The Philosophers' Cocoon

Are the job-market/academia worth it?

In our February "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Does anybody think this is worth it? Sorry that this is a grim question. But after a few cycles on the job market, I am wondering whether anybody thinks that this is worth it (and endorses that belief). I see so many intelligent kind friends absolutely burned out by the job insecurity, the constant moving, the two body problems, the low pay during prime saving years, the barriers to starting a family. I know we all know these things and we commiserate with each other - but then we just keep doing it. Line up again for another job market year, keep "crossing fingers". Has anybody figured out a defence, other than inertia, for why they keep doing it? If so could they share it, so that I can have their hope and reasoning as well?

I'm so sorry that the OP and others on the job-market are going through this. I spent seven (or was it eight?) awful years on the market wondering the same thing, and although I finally lucked out and ended up in a tenure-track job, I must confess that I still don't think that I have a good answer. Did a tenure-track job make that tremendously awful better-part-of-a-decade worth it? And would it have been worth it if I hadn't lucked out? I don't know how to answer either question, and I suspect there may not be any generalizable answers. Maybe it's all worth it in some cases but not others? But what about in comparison to relevant alternatives? I've heard a number of people who have left academia for industry joba report being far happier. Then again, maybe they are a non-representative, self-selected group of "alt-ac success stories"? 

In any case, it may be good to have a frank and open discussion of these issues, hearing the perspectives of people in different situations, including those on the market, those who have stayed in academia, and those who have left. 

Does anyone have any experiences or insights they're willing to share? Please do feel free to discuss away and commiserate.

Choosing which philosophical leads to develop?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Noah asks:

I'd be interested in hearing a discussion about how people manage the process of chasing down their philosophical leads. I have an ever-growing list of ideas that, prima facie, seem like they might be fruitfully developed into papers ("philosophical leads"). But, as I'm sure is familiar to many, the process of figuring out which these ideas really are viable is long and fraught. It can require significant time reading the literature, thinking things through, and drafting material, with no guarantee that the process will ultimately result in a paper. I'm curious to hear how others navigate the following issues:

(A) Deciding which of the many philosophical leads you have at any moment to actually pursue.

(B) Dealing with the temptation to pursue new leads rather than complete existing projects.

This is an interesting query, and I'm curious to hear from readers.

CFA - Country Music and Philosophy

Call for Abstracts!

Country Music and Philosophy

Edited by Joshua Heter and Brett Coppenger

Abstracts are sought for a collection of essays on any philosophical topic related to country music (which may also include western, folk, bluegrass, etc.) to be published with McFarland & Company Publishers Inc. Potential contributors may want to examine a previously published volume: Punk Rock and Philosophy: Research and Destroy (2022). Abstracts and eventual essays should be written for an educated but non-specialized audience (with an approximate length of 3,000 – 4,000 words). Potential topics include (but are not limited to)...

Metaphysics: What is “country”? Is it just a musical genre? Or, does it encompass a broader spectrum of cultural aspects? Is country music the type of thing that can be defined, does it have an essence, or do you just know it when you hear it? Wherein lies the distinction between (for instance) country and bluegrass?

Political Philosophy: Is country music inherently conservative? If so, why? Is there room for progressive country? What is the relationship between country music and patriotism?

Journals for work on philosophy and literature?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, an early career reader asks:

Are there any journals for discussions of philosophy and literature (other than ... philosophy and literature)? I often enjoy papers that have some substantial discussion of literature more than standard philosophical papers, but I don't have a good sense of how much of a readership there is for such things? Or where I'd send such papers?

Good questions. I initially became interested in philosophy as an undergrad partly as a result of an excellent philosophy and literature course, so I'd be curious to hear what sorts of venues publish this kind of work.

Do any readers have any helpful insights?

How many job apps does your department receive?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

At my university, we receive low numbers of applications for tt and post-doc positions. I would like to compare our numbers to the numbers other institutions receive. If you happen to have numbers from recent hiring processes, would you mind sharing them? I'd be interested in 1) type of institution, 2) area(s), and 3) rank. Is there a place where I might find such numbers?

Since my institution is non-English-speaking, what do you think would be an appropriate time-frame to learn the language of the country?

Many thanks in advance!

Interesting questions. There was this post reporting some data at Daily Nous yesterday, but it might be good to hear directly from readers on hiring committees.

1. How many applications do you receive for TT and/or postdoc positions?
2. What type of institution do you work at?
3. Where is your institution located (e.g., state, country)? 

Job app numbers?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

At my university, we receive low numbers of applications for tt and post-doc positions. I would like to compare our numbers to the numbers other institutions receive. If you happen to have numbers from recent hiring processes, would you mind sharing them? I'd be interested in 1) type of institution, 2) area(s), and 3) rank. Is there a place where I might find such numbers?

Since my institution is non-English-speaking, what do you think would be an appropriate time-frame to learn the language of the country?

Many thanks in advance!

Interesting questions. There was this post reporting some data at Daily Nous yesterday, but it might be good to hear directly from readers on hiring committees.

1. How many applications do you receive for TT and/or postdoc positions?
2. What type of institution do you work at?
3. Where is your institution located (e.g., state, country)? 

Publishing a book that receives no reviews?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I published a book roughly 18 months ago (September 2022). The book was published with an academic publisher, not university press (think Springer, Brill, etc). I was initially asked to give a list of potential reviewers to the editorial (or marketing?) team. I did this, even emailed every potential reviewer before hand to make sure it was ok to list them. Nothing happened so I followed up after about a year, providing other names. I've even had one or two people on journals offer to help but never follow up with me.

Is it too late at this point? Any advice on how I might resolve this? It seems like having a published review would be quite useful, but perhaps I'm wrong. I was given basically no guidance and have obviously failed. Shame the publisher doesn't seem to have tried that hard.

I'm sorry this happened to the OP. I've heard that publishers have become increasingly unwilling to send hard copies of books to journals to review, and that this may be impacting how many reviews books receive. In any case, I'm not sure what to advise to the OP. They might consider trying emailing the book review editors of various journals directly to see if they are interested.

Do any readers have any helpful tips or insights?

Asking someone working in an elite program who graduated the same year with for a job letter?

**Updated: I've corrected the post's title and my response - see 1st comment (and underlined).

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I am a pre-tenure TT faculty member in a regional state university in the United States. I would like to get a position at an R1, a good/elite liberal arts college, or a regional state school in a different region.

I have a colleague in my sub-specialty, who thinks highly of my work, whom I speak to from time to time about our work. We trade drafts and discuss them, and sometimes we meet up at conferences. We got our PhD's in the exact same year, from different institutions. However, this colleague is a TT faculty member in an elite research program. They might be tenured at this point.

My question: would it be advisable or not advisable to ask for a letter of recommendation from my colleague when I go on the job market?

Hmm, I'm not sure. Personally, I don't know if hiring committees are even likely to "put 2 and 2 together" and realize that you graduated the same year--unless of course your friend mentions it in their letter. Then again, maybe they would. In any case, I'm not sure how this would look, particularly given that the person seems to be something of a friend.

Do any readers have any helpful insights here? It would be especially good to hear from people who have hired at the kinds of institutions the OP wants a job at!

Tips for a grad student writing a letter supporting a professor's promotion?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Does anyone have advice for a graduate student writing a letter of recommendation for a professor going up for tenure/promotion to full professor?

Interesting question. What do readers think?

New (ranking) site for philosophy journals

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader writes:

I stumbled across this new site on philosophy journals, which includes an new ranking: https://www.pjip.org/

Does anyone know about it, or have thoughts? Seems like it has the potential to turn into a good resource for philosophers, particularly early career folks.

While I'm not a big fan of rankings in general, this site is interesting insofar as it compiles its ranking utilizing a variety of different measures. In this regard alone, it's a helpful central resource to go to in order to view how particular journals fare on different measures (which may be helpful in tenure files, etc.).

One prima facie worry, I guess, is that the different measures used to calculate the overall ranking measure different and potentially incommensurable things (different measures of reputation, citations, etc.), such that the overall ranking may not be a great measure of any particular thing very well at all (see e.g., the fallacy of composition). This might explain some seemingly-strange results, such as Ethics and Philosophy and Public Affairs ranking well below journals that don't seem to be regarded nearly as highly. Another issue potentially affecting the results is that some journals (such as the two just mentioned) seem to be missing data that other journals have.

Anyway, what do you all think?

Gregory Robson from Iowa State to Notre Dame

This is just a quick note that Gregory Robson is moving from Iowa State University to the University of Notre Dame, where he will be Associate Research Professor in the Mendoza College of Business. Big congrats to Greg!

Getting a job in a law school?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I’m wondering about the requirements for getting a job in a law school.

I work and publish in an area of philosophy of law, but don’t have any law degree. I do know quite a bit about certain areas of the law and think I could in theory teach law courses with some preparation. Do I need a law degree to apply for a job in a law school?

I don't know the answer. 

Do any of you? Any other tips or other helpful insights for the OP?

How many hours per day do you work on research?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

How many hours a day do you work? I mean real, serious, research work (reading and writing)? Even on my research days I can't do more than 4-5 hours... anything more than that my brain is mush.

Lots of scientists claim to work 80 hours a week, but of course a lot of their research is quite different. Just curious what the experience of pother philosophers is.

I'm pretty productive. Not a research star, but I got tenure at a decent place.

Due to my teaching and service workload, I only really have time to focus on research during the summers, but when I do have time I'd say 5 hours is my median. Sometimes I'll work significantly longer than that, for example if I have an impending deadline. But, like the OP, I tend to find that after 5 hours or so, my brain goes to mush. I also virtually never work in the evenings or on weekends, as I find I'm more productive when I give myself time off to recuperate and do other things in life.

What about you all?

Edited volumes as acts of resistance

Chiara Ambrosio begins her book review of Milena Ivanova and Steven French's edited volume The Aesthetics of Science: Beauty, Imagination and Understanding (2022) as follows: 

Edited collections are acts of resistance. We are told that they weigh less in research assessments and that book chapters are not as valuable as articles and monographs, and yet we stubbornly hold on to this enduring academic format for some of our most important publications. Milena Ivanova and Steven French’s The Aesthetics of Science is a brilliant example of why we do this, why our resistance to institutional pressures is entirely justified, and why we should indeed continue to resist: because edited collections are the materialization of the time and spaces we reclaim as researchers to engage in new conversations that transform our fields.

I love the sentiment expressed there, I don't have much to add, except this. We are faced with tremendous pressure to make our publications count, especially early-career people and people not on the tenure track. Indeed, academic job coaches will tell junior people not to waste their time editing volumes, or publishing in them.

The supposed laxity of peer review process makes you can put things in an edited volume that would not get into a journal, but we also know peer review is broken and that many excellent works never see the light of day (I could go on a bit about how I do think the standards of triple blind review, while excellent, do not promote the quality control we hope, and part of it is that you simply cannot see philosophy papers as these dissociable works from an author and her larger context--another time perhaps).

Edited volumes operate under a different game: there is a hermeneutic of trust and conversation, not of nitpicking and rejection. Philosophy really is more conversational, because the editor thinks about how the shape of the edited whole relates to all the individual contributions. The editor makes careful judgments about who to invite for such a volume. The author can think about the aims of the whole, even the other authors (she will be aware of who they are) to develop her paper in this conversational, broader disciplinary context. This can make edited volumes truly revolutionary in their field. With that in mind, I'd love to open a conversation and a thread for people to post edited volumes which they particularly appreciated. 

Tips or success stories on leaving then returning to academia?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I am curious to hear about any advice/success stories of those who left academia (due to geographic and financial constraints) and then returned. I understand it’s probably not recommended, but I’m still curious about how search committees perceive these types of candidates. Are they seen as unappealing or not serious candidates? The advice I’ve heard so far is to adjunct on the side and to continue research activities. (If this has been asked before, could you/someone provide the link to the post, please?) Thank you!

I don't know if we've discussed this before, but it's a good question! I suspect a lot probably has to do with what you've done in the interim (while you are out of academia). Have you published at all? Continued teaching in some capacity? In any case, I really don't know how search committees perceive candidates who have been away from academia for a while.

Do any readers have any helpful tips, experiences, or other insights to share?

Grappling with academic jealousy?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader ('failure') asks:

How do you get over academic jealousy?

I applied to a wide range of Ph.D. programs this cycle. I only have offers from a few very low-ranked or unranked Ph.D. programs. The rest are rejections, so no hope of getting out of a waitlist to a better program. If I accept one of these offers, I believe, based on the comments here and elsewhere, the students' comments on APDA and elsewhere, and my experiences so far, that (1) I will have much worse job prospects both in kind and number in an already bad market, (2) I will get taken seriously much less both in the philosophy academia generally and my specialty specifically, (3) I will get read less, and (4) I will not be as respected among my peers and faculty everywhere. Equally importantly, I am hesitant to accept one of the offers I have because I strongly believe that (i) I will probably never stop feeling jealous and resentful, and that (ii) I will probably never stop believing that my feelings are apt because I have been done an injustice. Here is why.

I believe a significant number of people had better applications than me and they reasonably received better offers (By 'better' I mean the academic achievements on their CV, their fit to the program as stated on their SoP, and the strength of their writing sample). This is great. However, the problem is, I also believe that I had a better -or at least as good- application than a significant number of people who received much better offers. Of course, this problem belief may be false, and I would very much like it to be false, in order to trust how things work. But, given how things work, I will probably never know if the problem belief is false and, if so, why. Neither will do my professors, friends, and other applicants with whom I have been discussing this. I can no longer deal with the negativity this situation generates for me. Either I need to accept my failure as evidence that (a) I am a worse philosopher than I think I am, and so I should not mind being treated as such, or (b) I have been done an injustice; I am not a worse philosopher than I think I am, even though I did get much worse offers than people whose applications are not much better than me.

If (a), then I think I should quit. If I don't have enough self-knowledge or ability to understand why I fail even at the entrance to the discipline, then this is good evidence that I am simply not cut out for the highest level of academic philosophy. If (b), then I think my feelings of resentment (i-ii) are apt, and I will never be able to deal with the inferior treatment (1-4, and more) I would receive had I accepted one of the offers I currently have. Still, in this case, I think I should quit.

Applying again is an option, of course. But, if we should trust how things work, there's no point in doing that if I believe I did everything I could do this time, which I do. And, if we don't trust how things work, then, again, there's no point in "improving" my application and hope for the best.

Is there any way out of this?

I'm curious to hear what readers think. From talking to people over many years, my sense is that academic jealousy is common, and that unfairness (unfortunately) is a fact of life that we all must find a way to grapple with the best that we can--which some do by adopting a kind of stoicism, or detaching from competitive aspects of the profession, focusing instead on other parts of life (friends, family, etc.) and intrinsic rewards (e.g., enjoying research and teaching for their own sake); whereas others may respond in different ways. Is academic jealously worse than jealousy in other areas of life, or other occupations? Maybe, I'm not sure--though I guess I wouldn't be surprised. In any case, I'm not sure what to recommend to the OP. We're all different of course, but if they already find the situation intolerable, then perhaps they've arrived at the best practical conclusion. I don't know.

What do you all think?

The culture at elite grad programs?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I’m a PhD student at a low-ranking department. Some of my professors think I’m a shoe-in for a spot in an elite program and have suggested that I transfer.

But I’ve heard horror stories about the culture at elite departments. The going wisdom seems to be that faculty at these departments are generally unavailable to students, don’t work well with others, and are myopically focused on their own research to the detriment of their pedagogical duties. As a result, these departments are socially desolate hellscapes where students are basically left to fend for themselves in isolation. (I’ve put that last part somewhat colorfully, but it captures the attitudes of some people I’ve talked to.)

I don’t really believe this going wisdom, but I don’t disbelieve it, either. And it matters quite a lot to me whether the going wisdom is true. Since my current program is a wonderfully welcoming and collaborative place, the expected utility of transferring seems moderately high at best, given the going wisdom.

I would be grateful if those of you who are at elite departments, or who studied at elite departments, shared your insights about this. If the going wisdom turns out to be false, or false of a significant number of high-ranking programs, that will make my decision much easier.

I don't think the Cocoon is an appropriate place to call out or insinuate things about particular departments (see the blog's mission), so I won't approve comments that do that. However, readers who are (or were) in an 'elite' grad program should feel free to comment below--without revealing anything about their program or institution--about whether the "going wisdom" the OP describes is accurate in your experience. I'd also encourage readers to share tips for how someone like the OP might best gauge the culture in any department to which they are applying.

For what it's worth, I suspect there is probably significant variation between the cultures of different 'elite' programs. The OP might consider checking out the ADPA placement data for some survey-based comparisons.

How do non-TT lecturer or teaching professor positions look to TT hiring committees?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I'm curious about the perceptions of those on TT hiring committees vis-a-vis the following issue: Does it in any way look bad to be currently employed as full-time/non-tt teaching faculty (e.g. permanent lecturer or teaching professor)?

My sense is that post-docs and VAPs are often seen as natural stepping-stones to TT positions, but what about non-tt teaching jobs like permanent lecturer or teaching professor? Does an applicant who currently holds a position like this look any better/worse when compared to someone who is a post-doc or VAP? Does it not matter? For instance, say that someone isn't too far out from their phd and is still publishing in good journals. Would it be a mark against this person if they currently hold a teaching-focused job like this? Is it correct to assume that most R1s would simply pass over someone who currently holds a job like this? What about SLACs? I feel like these teaching-focused positions are sometimes looked down on as not prestigious or fancy enough or something. As a result, they might be a liability when it comes to applying for certain jobs. Am I wrong?

I suspect it is probably hard to generalize here, and that a lot depends (as the OP suggests) on the rest of one's file, such as whether one is publishing in good journals. 

Do any readers have any helpful tips or insights? It could be good to hear from search committee members, as well as from people in these kinds of non-TT jobs who have either gotten or struggled to get a TT job.

Tips for interesting students in ethics as a tutor?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

I taught philosophy for about three years and am now tutoring in philosophy for the first time (undergrad Intro to Ethics for mostly criminal justice majors, and Biomedical Ethics for mostly nursing majors). What tips do you have for tutoring students in ethics, particularly students who lack basic understanding of or motivation in the subject? Many thanks.

Interesting question. I've never been a tutor, so I'm not sure that I have any helpful tips to share here. 

Are any readers who have served as an ethics tutor able to weigh in?

Handling a rude author as a reviewer?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

Reviewers ethics. Is it OK to recommend “reject” because the author is rude? I recently reviewed a paper and recommended “reject.” However, the editor chose R&R and I got the author's revised paper and their responses to my comments. I think the paper still sucks big time, so I would re-iterate my “reject” anyway, but… I gave a lot of unvarnished-but-not-uncharitable comments on the paper. In the authors response, they make a lot of remarks that I can’t read as other than rude, e.g. “It seems that reviewer 1 has utterly failed to grasp my point… Thanks for this strange suggestion, but no…..Wow thanks a lot for this wider remark, I’ll save that topic for my next book”.

When I’m dealing with students I don’t really get upset by rudeness/tactlessness, but I still react negatively, so that they learn how is appropriate to interact with professors, etc. Is that appropriate here?, to recommend reject and leave a note along the lines of “You should remember who is doing who a favor here and be more polite, my friend.”

Interesting question, and I'm curious to hear what everyone thinks. Personally, I don't think one should reject an author's paper because they are rude. After all, an author might be rude while their paper is excellent, and our task as reviewers is to evaluate the work submitted. But, of course, in this case the OP notes that they arrived at a negative evaluation of the paper anyway, so the above case is neither here nor there in this case.

It's another question, I think, whether a reviewer should comment on an author's rudeness in their reviewer report. Here, I'm note sure. But here's a thought: most journals allow authors to submit a review to forward to the author, but also private comments for the editors only. One option here is to indicate in one's comments to the editors that the author was out of line, and to request that they say something to the author. Then again, if an author is really out of line, then maybe it does make sense to say something in one's review to them.

What do you all think?

How can we help you? (March 2024)

Now that it's been a month since our last "how can we help you?" thread, it's time for a new thread.

For those of you unfamiliar with this series, this is a chance for you to post openly or anonymously in the comments section below on anything you could use help with related to the profession. After you post your query in the comments section, I will then post new threads for readers to discuss your query. 

As usual, feel free to ask questions on anything (within the Cocoon's mission) that you could use help with, including but not limited to:

• The job-market (applying for jobs, etc.)
• Issues in the profession (including issues of social justice)
• Graduate school
• Publishing
• Teaching (including in the age of A.I.)
• Work-life balance
• Mental health & well-being
• Personal struggles
• Etc.

Ask away - we're here to help! 

Finally, a quick reminder of the following NEW RULE: in the past, I have allowed people to submit follow-up comments to queries in these threads, and sometimes included those comments in new posts on this thread's queries. Given the number of comments and replies that are submitted, this has become infeasible for me to keep track of. So, please only submit queries in the thread below, not responses to queries already submitted. If you'd like to respond to a query, please wait until I actually post on the person's query myself and comment in that thread instead!

Call for Participants: The Doing Philosophy Podcast

By Tom Kaspers

Doing Philosophy is a podcast that is meant to promote the research of early career philosophers. Each episode is essentially an essay in the medium of sound. But instead of just reading an essay out loud—which wouldn’t be terribly interesting—the goal of the podcast is to bring the essay to life by means of dialogue, background music, theme music, and, most importantly, interviews with “big names” in philosophy. For an early experiment with this format, please see the first four episodes, in which the creator and host of the podcast, Tom Kaspers, develops his own philosophical theories in conversation with Huw Price, Crispin Wright, and Sanford Goldberg. You can check out these episodes on Spotify, Apple Podcasts, or Amazon, by clicking on the links below.

https://open.spotify.com/show/6P5W2Xv4DTfMtfRWBBeuT2 

https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/doing-philosophy/id1732395829 

https://music.amazon.com/podcasts/041a5cff-9f58-4cb9-98f5-9fe968853e87/doing-philosophy

https://tomkaspers.com/the-doing-philosophy-podcast/

In later episodes, Tom will act as the host and work behind the scenes to edit and produce the podcast. Every episode will feature an early career philosopher as a guest, who will interview a leading name in their field and build a script around this interview in roughly the same style as these earlier episodes. If you’re doing exciting and important philosophical research, and you’re looking for a platform to promote your work, please consider joining Doing Philosophy as a guest and having your theories featured on this podcast. For more information, visit https://tomkaspers.com or send an email to [email protected]. 

Should an ABD seeking a SLAC job prioritize teaching experience or their dissertation?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a grad student asks:

I am an ABD candidate who will be on the market next year. I have two solo-taught logic courses and am trying to place at a SLAC.

Even though I am slated to teach medical ethics next AY, I feel uncomfortable with how little teaching experience I have.

I have 2/5 of my dissertation chapters done. Should I aim for a 2-2 next AY (with another prep) and risk slowing down my dissertation progress?

One thing I am worried about is over-committing myself so that I have 2 new preps, a dissertation, and a bunch of applications to fill out. But I don't think this is unique; this labor comes with the territory!

Good question. I noticed that the OP didn't mention anything about publications, so before I respond to their query more directly, let me say something about that.

The 'publishing arms race' in grad school vs. in a TT job?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

one of my least favorite parts of grad school was participating in the publication "arms race." I know it's not a novel observation, but it seems that in my future institution, in order to get tenure, I have to simply continue to participate. One plus is that this race will be a bit longer as I'll have job stability (and better pay and benefits) during that time. Can those with experience on both sides tell me what, for them, the difference between these publishing arms races has been?

I empathize, and this is a fair question! In my experience, a lot depends on the kind of institution you are at and how high the publication expectations are.

But in any case, my sense is that the biggest differences are these: you have a lot more to do in a full-time job (full-time teaching, mentoring, service) than in grad school, combined with a very limited amount of time (5 years) to publish everything you need to before you come up for tenure. This means that if you have to publish a lot (in selective journals) to get tenure, you need to get a lot of good papers finished and out while in a full-time job, and in turn published. This can be hard given all of the other stuff you have to do, and with journal wait times and rejection rates, it can be really stressful, particularly as you get closer to tenure review.

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?

Resource thread for new assistant professors

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a reader asks:

[C]an we have a thread of resources for new assistant professors? I've spent so many years on the job market that I feel pretty unprepared to think about the next step.

This is a great idea. Please do feel free to share tips and resources below.

Also, if any readers have specific queries about transitioning into an assistant professor job, feel free to post them below as well or in our most recent how can we help you?" thread. I'm always happy to start new threads for discussion on these issues too.

Moving from a job in a non-philosophy department to philosophy?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, a grad student asks:

How do hiring committees of philosophy departments look at someone who's spent a number of years in a position (TT or non-TT, if that makes a difference) at a non-philosophy department straight out of grad school? I'm ABD and considering applying to business schools, but would prefer to end up in a philosophy department later on.

I'm interested in this in general, but given my personal circumstances could easily imagine the following: a US business school for a couple of years, then applying to philosophy departments in Western Europe.

If possible it would be helpful if you could specify the geographic area with which you have experience.

This doesn't seem like a big deal at all to me, provided you're doing broadly philosophy-like things (publishing in some philosophy journals, etc.). In fact, it might give you a further advantage on the market, as now you may look like a good fit for some departments outside of philosophy (though the OP does note they'd prefer to be in philosophy).

Anyway, what do you all think?

Shifting research subfields on the market?

In our newest "how can we help you?" thread, Jedidiah writes:

I have a question about applying to jobs in different subdisciplines of philosophy. My past and current work emerging from my dissertation has fallen squarely in one subfield (call it X). However, my current and projected future work has been in the overlap between X and subfield Y, and projects to be more squarely in Y in the future. I have exclusively applied for jobs in X so far, but I am wondering if this research path might allow me to open up the range of jobs I might be a fit for. Of course, there might be downsides to this: I may not be viewed as a genuine expert in Y (or worse, either subfield) by spreading myself too thin. I suppose I am wondering if anyone has switched subfields while on the market and had success and whether it was worth the work (tailoring materials, possibly seeking new letter writers). Maybe I'm overthinking things and many if not most of us don't fit cleanly into one subfield of philosophy. Like all things job market-related, I suspect there won't be much to say that's generally applicable, but I thought I'd ask nonetheless!

I don't know--this seems to me a pretty natural thing to do. I did my dissertation in social-political philosophy, but then shifted my research toward ethics while on the market. If anything, it seemed to make me more competitive for more types of jobs. I think the key is probably building up a good publication list in area Y, so that one can provide some evidence that one has expertise in the area (as opposed to merely nascent interests in Y).

But these are just my thoughts. What are yours?