Files for Recommenders
Due: August 5th, 2025
According to the fellowship portal, “recommenders should submit their letter of recommendation directly to ugrad-urf@columbia.edu and the letter should be written on letterhead (i.e. professional stationary) if at all possible, it should be dated, and if you are applying to the Marshall and/or Churchill in addition to the Rhodes, your letter writer only needs to submit this single version of their letter for the campus nomination process.”
Writing Samples
I am applying to the MSt in Ancient Philosophy, but most of my academic work at Columbia has been focused on psychoanalysis and aesthetics. I have written on Greek philosophy for various classes, so I have attached older writings which demonstrate engagement with Greek philosophy in addition to my most recent writing. I don’t expect that every recommender has time to read everything, so I have tried to write an abstract for each one.
Disinterested Pleasure (2025) [Thesis Draft]
This paper argues that Kant’s account of aesthetic judgment as disinterested cannot adequately explain the phenomenon of aesthetic pleasure. Drawing primarily on Freud’s “Interpretation of Dreams,” I demonstrate that aesthetic pleasure, even in pure aesthetic judgments, must be understood as fundamentally rooted in interest and desire. Rather than rejecting Kant’s framework entirely, I show how Freud’s theory of wish-fulfillment and dream-work mechanisms (condensation and displacement) actually rehabilitates the concept of disinterest by revealing that aesthetic pleasure requires a veil of disinterest to function. The paper traces how Kant’s own concepts—including subjective purposiveness, “lawfulness without law,” and the sublime's alternating attraction and repulsion—already contain openings for psychoanalytic intervention and hint at the role of repressed desires in aesthetic experience.
Oedipus in the Symposium (2023)
This paper argues that Plato’s Symposium contains an implicit representation of the Oedipus complex, with the lover-young man relationship functioning as a extension of the father-son dynamic described in Freud’s psychoanalytic model. Drawing on Freud’s own acknowledgment that Plato’s eros “coincides exactly” with psychoanalytic libido, I demonstrate how the pederastic relationships central to the Symposium represent not an alternative to Oedipal dynamics but rather their necessary continuation. While Freud’s Oedipus complex describes how the boy, severed from his mother, resolves his rivalry with his father through identification and the internalization of paternal values as his ego ideal, I show how Plato’s lover-young man relationship enacts a second severance that redirects the young man’s psychological investments from the family unit toward the polis.
To My Friends and For My Nation (2024)
This paper examines how Aristotle would respond to E.M. Forster’s provocative claim that one should “have the guts to betray [one’s] country” rather than betray a friend. I argue that Aristotle would reject the fundamental premise of Forster’s dilemma—that loyalty to friends and loyalty to country are in opposition. The analysis hinges on clarifying the distinction between Aristotle’s concept of the polis (city-state) and the modern nation-state. Within the context of the polis, Aristotle views friendship (philia) and civic duty as fundamentally aligned, both serving to promote virtue. Indeed, friendship forms the moral fabric of the city-state, with Aristotle claiming that “if people are friends, there is no need for justice.”
The paper then addresses whether Aristotle’s framework can accommodate the modern nation-state, examining his concerns about political scale through examples like the Nevsky Prospect in St. Petersburg. While Aristotle worried that oversized polities would lose cohesion (asking who but Stentor could serve as herald), I argue that technological advances have overcome these practical limitations. By demonstrating that Aristotle’s ethics are universal rather than culturally relative—despite his problematic views on non-Greeks—the paper concludes that Aristotle would accept the possibility of larger political bodies like nations. If friendship and national loyalty diverge, Aristotle would interpret this as evidence of political corruption. In such cases, he would advocate prioritizing friendship not as a matter of personal allegiance, but because friendships serve as both the measure of political health and the means to restore it. Thus, we commit to our friends not against our nation, but for its moral restoration.