Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    Just because you applied for the same university as me doesn't automatically make your opinion as valuable. You won't get into Clare, you got AABB for AS, and you did the worst board possible for philosophy. (Oh, and I know someone applying for philosophy there far more intelligent than you). What precisely is there for me to be jealous of? Am I not allowed to just make a passing comment without getting mobbed?

    Augustine’s theodicy is a theodicy which aims to remove the responsibility for evil away from God and onto human beings.

    ^ This is the first sentence of one of his essays. Now please, ok, there is nothing absolutely crushingly terribly about it. But it's hardly Oxbridge standard, is it? It doesn't read well and seems poorly constructed. Also, it mentions the fact his theodicy tries to resolve the problem of evil with God's assumed benevolance. It's mentioned like that is something specific to Augustine's theodicy, when in fact all theodicies (by definition) aim to do that.
    You are just criticising people for the sake of it. What is the point in criticising Adsur?

    Also, about the theodicy essay. Perhaps it is not Oxbridge standard, but it is the sort of essay that would come up in an exam, in which you are not expected to write a dissertation; rather, you are expected to write clearly and demonstrate your knowledge of the important points.

    http://michaelmgs.f2o.org/essays/dua...rtes_plato.htm
    http://michaelmgs.f2o.org/essays/ont..._descartes.htm

    I sent these two off to Oxford, I hope these are a little better by your standard. And I am sure it will surprise you to hear that I got an offer yesterday from Oxford to read Maths and Philosophy, given that my essays are so 'poor.'
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    1) It's the easiest board, I've seen the syllabus and textbooks for other boards and am convinced of this.
    2) You said 'she wouldn't get into Cambridge'. i.e. She isn't intelligent enough for Cambridge.
    3) There's always somethings that people don't know, perhaps we should quiz your knowledge until you get something wrong
    4) The tutors are looking for potential in philosophy, not in other subjects. She got A in philo AS, what more can you ask? Just because she got two B's and you got 2 A's doesn't make you a better philosopher.
    5) I'm saying that current intelligence and potential are quite unrelated, since you can't deduce how people will cope with just studying one subject in such depth compared to several, and also whether people have enthusiasm, which is essentially for degree studies, equally as much as intelligence imho.
    1)Well I've heard differently. Regardless of that specific instance, clearly studying as easier board is less beneficial to you than studying a harder one? (in terms of knowledge and understanding).
    2)No, you can't necessarily saying I was inferring she wasn't intelligent enough.
    3)Of course there are things people don't know, what a stupid thing to say? But applying to cambridge for philosophy and not knowing about deduction is like applying to maths and not knowing about differentiation.
    4)No, of course it doesn't. But I know how admissions tutors select people, and their initial step is ranking applicants in order of academic success. (I was told this first hand by a cambridge undergrad)
    5)Then say current intelligence and don't say intelligence?
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adhsur)
    rotfl.
    i didnt know what to put on the end so i put shouting
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    Just because you applied for the same university as me doesn't automatically make your opinion as valuable. You won't get into Clare, you got AABB for AS, and you did the worst board possible for philosophy. (Oh, and I know someone applying for philosophy there far more intelligent than you). What precisely is there for me to be jealous of? Am I not allowed to just make a passing comment without getting mobbed?

    Augustine’s theodicy is a theodicy which aims to remove the responsibility for evil away from God and onto human beings.

    ^ This is the first sentence of one of his essays. Now please, ok, there is nothing absolutely crushingly terribly about it. But it's hardly Oxbridge standard, is it? It doesn't read well and seems poorly constructed. Also, it mentions the fact his theodicy tries to resolve the problem of evil with God's assumed benevolance. It's mentioned like that is something specific to Augustine's theodicy, when in fact all theodicies (by definition) aim to do that.
    how can you possibly know Rushda won't get into Clare, are you the admissions tutor pretending to be a student?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Adhsur)
    For God's sake, I think it does show your own feeling of inadequacy if you have to constantly see me as "the competition". Give it up! I haven't been insulting you anywhere near as much as you've insulted that guy's essays (which I thought he did a great job in) and me. If I don't get in, so be it...but that's no reason to think I'm in any way inferior to you - how can you be so sure YOU'LL get in? As for the exam board stuff, that is a load of rubbish. Do you really think universities will say, "that girl did it on AQA so she can't come into our uni"? It's still an A level!!!

    I don't think anyone can truely say that they will get into Cambridge but since we both got an A in philosophy I don't see why you think my opinion is less worthy than yours. For someone who has to go out of his way to criticise someone's hard work and effort in those essays, that must be really low. And I mean REALLY low. With an arrogance like that if you don't get in you really do deserve that.
    I didn't say your opinion was worth any less than mine, I just said the fact we are both applying to cambridge doesn't make our opinions equal.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikesgt2)
    You are just criticising people for the sake of it. What is the point in criticising Adsur?

    Also, about the theodicy essay. Perhaps it is not Oxbridge standard, but it is the sort of essay that would come up in an exam, in which you are not expected to write a dissertation; rather, you are expected to write clearly and demonstrate your knowledge of the important points.

    http://michaelmgs.f2o.org/essays/dua...rtes_plato.htm
    http://michaelmgs.f2o.org/essays/ont..._descartes.htm

    I sent these two off to Oxford, I hope these are a little better by your standard. And I am sure it will surprise you to hear that I got an offer yesterday from Oxford to read Maths and Philosophy, given that my essays are so 'poor.'
    I was aware of your offer which is why I was so dissapointed by the quality of the essays. Considering about half of applicants get in I'm not particularly surprised actually (also, no doubt they probably focused on logic and maths rathen than your essay writing ability). There's nothing to worry about, I'm sure you'll do fine at Oxford but you obviously aren't naturally adept at writing.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    1)Well I've heard differently. Regardless of that specific instance, clearly studying as easier board is less beneficial to you than studying a harder one? (in terms of knowledge and understanding).
    2)No, you can't necessarily saying I was inferring she wasn't intelligent enough.
    3)Of course there are things people don't know, what a stupid thing to say? But applying to cambridge for philosophy and not knowing about deduction is like applying to maths and not knowing about differentiation.
    4)No, of course it doesn't. But I know how admissions tutors select people, and their initial step is ranking applicants in order of academic success. (I was told this first hand by a cambridge undergrad)
    5)Then say current intelligence and don't say intelligence?
    1) I can only speak for maths, but in maths it's not the material that is different, it's the style of questions. your understanding and knowledge is only determined by how far you teach yourself anyway.

    2) LOL. Are you joking? You said she wouldn't get into cambridge, what else am i meant to infer? That she is intelligent enough?

    3) I'm not particularly qualified to answer this, having not done philo, but i take your point

    5) Oh come on, Mr can i be any more pedantic? When i refer to someones intelligence, I hardly mean their intelligence 4 years ago or something do I? If i say, 'adhsur is intelligent', i don't mean she was intelligent 10 years ago, or 10 years in the future, I mean now.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    how can you possibly know Rushda won't get into Clare, are you the admissions tutor pretending to be a student?
    If so, at least he ain't in a chatroom, that's just peado...
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by mikesgt2)
    I sent these two off to Oxford, I hope these are a little better by your standard. And I am sure it will surprise you to hear that I got an offer yesterday from Oxford to read Maths and Philosophy, given that my essays are so 'poor.'
    Hahaha that's amazing! Well done. So, hmmmm, maybe the oxford person agrees with me that this person's essays are up to scratch. Hmmmmm, who would I rather believe, oxford admissions or Seer? I knew you were good enough mike.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    how can you possibly know Rushda won't get into Clare, are you the admissions tutor pretending to be a student?
    You're an idiot.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    You're an idiot.
    From you, that is a real insult.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    You're an idiot.
    No, you're the idiot for saying she won't get in.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chimp_spanner)
    We base our knowledge of the Universe around what we can see and measure and quantify.
    Precisely. We have used various techniques including spectroscopy to conclude that stars consist of burning balls of gases (mainly hydrogen and helium). Comets are balls of gases including hydrogen and ice. Planets are made from rocks containing common earth-found minerals and metals including iron, magnesium and aluminium.

    Our observations suggest that the elements that exist on earth are universal throughout the universe.


    (Original post by chimp_spanner)
    What do we have to compare it against? It's not a "fair test" so to speak.
    See above. It is a perfectly fair test and all evidence supports the universal theory of elements.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    1) I can only speak for maths, but in maths it's not the material that is different, it's the style of questions. your understanding and knowledge is only determined by how far you teach yourself anyway.

    2) LOL. Are you joking? You said she wouldn't get into cambridge, what else am i meant to infer? That she is intelligent enough?

    3) I'm not particularly qualified to answer this, having not done philo, but i take your point

    5) Oh come on, Mr can i be any more pedantic? When i refer to someones intelligence, I hardly mean their intelligence 4 years ago or something do I? If i say, 'adhsur is intelligent', i don't mean she was intelligent 10 years ago, or 10 years in the future, I mean now.
    1)Yes, well philosophy is different to maths.
    2)I said necessarily.
    3) -
    4)what happened?
    5)It comes with doing philosophy. You phrased it badly was my point.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    You're an idiot.
    Bloody hell, he's everywhere! He's advising the Cambridge admissions tutors, he's marking Huntroyde's work to be calling him stupid, and all from London, I mean wow dude (!)...
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by theone)
    No, you're the idiot for saying she won't get in.
    If I said she would get in would that make me less of an idiot?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Lord Huntroyde)
    From you, that is a real insult.
    Talk about a silver tongue.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    You're an idiot.
    Gee, that's a great answer.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    1)Yes, well philosophy is different to maths.
    2)I said necessarily.
    3) -
    4)what happened?
    5)It comes with doing philosophy. You phrased it badly was my point.
    1) But my point of your understanding not being limited by your studies still applies. Your knowledge should extend a fair bit beyond your in class studies.

    2) right....

    4) You agreed, by saying 'no of course it doesnt'.

    5) Or perhaps you misunderstood it? I don't think many other people would have questioned what i had written.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Seer)
    If I said she would get in would that make me less of an idiot?
    As a potential philosophy person, I would have thought you would realise saying anything without proper consideration and without proper facts is idiotic.
 
 
 
Poll
Is the Big Bang theory correct?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.