Classics at UCL

I am thinking about applying for Ancient World next year. Anyone doing Classics/Ancient World Studies at UCL? Is UCL good for Classics? Is Ancient World Studies less prestigious compared to other UCL degrees? How good is the career prospect of a degree in Ancient World Studies?

Reply 1

Mr H

im not a UCL but was thinkin of going to do classics/ancient history, ucl is the creme de la creme wen it comes 2 that. i wouldnt say that it is less prestigious as any degree at ucl has international acclaim. the career prospects r gd, the skills that you learn make you a well rounded person, n employers love that.

University College London

London

Reply 2

uthinkilltellu

bryan

yes, world studies is less prestigious than say biochemistry. but its a degree from UCL, and that in itself is speaks volumes...

Reply 3

bryan

uthinkilltellu

yes, world studies is less prestigious than say biochemistry. but its a degree from UCL, and that in itself is speaks volumes...

I would be grateful if you could elaborate on your statement that biochem is more prestigious than ancient world studies or oter classics-related degree (ie. Ancient History..etc).

Reply 4

uthinkilltellu

bryan

I would be grateful if you could elaborate on your statement that biochem is more prestigious than ancient world studies or oter classics-related degree (ie. Ancient History..etc).

certainly...

there is nothing to elaborate on... biochem (or other sciences) are fixed (factual) studies, there is no liniency there. You can't argue about biology/chemistry. but in ancient world studies you can always find flaws/arguments.

also, people with biochem are more likely to get a job than people with classics. now THATS a fact.

Reply 5

bryan

uthinkilltellu

Surely one can't argue in biology, chemistry and other sciences. While ancient world stuides and other arts subjects do teach one how to argue. Forming sound and valid arguments is itself an invaluable skill to accquire. If the skill of arguing effectively is not a highly regarded one, as you say it is, I doubt why law and history are the most competitive subjects to get into.

Reply 6

uthinkilltellu

they teach you how to argue in ancient world studies??? really??? philosophy, yes. but classic subjects? don't think so. its just studying about ancient empires... :cool:

law: people think that if they get into it, they'll have a higher paid job than anyone else... and they are right, but they'll have to work VERY HARD...

history: because they can't get into science faculty :smile:

may i ask you why do grads with a science degree get more/better paid jobs than people with history...

ps. law is neither here nor there.

Reply 7

bryan

uthinkilltellu

they teach you how to argue in ancient world studies??? really??? philosophy, yes. but classic subjects? don't think so. its just studying about ancient empires... :cool:

may i ask you why do grads with a science degree get more/better paid jobs than people with history...

ps. law is neither here nor there.

There are philosophy modules in the Ancient World Studies degree as well! I think you don't really understand what Ancient World Studies or Classical Studies are about. In a Classics degree, you don't only study about the history of the Romans/Greeks, you also study their language and philosophy. Therefore, many Classicists specialise in Plato and Aristotle which is the basis of western philosophy! I don't think many people would agree with you that people apply for history because they can't get into science faculty. For example, the standard offer for History at UCL is AAA-AAB at A level which is higher than the standard offer for Biochemistry which is AAB-ABB or even Chemical Engineering which is BBB-CCC!

Famous people who have studied Classics at university:
J.K Rowling (Author of Harry Potter)
Toni Morrison (Nobel Prize for Literature 1993)
Friedrich Nietzsche (Arguably most influential philosopher of this century)
Karl Marx (political thinker who proposed communism)
Chris Martin (UK pop singer- Ancient World Studies at UCL)
David W. Packard (Former Chairman and President of Hewlett-Packard)
and many others...

Reply 8

uthinkilltellu

there are many people who can write well (evidently i'm not one of them), yet there are few people who can explain the Shoe-String Theory. thats the reason why the offers are lower it takes more thought to undestand the miracle of cell mutation(if not the yeast suicide), yet not much to answer:

this is the question. what is the answer?

we can all argue and make 2 points of view...

but tell me definitelly, yes or no, does god exist?

you can't prove it, can't measure it, and can't analyze it...

but yes, i don't know much about Classics, but neither do you about science.

although its a shame you didn't include Socrates (the greatest philosopher), neither did you include Marcus Aurelius (my favourite philosopher - universe is divine)

Reply 9

bryan

uthinkilltellu

I believe that every subject has its own beauty, not to mention equal in terms of level of intellect required. But apparently it is you who believe Science is better than Humanities! Moreover, if I were to list every single influential classical philosopher it would take me a whole day and I wouldn't bother to do so just to persuade you that humanities and sciences are equal!

Reply 10

uthinkilltellu

i agree about the subjects, they both are rather intellectually stimulating. its the degree i had a got at... humanities degree is inferior to science degree (not by much, but still inferior)... look at the unemployment degree tables, you'll be unpleasantly surprised.

also, its just you've named the two most known philosophers, surely you could have given me two unheard of (yet equally good) philosophers, therefore given me some food for thought, but no...

shows how much you know/interested about classics :wink: