Our books






Become a Fan

« Query on book presses | Main | Publications in edited volumes & the market »

06/24/2019

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Michael Barkasi

Some of these AOS aren't really all that narrow. E.g., those who do phil perception often work with the related psychology and neuroscience, which means they actually cover a lot of ground. Second, this naturally leads to an AOS list that looks like "phil perception, cognitive science, philosophy of neuroscience, etc", which isn't all that narrow but doesn't fit nicely under a label like "phil mind" (traditionally construed). Third, if you have a "narrow" (but actually merely disjointed according to standard taxonomies) AOS (e.g., phil perception) and are applying to a job advertised as something broader (e.g., phil mind) where the intent of the ad is to get someone who is really up on all the traditional research in that area and where there's little room for you to spread out into your related areas (e.g., cognitive science), then it just sounds like the job isn't a good fit for you. Finding a way to pitch yourself to this job sounds at worst deceptive, and at best like a bad idea: I imagine the search committee will see through it, there will be others who are manifestly better fits, and (even if you got the job) you wouldn't actually be happy. Likely you won't know the real intent behind the AOS listed, so perhaps it's still worth throwing your application into the pile, but it then seems best simply to have a CV that's transparent, highlights your accomplishments, and is organized so as to bring out some relevant theme or narrative. E.g., if you have in fact taught a lot of traditional phil mind courses (or whatever), put that down (of course). (This is also probably a reason not to clutter your CV with a line for every little thing you've done, so relevant work is easy to spot.) If you're a fit, you're a fit?

To be clear, I don't think Marcus is advocating being deceptive.

Philosopher

I second what Michael said. Maybe one can boil it down to: if your AOSs are at all non-standard, make sure you have the bog-standard _AOCs_ in the related areas.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Job-market reporting thread

Current Job-Market Discussion Thread

Alt-ac jobs discussion thread (2021)

Philosophers in Industry Directory

Cocoon Job-Market Mentoring Program

Categories