical data in presenting a view of the mind.
Reply
Leave a comment