I just find this funny!

I'm not comparing Demont with Oxford... I'm comparing the degrees..

Most courses in other uni's ( such as pharmacy, med and dent) are much better than most courses ( obvs barring med) at Oxford.

Why are you ignoring me??? I dont like being ignored

From your first post:



You're comparing Oxford to other unis. You then go on to use DMU as an example. Comparison.

Also, you should note that someone studying biology at an institution such as Oxford may go on to make huge breakthroughs in medical science. I would call that a success, not only for them, but for humanity.

(Please note, I am planning to be a nurse, which is not a course Oxford offers, and nor am I applying to Edinburgh or anywhere. I do not aspire to Oxbridge, nor am I bull****ting about my grades.)

TBH most people studying Biology go into teaching more than reserach... and I am comparing degrees from other uni's compared with degrees from oxford... If i was comparing uni's i would be talking about the night life, how the campus is ect... but i'm not..

If you'd read my first post you would see that I'm saying you can't have a double variable and call it a fair comparison. You can't compare pharmacy here with biology there. It doesn't work.

The 'double variable' thing is a load of bullsh***** . You can compare degrees with each other (which one will be more respected, whats your chances of getting a job with that degree!, How much would you earn ect). Also tbh it is also about the fun factor aswell ( which degree you enjoy more), but like i said there have been more successful pharmacists/Meds/Dent than Biologists/artists ect...

I'm not comparing Demont with Oxford... I'm comparing the degrees..

I'm just saying that so many people think they are smart on here getting into Oxford ( and most probably are).. but the people doing stuff like art got there by doing soft a-levels ( which are eassier to get high grades in).... and the fact is that to get into pharmacy you need min of BBB, and to do art at oxford you need something like AAA, and at the end of the day you are gonna be better of with a Pharmacy degree than an art one!!...

I'm just saying that so many people think they are smart on here getting into Oxford ( and most probably are).. but the people doing stuff like art got there by doing soft a-levels ( which are eassier to get high grades in).... and the fact is that to get into pharmacy you need min of BBB, and to do art at oxford you need something like AAA, and at the end of the day you are gonna be better of with a Pharmacy degree than an art one!!...

1. Pharmacy is an exception however as it is an accredited degree, so to a certain extent it does not matter where you get your degree from.
2. Define "success", because if you mean it in purely monetary terms, frankly, not everyone studies at universities for their prospective salaries, but for the pursuit of their subject.
3. People who do Biology at Oxford are not prospective pharmacists. Those courses cannot be compared as one is strictly academic (so to speak) and one takes a more vocational route.
4. To show how crap (for want of a better word) De Monfort is, you cannot even take Biology there.
5. Do not even dare suggest or imply that De Monfort University (as an institution) is better than the University of Oxford.

2) People doing pharmacy/Med/Dent are more respected in the community ( from any uni) than a person doing a Biology ( or even other degrees from oxford barring law and med) degree. More money - better life style. More chances of getting a job ect

And now you're randomly mentioning Art?
As far as I'm aware, Oxford doesn't offer art! Art is by no means a soft subject, I did it at GCSE and even then the workload in relation to the grade I got didn't match up and I've been told I'm a pretty good artist. Oxford do offer Architecture which is art based *and* mathematical and is incredibly difficult. You have to be logical and artistic which may be more difficult than being purely scientific in thought. I have no comment for your 'comparison' between Pharmacy and Art which isn't even offered at Oxbridge. Your argument doesn't even make sense.

Attacking and assuming things about people on here isn't helping your argument. I have no aspirations for Oxbridge but I don't judge those who do.
Can I ask what the point of this thread was? Your logic is flawed, Imsoacadmic floored you and you're annoying me because I want to sleep but I keep responding and my responses are getting convoluted.

Yes, Pharmacy is useful. So is Biology, so are most subjects! As has been mentioned, Pharmacy is vocational and Oxbridge don't offer it. Doesn't mean subjects Oxbridge offer are less useful than Pharmacy just because they aren't as targeted. Without Biomed and Biology, you'd have no medicine to prescribe (I'm assuming you're a prospective Pharmacist). I'd say the people who developed the drugs would *feel* more successful than the person who prescribed them. But as you haven't even bothered to define success, I'm going to sleep..

And now you're randomly mentioning Art?
As far as I'm aware, Oxford doesn't offer art! Art is by no means a soft subject, I did it at GCSE and even then the workload in relation to the grade I got didn't match up and I've been told I'm a pretty good artist.

I'm just saying that so many people think they are smart on here getting into Oxford ( and most probably are).. but the people doing stuff like art got there by doing soft a-levels ( which are eassier to get high grades in).... and the fact is that to get into pharmacy you need min of BBB, and to do art at oxford you need something like AAA, and at the end of the day you are gonna be better of with a Pharmacy degree than an art one!!...