Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 LordofHats wrote:

Was it a philosophy thing? In my class on Ethics of Warfare, my professor suggested that when someone wants a degree in philosophy without doing any of the work that they go to France. I thought he was joking

Continental departments are not well liked by analytic departments.

 hotsauceman1 wrote:
Damn, B+, looks like i might be screwed.

Well, one thing to understand is that GPA is irrelevant outside the standards of the institution granting the degree. Unlike lower tiers of education, graduate students probably aren't going to be getting other degrees and no one in the working world really cares about GPA. As such, graduate programs tend to be de facto pass/fail.

 LordofHats wrote:

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
So he registered to U of Sorbonne, in France, and paid a small fortune to obtain his doctorate under the table.

Was it a philosophy thing? In my class on Ethics of Warfare, my professor suggested that when someone wants a degree in philosophy without doing any of the work that they go to France. I thought he was joking

No, Art History. The student was doing a thesis on a ridiculously specific aspect of the production of a French-Canadian artist, Jean Dallaire. Too specific and too unimportant according to my mom to warrant a full thesis. That opinion was communicated often to the student, but he was apparently really difficult to deal with (a retired engineer trying to reinvent himself as a historian of art...).

And the status of French Universities in philosophy is a weird thing. Generally, everyone who'se been to Sorbonne tells me that the quality of teaching is really really low. But yet, French-Canadians universities hire Sorbonne-trained teachers like there's no tomorrow. It's annoying.

It's possible that your teacher was just taking a stab at a notoriously continental institution. Which is as good a reason as any other.

 dogma wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

Was it a philosophy thing? In my class on Ethics of Warfare, my professor suggested that when someone wants a degree in philosophy without doing any of the work that they go to France. I thought he was joking

Continental departments are not well liked by analytic departments.

I have no idea what that means XD

 dogma wrote:


Continental departments are not well liked by analytic departments.

Yup. Beat me to it.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:
doing a thesis on a ridiculously specific aspect of the production of ... Too specific and too unimportant ... to warrant a full thesis.

That sounds like every Liberal Arts doctoral thesis.

 LordofHats wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

Was it a philosophy thing? In my class on Ethics of Warfare, my professor suggested that when someone wants a degree in philosophy without doing any of the work that they go to France. I thought he was joking

Continental departments are not well liked by analytic departments.

I have no idea what that means XD

Generally, continental refers to French and German writers. Analytical refers to Austrian and Anglo-Saxon philosophy. The difference is mostly the methodology. Continental philosophy doesn't really have one, while analytical philosophy is all about logico-linguistic analysis.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:


No, Art History. The student was doing a thesis on a ridiculously specific aspect of the production of a French-Canadian artist, Jean Dallaire. Too specific and too unimportant according to my mom to warrant a full thesis. That opinion was communicated often to the student, but he was apparently really difficult to deal with (a retired engineer trying to reinvent himself as a historian of art...).

An engineer? Engineers are more stubborn then a mule.

 Kilkrazy wrote:
You're not saying The Sorbonne is a junk university?

My cousin studied there.

It once was the best French philosophy university, and probably for a lot of other liberal arts. I often hear say that it's no longer the case. Saying 'junk' is probably too much.

 Kovnik Obama wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 dogma wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

Was it a philosophy thing? In my class on Ethics of Warfare, my professor suggested that when someone wants a degree in philosophy without doing any of the work that they go to France. I thought he was joking

Continental departments are not well liked by analytic departments.

I have no idea what that means XD

Generally, continental refers to French and German writers. Analytical refers to Austrian and Anglo-Saxon philosophy. The difference is mostly the methodology. Continental philosophy doesn't really have one, while analytical philosophy is all about logico-linguistic analysis.

Could you go into a bit more detail on that? Specifically, I'm interested in what the significant differences are between German and Austrian philosophy and methodology.

 Hordini wrote:
Could you go into a bit more detail on that? Specifically, I'm interested in what the significant differences are between German and Austrian philosophy and methodology.

With pleasure. In relation to the continental-analytical dichotomy, it's good to bear in mind that the distinction is harder to make than in the case of France and the UK, for exemple. In the last pair, the traditions are settled. In Austria and Germany, specifically that of the second half of the 19th century, the distinction is harder to make ; Freud (austrian) is one of the greatest source for continental thought, while Leibniz (german) is the one that reformed logic and gave the tools for analytical epistemology, for exemple.

The austrian analytical philosophers where mainly that of Vienna between 1874 and 1939. There's certainly quite a few causes for the particular intellectual culture that arose there (the state needed many highly educated bureaucrats, popular philosophy courses were given on sundays like the Mass, intellectual life was very well seen, etc) but what is really important was that it's authors weren't just philosophers. Most had a scientific career, or were economists, and because the specialties were yet to be so well defined as they are right now, a lot of the time spent by these authors was centered on more 'foundational' problems. It gave rise most notably to the school of Brentano (Meinong, Husserl, Twardowsky, Marty, Von Ehrenfels, Stumpf) and the Vienna Circle (Schlick, Carnap, Menger, Neurath, etc). Distinctly, austrian philosophy is characterised by the way it tries to emulate empirical sciences, by the importance it puts on the analysis of language (possibly an influence from John Stuart Mill), by the critical stance it takes concerning the kantian and neo-kantian german mouvements, by a commitment to realism (as understood by Bolzano and Frege), an acceptation of a priori conceptions and finally a certain psychologism (in the case of the school of Brentano).

Germany was more idealist. With the exception of Frege and a few others, it was all neo-kantian schools and hegelian schools. Here it's more a lack of method that is to be noted. Kantian and neo-kantian are great at giving the illusion of methodology with all the categories and classifications they come up with. Hegel's methodology could be summed up as making a religion out of reason. With him, Rationality becomes Providence, the rule that leads the universal history. Heidegger gives launch to 20th century existentialism, mostly by corrupting everything Husserl produced, Probably the most important aspect of german philosophy is their historicism.

As you can see, I have a very clear bias.

Good. If education is going to be treated as a commodity, that means that the people who buy it deserve their consumer rights.

I agree. It is all well and good saying teachers and lectures need freedom to teach, but equaly should they be above all questioning? Should they be thought of as above all bias and incapable of discrimination? Do we asume that HE institutions have 100% fair and effective complaints processes for students?

In this case it sounds like the student and the lecturer vehemently disagreed over gay marriage (and probably other things). The question is, did the lecturer give the student a poor participation mark for not agreeing all of the time, or for not letting a subject drop because she disagreed?

We don't know, but given the effect that failing that one class can have on the rest of her life I think it is absolutely right that she uses the avalable processes to force the issue. The student may be in the wrong, but that dose not make using the courts automaticly wrong.

Steve steveson wrote:
I agree. It is all well and good saying teachers and lectures need freedom to teach, but equaly should they be above all questioning? Should they be thought of as above all bias and incapable of discrimination? Do we asume that HE institutions have 100% fair and effective complaints processes for students?

I don't think it was claimed anywhere that this is the case at all, either in this thread or in any of the articles. There were several steps that the school went through to tell the student of behavior that was harming her grade and by all accounts she ignored them. A zero participation may be a bit odd, but the court apparently didn't find that the school acted in bad faith, as she lost her case, both at the school and in the courtroom.

Steve steveson wrote:
In this case it sounds like the student and the lecturer vehemently disagreed over gay marriage (and probably other things).

That was an accusation made by the student with little to nothing to back it up, so I don't believe that it actually was an issue anywhere other than in the students mind. It was even pointed out in court that the teacher had close family members that are gay.

Don't get me wrong, I am not saying the school was wrong, just defending her right to take her action as far as it could go if she felt it appropriate.

People were saying that she was clearly at fault for not participating, therefor asuming that the school and lecturer must be correct in their actions and that no external redress should be avalable. I was not saying either side was right or wrong, I just think that educational insitiutions see themselfs as sacrosanct bodys able to diliver a service for a (large) cost with no external redress when they fail to diliver. Every time one of these cases come up people dismiss them as silly as if an educational body is beyond question.

Steve steveson wrote:
I just think that educational insitiutions see themselfs as sacrosanct bodys able to diliver a service for a (large) cost with no external redress when they fail to diliver. Every time one of these cases come up people dismiss them as silly as if an educational body is beyond question.

Usually, there's an internal process if there's a dispute that arise from a grade given. First the teacher reviews the evaluation with the student. If that's not enough, you can ask for one of the teacher's peers to weight in.

There's also the student rights office who can take care of any abuse claims.