In the "About Me" information displayed on my blog, I note that I hope to continue my academic career next fall. Ultimately, I want to be a professor in the field of religious studies. Though I am not likely to end up occuppying a spot in the pantheon of theological or philosophical uber-nerds (as I've depicted above), I do think I possess the potential to be a quality teacher and writer. To achieve such goals, however, I must first earn a Ph.D. in the field. And to do that, I first need to be accepted into a credible doctoral program. And to make that happen, I am presently finishing and submitting applications to two such programs.
One application, the one for the Graduate Department of Religion at Vanderbilt University, is due tomorrow. Every required element in my dossier has been submitted for the admission committee to review except one letter of recommendation (which is now out of my control whether arrives in time or not). A truly significant element is my "statement of purpose."
In a nutshell, this relatively brief statement lets the admissions committee know why I want to go to their graduate school and what I intend to do while I'm there should I be accepted. I have decided to post that statement here on the off chance that some folks might appreciate reading it. The statement I will submit with my other dossier will be essentially the same statement with references to the school and faculty being changed to fit the other program. I encourage you to leave comments and questions about what follows.
A Statement of Purpose for the Graduate Dept. of Religion at Vanderbilt University
by David N. Scott
If admitted to the Graduate Department of Religion’s doctoral program, my area of major concentration will be Theological Studies. Although my previous baccalaureate and graduate work in the field of religion has included courses in biblical studies, ethics, and comparative religion, my preferred area of study has always been systematic theology. The particular point of theological reflection in which I am most interested is the God-world relationship. I presently cannot identify what specific topic my dissertation would address, but I can guarantee that it will concern the metaphysical character of God’s relationship to the world. During the past three years, I have written four major papers on the subject, including the honors thesis I presented (and successfully defended) while at Anderson University.
Within the broad subject of the God-world relationship, I have three main issues I would continue to pursue during my graduate work at Vanderbilt: 1) What is the nature and character of God? 2) How does God direct and sustain the world? And, 3) What place of significance, if any, does humanity occupy within the God-world relationship? While investigating these three related quarries, I plan to dig deeper into modern discussions about panentheism, the viability of contemporary Trinitarian models, and the conceptual distinction between the finite and the infinite.
I should note that the resources I intend to draw upon in addressing these issues are predominantly Christian. Both my personal life and my formal education have always been shaped by the Christian tradition. Therefore, the voice with which I speak and write is distinctively Christian as well. If my voice is at all unique within the field of religious studies, it is because that voice is informed by an uncommon mixture of conversation partners. My most regular conversation partners include historical sources such as Augustine, Luther and Schleiermacher, conservative sources such as the evangelical Openness of God movement, and the liberal school of Process Theology. More recently, I have added several Continental philosophers to the discussion, particularly Gabriel Marcel and Emmanuel Levinas.
Having reviewed the available information on the GDR’s faculty, I know of at least two professors who would be valuable conversation partners should I have the opportunity to work with them. It appears that Dr. Paul DeHart shares my interests in the doctrine of God and Trinitarian theology, while Dr. John Thatamanil also has a deep appreciation for the contributions Process Theology has made to the field. I am also encouraged by the presence of Dr. Ted Smith on the faculty. Having taken a class with him at Emory University, I know he would be a tremendous aide should I opt to devote a portion of my dissertation to the practical implications of my abstract reflections.
By pursing a Ph.D. in Theological Studies, I seek to accomplish two primary objectives. First and foremost is the personal objective to improve my abilities to clarify and engage the ultimate questions to which I am continuously drawn. Like many theologians, my chief interests find their source in the formative events of my personal history; namely, the tragedies and sorrows I have endured (e.g., losing my parents in a car accident at age 10). My theological pursuits are a means by which I seek to articulate for myself how God might still be working for the world’s greater good in the midst of such pain and loss. Thus my academic questions hold existential and therapeutic importance for me. It is my desire to address my personal concerns as thoroughly and competently as I am able that has driven me to apply to this and other religion programs.
My second objective for undertaking graduate work is vocational in nature - I want to teach theology at the college level. A career in the university would allow me to earn a living while pursuing my interests. It would also allow me to put the fruits of my self-serving labor towards the benefit of a larger community. I hold that the study of religion is best thought of as a conversation. Any fruitful conversation is going to need discussion leaders who are capable of defining the content and parameters of the discussion and helping their interlocutors express their respective views as clearly as they can. As a professor of religion, I would serve as such a leader. While I certainly plan on writing and having my work published, I am more interested in the classroom aspects of the vocation. What I have read in the GDR’s catalogue indicates that Vanderbilt’s faculty would be a great help to me as I made the transition from student to teacher.
In closing, I would like to address a few of the strengths and weaknesses of my academic preparation to date. I believe my greatest strengths as a scholar of religion are my skills of exposition and analysis. The course work I did at Anderson and Candler School of Theology required me to develop superior critical thinking skills in order that I might engage and understand difficult writings from a wide range of theological perspectives. The end result is that I now possess the desire to expand my knowledge, the patience to engage challenging material, and the integrity to interpret a source as faithfully as I am able. The development of my critical thinking skills has also prepared me to express complex ideas with clarity and precision and to write well-organized, coherent papers.
The greatest weakness of my previous preparation is that I have minimal proficiency in modern languages other than English. Although I did audit a course on German for Reading Comprehension at Emory University in the summer of 2005, I have no training at all in French. Thus I will have to do substantial work to meet the language requirements Vanderbilt has set for the doctoral program. Also, I have limited experience in teaching a college classroom. I have taken a position of leadership in several undergraduate and graduate courses, but I have never been a teacher’s assistant or colloquy leader. I plan to remedy this situation as soon as circumstances allow.
Despite these weaknesses, I know that I am an excellent student with the potential to be an excellent professor. I am confident that I have the constitution and the skill set to perform at the highest level at any graduate school. I hope those persons reviewing this statement will see the same promise in me that previous teachers and colleagues have encouraged me to see in myself.
