The Philosophy of Science

Yes, there is a long tradition in the US of binding philosophy of science to history of science. That fulfils at the graduate level (what I intended to be) my criterion, but not ideally, because there are only academic outlets; you can get an academic job if you're lucky (although there aren't many) but you can't just go off and work at Argonne.  There is also the STS tradition, from the 1970's onwards, which I don't think you hinted at, so maybe you're not that interested in it; the people who look at science as a social phenomenon and scientific knowledge as the result of social agreement, close to an American Pragmatist take. And arising out of that the “science wars” which attracted many philosophers who were not previously into Phil Sci. People interested in either of those have a wider choice of program than those you originally listed; but, again, they typically lead to back to academia, not to immersion in scientific or science-related activity.  I also note my program, Logic and the Methodology of Science (aka “Tarski's Group”) is not listed. 

I still wish to emphasise that combining with something useful outside academia is a very good move. I remember a post-doc physicist pal in Berkeley in the late 1970's bemoaning the fact that there had been one tenure-track physics job in his field offered in all of the US in that year. He was more of the math type. My metal-bending physics colleague set up a consulting firm which ran largely on USG research contracts and he ended up going to all sorts of fun places.

A possibly-fruitful new line, and not well represented in the listed programs, is Philosophy and/of Medicine, which I suspect is best pursued along with medical training (and therefore not in the US, where medical training is post-grad, all-consuming and very expensive). Medicine is full of things which I like to call ontologically malleable; many things are there or they are not there, depending. When you break your arm, it is clear what is wrong, but what about Encephalitis lethargica? Or ME/CFS? An advantage of such study is that, if you are not a medic by the time you graduate, you can at least go work for an insurance company :-)

Yes, there is a long tradition in the US of binding philosophy of science to history of science. That fulfils at the graduate level (what I intended to be) my criterion, but not ideally, because there are only academic outlets; you can get an academic job if you're lucky (although there aren't many) but you can't just go off and work at Argonne.  There is also the STS tradition, from the 1970's onwards, which I don't think you hinted at, so maybe you're not that interested in it; the people who look at science as a social phenomenon and scientific knowledge as the result of social agreement, close to an American Pragmatist take. And arising out of that the “science wars” which attracted many philosophers who were not previously into Phil Sci. People interested in either of those have a wider choice of program than those you originally listed; but, again, they typically lead to back to academia, not to immersion in scientific or science-related activity.  I also note my program, Logic and the Methodology of Science (aka “Tarski's Group”) is not listed. 

I still wish to emphasise that combining with something useful outside academia is a very good move. I remember a post-doc physicist pal in Berkeley in the late 1970's bemoaning the fact that there had been one tenure-track physics job in his field offered in all of the US in that year. He was more of the math type. My metal-bending physics colleague set up a consulting firm which ran largely on USG research contracts and he ended up going to all sorts of fun places.

A possibly-fruitful new line, and not well represented in the listed programs, is Philosophy and/of Medicine, which I suspect is best pursued along with medical training (and therefore not in the US, where medical training is post-grad, all-consuming and very expensive). Medicine is full of things which I like to call ontologically malleable; many things are there or they are not there, depending. When you break your arm, it is clear what is wrong, but what about Encephalitis lethargica? Or ME/CFS? An advantage of such study is that, if you are not a medic by the time you graduate, you can at least go work for an insurance company :-)