Competition - post a photo you've taken of nature >>

This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

Oxford versus Cambridge

Scroll to see replies

Reply 40

ShadowCatz

chrisjorg

You have revealed to us the secret recipe for the sucess of Oxford students.

Beer?

Reply 41

FadeToBlackout

ShadowCatz

Beer?

Nah, their inferiority complex drives them on. :p:

Reply 42

georgecrabbe

FadeToBlackout

Nah, their inferiority complex drives them on. :p:

lol, the irony...

Reply 43

ShadowCatz

FadeToBlackout

Nah, their inferiority complex drives them on. :p:

I don't know what to say.

Reply 44

tenjon

georgecrabbe

lol, the irony...

haha precisely

Reply 45

FadeToBlackout

georgecrabbe

lol, the irony...

Sorry, that's not irony- it's spontaneous and true, ergo it is instead wit.

Irony is like goldy or bronzy, but made of iron.

</Baldrick>

Reply 46

georgecrabbe

FadeToBlackout

Sorry, that's not irony- it's spontaneous and true, ergo it is instead wit.

Irony is like goldy or bronzy, but made of iron.

</Baldrick>

Just because you're missing the irony doesn't mean there isn't any :wink:

Reply 47

Vegita

League tables mean so little. The important things to consider are the course content and structures. For example, the one that immediately comes to mind is Natural Sciences or Physics/Chemistry/Biology?

Well if you're not quite sure of what you want to go into, and you have A levels in Maths, Physics, Chemistry and Biology (or any of the 2 sciences + maths really) then to NatSci.

If you prefere a more specialised course then go for Physics/Chemistry/Biology at Oxford.

There's no difference in teaching standard really, and much is down to independent work. Plus, they are both amazing universities. Anyone would be lucky to go to either.

Reply 48

henryt

Obviously, it's nice to have a bit of banter, but I think a (serious) thread on it is mildly pointless...There really is so little difference between the two, I reall do think it would almost be churlish to make a distinction in terms of the academic standards of the courses. Just choose on which course suits you more and the university/place itself. Either way, you'll be in one of the best learning environments in the world.

Reply 49

tinypony

Exactly. There is no "battle" because both universities are at an almost similar standard.

Reply 50

Alewhey

Siddhartha

Exactly. There is no "battle" because both universities are at an almost similar standard.

Pah, this namby-pamby 'everyone is equal' talk is nonsense. You're crazy if you think the lecturers believe that.

Fact : All the best scientists and mathmos go to Cambridge. For other subjects I don't know the details, but one or the other will come out on top every time. In the latest Times ranking, Cambridge tops 34 subjects, Oxford 8. Cambridge is richer, prettier, in better shape financially and better placed to compete with the big US universities. It wins hands down.

Sure, you can rebut me any way you likes, but that slight pang you are feeling is me hitting a nerve. And by the way, all the league tables that say otherwise are flawed and wrong, and you know it.

In Oxford's defence, Richard Dawkins is cooler than Stephen Hawking.

Reply 51

tinypony

You're crazy if you think the lecturers believe that.

So you're saying that the lecturers at Oxford feel inferior in the presence of the all-mighty ones from Cambridge? :rolleyes:

You wish it were true.

Reply 52

Alewhey

Siddhartha

So you're saying that the lecturers at Oxford feel inferior in the presence of the all-mighty ones from Cambridgeb :rolleyes:

You wish it were true.

Did I say that? No.

Is it plausible? Certainly. Academics are notoriously competitive. If one department in Cambridge has a towering international reputation and the one from Oxford is clearly not churning out research of a similar standard, it is only natural that the Oxford dons would feel intimidated. They are, after all, in direct competition (for funding, at the very least).

Reply 53

tinypony

Alewhey

Of course you said so. You stated that lecturers do not believe that both universities are of equal standards, hence this implies (from your point of view) that the lecturers must believe that Cambridge is superior to Oxford, ad thus they themselves being inferior to those from Cambridge.

Besides, I believe that I will be worked hard at Merton and thus come out with a very good degree. No matter what you say I know a degree from Oxford is just as good as one from Cambridge.

Reply 54

kizer

Alewhey

Ah, but you forget the mind-numbing boredom of a provincial ****hole full of mathmos and scientists.

I used to live there

I could of course point out the obvious fact that is is not all all clear, or true, that all the best mathmos and scientists go to Cambridge (with the exception of the UK IMO team which pretty much always goes to Trinity, Cambridge. But if people want to sit on their high horse feeling smug, go nuts.

Reply 55

Craghyrax

Alewhey

But who gives a damn? :wtf?: Really.. only the academics you mentioned, and any of us who go on to do postgrad studies at Oxbridge, and even then the differences are minute. For the interests of the vast majority of people, though, both Universities will be equally beneficial in making graduates highly employable. Do you think employers care? They're also each equally efficient in providing a stimulating atmosphere to learn within, and a unique tertiary experience.

If I were to find out that Oxford was better than Cambridge, I wouldn't care. It would have absolutely no effect on my life or how experienced my studies.

Reply 56

Turdburger

Fact : All the best scientists and mathmos go to Cambridge. For other subjects I don't know the details, but one or the other will come out on top every time. In the latest Times ranking, Cambridge tops 34 subjects, Oxford 8. Cambridge is richer, prettier, in better shape financially and better placed to compete with the big US universities. It wins hands down.

Fact: Stephen Hawking attended Oxford, hes a pretty good mathematician/scientist. I continue, Halley, Hooke, Hubble, Cashmore, Schrodinger, Van De Graff, Tim Berners Lee, Boyle, Dawkins, Wiles have all attended Oxford at some point.

Clearly these are all top scientists, as I know **** all about the history of science and even Ive heard of them, so clearly you havent got a clue what you are talking about.

Most of your comments are just unfounded crap. Prettiness is entirely subjective. Oxford has more £ per capita, as it is a smaller university which is surely more important than just outright money.

You cant rely on league table statistics, if you choose to ignore the fact that the same league table, the Times, put Oxford top.

The fact is that both universities are remarkably similar, more so than any other in the world.

Reply 57

$Avatar for sTe\/o$

sTe\/o

This thread is such good value. :rolleyes:

Reply 58

Turdburger

Sorry, I really shouldnt have bothered with the petty arguments, but that guys arrogance just annoyed me.

Reply 59

FadeToBlackout

Heartbreaker

Fact: Stephen Hawking attended Oxford, hes a pretty good mathematician/scientist.

Yes, and he's now a fellow of Caius, Cambridge, with a new court named after him. What's more prestigious, a person who did an undergraduate degree at the university, or is now an important member of part of another university? :p:

I continue, Halley, Hooke, Hubble, Cashmore, Schrodinger, Van De Graff, Tim Berners Lee, Boyle, Dawkins, Wiles have all attended Oxford at some point.

Chadwick, Crick, Darwin, Kelvin, Newton, Rutherford, Turing, Watson... etc etc.

Clearly these are all top scientists, as I know **** all about the history of science and even Ive heard of them, so clearly you havent got a clue what you are talking about.

As are the ones I've just quoted for Cambridge. And I also know naff all about the history of science. :smile:

Most of your comments are just unfounded crap. Prettiness is entirely subjective. Oxford has more £ per capita, as it is a smaller university which is surely more important than just outright money.

Oxford is looming, big, and oppressive and is definately a city choked with traffic, fumes, and cars. Cambridge has more of a country town ambience where you're never more than 10 minutes from open countryside; it has more small-scale, more welcoming colleges that are better on the eye, and a centre that's full of bicycles and people, not traffic.

You cant rely on league table statistics, if you choose to ignore the fact that the same league table, the Times, put Oxford top.

And the Times admitted, when it did it, that although Cambridge came top in far more areas than Oxford, they spent marginally less on library provision per student so Oxford was given the lead. In certain subjects, Oxford trails; in History, for example, Cambridge is the undisputed master.