/lit/ - Literature

[Anonymous No.15570498]

Can anyone who studies philosophy, humanities or social sciences at university tell me...

Do you think many professors give you a lower grade if you try to argue an idea they don't like?

Do you ever try to please the professor's views so that you can get a better grade?

[Anonymous No.15570505]

>>15570498
Swallow

[Anonymous No.15570507]

>I’m gonna sucseed

[Anonymous No.15570512]

That is 100% the case. I’d tried importing ideas into my paper that he flat out refused to consider for being “pop philosophy”. You argue in their paradigm of 2-4 threads of academically established reasonings or you gtfo. They are going to drive you to convince you of their view because that’s just what they researched. It’s not always a bad thing, but don’t expect better things to always come from “”comparative”” approaches.

[Anonymous No.15570514]

>>15570498
>Do you think many professors give you a lower grade if you try to argue an idea they don't like?

I used to be one of those autists who claimed "Nah nah, so long as you argue your points coherently you will do just as well regardless of whether you write for or against your professor's views." But the honest truth is even with professors who relatively okay with being argued with, you will need to put much more effort to get an A on a paper arguing against his views then a paper which confirms his views.

[Anonymous No.15570532]

>>15570498
Absolutely yes. My last year at school I was taking a Cultural Studies seminar with a cunt of a professor (she has a small town complex), and got into an argument with her on one of the last days of class. The question was a hypothetical of whether a Chaucer should be kept in a given curriculum if there were no students enrolling in the class. When should the university deem a subject essential enough to be included in a gen ed list and what not.

I was pissed cause this has fucking nothing to do with culture studies and she was clearly trying to air some grievance she had in the past. Disagreed with her very vocally and dismissively and a couple weeks later was greeted with a C+.

Kiss ass if you want good grades, it's a safe bet.

[Anonymous No.15570533]

>>15570512
Is it usually a slight bias or have you found most professors to be as bad as this?

[Anonymous No.15570542]

>>15570498
That looks like a very good cup of coffee

[Anonymous No.15570544]

>>15570533
Mostly upper division classes are like this.

[Anonymous No.15570546]

>>15570532
Is this representative though, or an odd case? I'm just wondering whether it's worth putting effort into learning the teacher's background and views. Although this is also making me question whether I want to study at university altogether.

[Anonymous No.15570550]

>>15570498
Will school stories be remembered in the future like pic related

[Anonymous No.15570564]

>>15570498
what would be the purpose of paying good money to go to university and argue with your professors? if you're already that wise a degree is obviously redundant

[Anonymous No.15570567]

>>15570498
I'm a STEMfag that took a course or two at the neighbouring Department of Philosophy and what you're asking was NOT the case. In fact, I almost always argued against what the Professor was saying and those were always the most fun classes, for me and for them. And since we always had our class at the end of the day, once or twice we extended the debate for like an hour and then went to the nearby Uni Pub to continue over a beer or two.
Still, I have no doubt that some people really do function that way which is sad.

[Anonymous No.15570569]

>>15570532
you sound like a huge asshole ngl

[Anonymous No.15570585]

>>15570564
If you study politics at university and are asked to "argue whether taxes are justified", then are "arguing" a point. That's not the same as arguing with your professor.

[Anonymous No.15570586]

>>15570567
Did something similar and it was fine. I ended up learning a lot of stuff. I think they want that, when it is not something too disruptive.

[Anonymous No.15570589]

>>15570532
No, you just sound like a dumb cunt

[Anonymous No.15570594]

>>15570567
>>15570586
What subject? I think some topics are less hotly debated than others.

[Anonymous No.15570595]

>>15570512
Comparative approaches are something you do personally

[Anonymous No.15570600]

>>15570498
If you feel particularly passionate about whatever side of a debate and are able to argue your point well in the humanities or at least philosophy, you will get a good grade

[Anonymous No.15570604]

>>15570514
Generally this. Disagreement is possible but takes more work, more hours that could be spent on other classes. Assimilation is just easier.

[Anonymous No.15570612]

>>15570594
Some stuff about linguistics. He was a great teacher, probably the one who influenced me the most during college.

[Anonymous No.15570613]

>>15570546
It's useful enough to understand where your lecturer's point of view is coming from so that you can decide for yourself whether you fundamentally disagree with them enough to reject their shit or if can get behind their ideas.

If you are in a class, any liberal arts class, you kind of need to put in that effort in the first place. Milk them for your benefit, but formulate your own opinions for yourself. The act of agreeing with them becomes nothing more than an exercise.

[Anonymous No.15570616]

>>15570569
Kek

[Anonymous No.15571088]

When I was in uni there was only one or two profs I knew of that would have a spergout if you brought Wrongthink of any kind into their presence, but most would humor it if they saw you weren't just a retard.

By now I'd expect even they probably have to kowtow to Big Jew's doctrines, lest they be fired.

[Anonymous No.15571098]

>>15570532
Can you explain a small town complex, please?

[Anonymous No.15571109]

PhD researcher, I mark undergrad philosophy papers.

When marking I don't care what your conclusion is, I care how well you have paraphrased the views of others, and supported those paraphrases. I care how well you have supported the key premises in your argument. I care how well you reason from premises to conclusions, and how you support your reasoning. I care how well you engage with the rest of the relevant literature and situate your argument within that literature.

Some people think that they're getting a low mark for disagreeing with a tutor when, in fact, the thing they are arguing for is such a strong claim, it needs much more support or convincing argumentation than they have given it.

I'm a filthy socialist, but if you argued that all taxes are bad convincingly enough (given what year of undergrad you are), you'd get a first class from me.

[Anonymous No.15571216]

>>15571109
I understand that some professors do indeed mark based on how convincing the arguments are and how well-researched the paper is, but the question is to what extent does favouring the professor's views gain you points?

[Anonymous No.15571296]

>>15570594
Courses dealing with analytic philosophy.

[Anonymous No.15571303]

>>15570498
Yes, of course. My professor straight up told me he disagrees with what I argued and that he subtracted from my grade for it. What am I going to do? Professors are untouchable. With some professors you cannot even dare to bring up controversial questions, they would straight up destroy you.

[Anonymous No.15571304]

>>15570498
None, stop creating a idea of what you think academia is and just get in. Shut up, moron

[Anonymous No.15571308]

>>15571109
>how well you have supported the key premises in your argument. I care how well you reason from premises to conclusions, and how you support your reasoning
leftists and continentals are directly opposed to this though. how can humanitiestards still credibly claim they're doing ANY of this? maybe you could 70 years ago.

[Anonymous No.15571314]

>>15571098
She was from a very small town in Kansas but was probably the smartest person there. She went to University of Kansas and then transferred to University of Chicago after her first year because the curriculum wasn't challenging enough.

Basically, due to her having a clear intellectual advantage over her dumbass neighbors and hicks, she developed a really deep sense of superiority over everyone else (including her students). In turn, she overcompensated in really strange ways, flexing about her academic background (remind you, she's doing this to a group of seven students aged 20-22), always talking about her past in this hoity toity, dignified tone. If you disagreed or questioned her, she would just dismiss you bluntly -- it just never felt like a dialogue with her. She literally enjoyed listening to herself talk and boast about how she escaped what would have been a pastoral life.

I'm all for bringing personal experiences to the classroom, but at least tie it into what you are lecturing about. I do not give a shit about her upbringing, it was like her being our professor wasn't enough, she always had more to prove.

[Anonymous No.15571318]

>>15570498

[Anonymous No.15571322]

>>15571109
The only reason you believe you are impartial is because you are a leftist. They all do. I am a crypto-rightist adjunct in philosophy and I see it every day. The standards are overall laughable, as long as you parrot commonly accepted leftist arguments you will get excellent grades. It is particularly bad in the areas which are more explicitly political (for example, lit or sociology departments). Doing some critical analysis of a movie? Bring up some Butler and Haraway, introduce critical notions of gender, present it neatly, there's your A. But say you want to argue gender naturalism? There wouldn't even be sufficient space in your term paper to argue it, because the people grading your paper would demand such an intense and in-depth degree of argumentation that you would have to write an entire book on it. These are the unconscious differences in standards that prevail in academia, which you and anybody else are likely unaware of because your bias is so farspread.

[Anonymous No.15571350]

If you think someone isn't naturally going to more critical of something they disagree with then you're just a fucking retard honestly.
>>15571304

[Anonymous No.15571472]

There was a recent study that showed leftist academics are much more likely to "punish" their ideological opponents.
Paul Graham linked it (or an article referencing it) on his Twitter quite recently.

[Anonymous No.15571529]

>>15571322
At this point, social sciences are nothing more but a way to achieve success in a hierarchical dominant culture. What is even the point? Is there any search for Truth anymore?

[Anonymous No.15571588]

I'm
>>15571109


>>15571322
>>15571308

I'll conceed that maybe a student and I may not share the same idea about what makes a convincing argument, so I'm not going to be impartial there. Maybe they'll take a premise as given which I don't see that they're justified in doing, thats probably a bias I have.

I'll also conceed that maybe I'm biased because I research and teach a rather niche area in analytic epistemology of science, so I don't see to much of the kind of discourse you get in more humanities focussed areas. So, I can feel im impartial because I don't see much political discourse for my leftist leanings to affect my partiality.

But, I mark based on what year group someone is in. I don't expect a defence of a point form a first year that would stand up in a journal, I just need it to not have any glaringly faulty inferences, or unsupported leaps. Yes, a more bold claim will prolbably need more support, but thats only the difference between a first class and a 2:1 piece, where the feedback would be `consider if your argument supports a conclusion this strong', it's not the difference between a 1st and a 3rd.

>>15571109
I actually, in some ways, like to hear view that differ from mine. If I can find a criticism of my thesis now, it'll be easier than only finding it in my defence. That would get you a good mark because it's an original view. If you parrot me to myself, you'll lose marks for lack of original thought.

[Anonymous No.15571594]

>>15570498
no, idiot. They give you a low grade if you can't argue for your position.

[Anonymous No.15571621]

>>15570498
If you have an actually good professor then they won't, but most professors are shit and will

[Anonymous No.15571668]

No because I didn't have shit professors in uni. I don't even know what their actual positions were. The most I tried to appeal to their sensibilities was by imitating a more academic style of writing. It was boring and a bit formulaic, but kept my arguments clear and consistent.

[Anonymous No.15571719]

>>15570498
Depends on the class. If you have a good prof, you should be fine. It will also be clear when you have a bad prof what he wants you to do. The mediocre profs are where you have to worry.

I had two classes where I disagreed with the prof in final exam essays where I would have be marked down if for disagreeing with the professor's viewpoint despite providing support for that disagreement and demonstrating that you understood the material and arguments the professor presented. In one of those classes I got lucky and my final was graded by a TA who also disliked the prof, and I was fine. In another I went into the final with an A-, and my final grade ended up being a B.

Grades are kind of meaningless though if the point of going to university is to get an education, as opposed to a credential.

Also, in regards to your image, jezebels, semen demon, thot, etc. Sorry I cannot work up my normal reaction this morning.

[Anonymous No.15571722]

>>15571594
amazing post retard. notice how everybody else in this thread has said that's naive.

[Anonymous No.15571727]

>>15570498
That's not the experience i had. Usually proffessors value intellectual risk, this is, proposing original but well grounded methodologies or theoretical insights, even if they go against their preffered philosophical/sociological schools of thought.
There was one exception, the modern history proffessor, who wanted you to be convinced and to clearly state that Stalin was bad, really bad, and that the only good form of socioecomical organization is socialdemocracy and that we the youngsters are the ones guilty of making the welfare state sink because we don't fight and go to enough rallies. Just imagine how much of an intellectual failure this guy was.

[Anonymous No.15571891]

I just kept my mouth shut and wrote down what I figured was the easiest way to pass all the classes.

I didn't go to Uni to argue with professors or classmates. I have real friends I can do that with, and I won't get into trouble if I happen to say something no-no while talking to them. I went to Uni to get a degree, not to socialize.

[Anonymous No.15571910]

>>15570498
economics here
I was into Austrian economics openly and brashly because nobody else ever raised their hand so there was a free pass any time expressing unorthodox views seemed appropriate
The history of economic thought and philosophy of economics profs loved me so much I got a chance to do tutorials for them

[Anonymous No.15571935]

>>15571910
Economics is the only humanities field where there's something resembling a balance between right/left.
And even then, it's 60/40 in favor of leftists.

[Anonymous No.15571983]

>>15571308
>leftists and continentals are directly opposed to this though. how can humanitiestards still credibly claim they're doing ANY of this? maybe you could 70 years ago.
All instituttions are analytic in the English speaking world.

[Anonymous No.15572001]

>>15570532
>I was pissed cause this has fucking nothing to do with culture studies
You are very fucking retarded

[Anonymous No.15572034]

>>15571588
>I'll conceed that maybe a student and I may not share the same idea about what makes a convincing argument, so I'm not going to be impartial there. Maybe they'll take a premise as given which I don't see that they're justified in doing, thats probably a bias I have.

God, you sound absolutely insufferable lmao

[Anonymous No.15572055]

>>15570498
generally no, but i tend to feel the feedback is unfair if i go against the professor's views

[Anonymous No.15572064]

>>15571314
Now that you formulated it like that, it seems very recognizable

[Anonymous No.15572068]

>>15570498
Yes goy. Attend sheep factory, controlled by useful lefties. The goal is to either indoctrinate you or to make you used to talking in a politically correct manner. Lick those nuts and leave some slime on them.

>>15571109
>Some people think that they're getting a low mark for disagreeing with a tutor when, in fact, the thing they are arguing for is such a strong claim, it needs much more support or convincing argumentation than they have given it.
He won't see your point of view, or try to understand your way of thinking and accept a solid argument, you'll just have to metaphorically try to fuck a lesbian. OR JUST SUCK HIS DICK AS I TOLD YOU. Much easier.

[Anonymous No.15572091]

>>15572068
t. sour about being too poor or stupid to go to college

keep seething on an anime image board though. that'll surely cheer you up in the long run

[Anonymous No.15572118]

>>15572091
It's true though.
>When marking I don't care what your conclusion is, I care how well you have paraphrased the views of others, and supported those paraphrases. I care how well you have supported the key premises in your argument
>I'll conceed that maybe a student and I may not share the same idea about what makes a convincing argument, so I'm not going to be impartial there. Maybe they'll take a premise as given which I don't see that they're justified in doing, thats probably a bias I have
>>Maybe they'll take a premise as given which I don't see that they're justified in doing
in other words, if the student believes in X philosophy, the professor won't care much to see your premises -- that you take as given -- in the X philosophy point of view, and instead you will have to write a whole book for him OR argue in his preferred world view for an easier experience.

[Anonymous No.15572119]

>>15570498
>professor insists we watch and write a paper on his play
>absolutely awful play full of lolsorandum interjections and almost zero literary merit
>trash him for the entire paper, call him a failed playwright who settled for teaching
>insist he stop trying and take up something less artistic and more pragmatic
>get an A on the paper
>fail everything else
I dunno what I expected.

[Anonymous No.15572185]

>>15570498
>Do you think many professors give you a lower grade if you try to argue an idea they don't like?
No. They usually take great effort to avoid that. That is why they usually only look at reasoning and understanding in a written work.
That being said, that which is properly reasoned from proper understandings is also that which is true.
t. philosophy student

[Anonymous No.15572186]

>>15571935
It sounds strange that this is the case, when economics schools are schools of liberal economy. Anyway, that must be in USA, here in Spain the 50% are anarcholibs and the other 50% are just liberals, both groups composed of absolutelly retarded individuals.
There's a reason why economics is out of the social sciences departments. Austrian school is one of the reasons.

[Anonymous No.15572210]

>>15572118
Well naturally, because the justifications for the "orthodox" view on the subject were already discussed and gone over in class.

If you claim that 1+1 = 3 in your math class you're going to have a lot more explaining to do than if you just write 2. That's nothing specific to humanities, that's simply the nature of school where the primary function is to pass on knowledge of the previous generations to the next.

When you go against the scientific consensus you're more or less challenging the collective wisdom of every generation before you. To do that requires more work and explaining than going with the theory the faculty or the professor or their field of science in general has chosen to be the explanation to teach new students. They didn't just toss a coin and pick something to say. It's not an arbitrary thing to go against them and if you choose that path you'll have to put in some extra work.

It's only a problem if you literally cannot pass your classes unless you agree with the professor, which is the case in places like China.

[Anonymous No.15572211]

>>15572185
>That being said, that which is properly reasoned from proper understandings is also that which is true
truth is an oppressive eurocentric racist notion coming from colonialism, what you think of as properly reasoned is specific to the eurocentric, racist tradition of western enlightenment thinking.

[Anonymous No.15572217]

>>15570512
What were the ideas? Maybe they really were pop philosophy tier, regardless of his orientation

[Anonymous No.15572220]

>>15572211
t. never laid one foot inside a university but knows exactly how it is because a youtuber told them

[Anonymous No.15572242]

>>15572211
I have only ever seen that sort of dishonest epistemic nihilism from some particularly indolent and stupid students, and never from any professor.

[Anonymous No.15572315]

>>15570498
Usually no not really. If you provide evidence from the text to support whatever you are arguing and you articulate yourself well you will get a good grade.
>>15570512
>>15570532
>>15571088
>>15571322
>>15572068
You are just a bad writer but keep coping.

[Anonymous No.15572347]

>>15570498
Not necessarily. To annoy my professor and amuse myself I used to frequently cite Sam Harris's The Moral Landscape and I still received good grades on those papers, even though she'd circle those references and write comments like "Not a credible source" or "No".

[Anonymous No.15572437]

>>15570498
As an English professor, I try to be fair, but I do tend to warn my students of a few considerations:
If they have a thesis argument that seems absurd, or very hard to prove, I tell them they have an uphill battle ahead of them. They will have to work harder to find textual evidence and make compelling arguments, because their reader (me) isn't starting from a neutral stance. I'm only human: if your idea sounds like horseshit at the outset, and it's about a text I've been reading longer than you've been alive, extra convincing will be required.

The truth is that most of these far-out arguments are essentially unsupportable, and they will end up with a sincere but unconvincing paper. If you can't readily support your argument, you may be banging your head against a wall. You want to argue that Madeline Usher is a vampire who has been draining her brother? Absolutely: the text has a lot of evidence to make that a plausible position, even if I don't think it was Poe's intent.
You want to argue that she is taking revenge on Roderick for raping her? Still possible, but more of a stretch.
You want to argue that Poe foresaw his cousin-bride's death, though she was 17 at the time he wrote the story and Madeline is Virginia? Now you have your work cut out for you. I will try to keep an open mind, but the odds of you ending up with a convincing paper are slim.

The other issue is that students with unpopular opinions (usually on the far-right end) often come in like martyrs to the cause, act as provocateurs in class discussions, and shoehorn their social viewpoint into everything. Since humanities tend towards the left now for obvious reasons, it can also provide an uphill battle--but more often I mark them down for being off-topic. If I tell you to analyze a text, I don't want to hear your opinions on the author's sexuality, or how wrong it is. This happens with a few left-ish students too, who take offense to the existence of upsetting passages, but in my experience the students who want to explain why women are inferior or how non-Christians are going to Hell tend to be either recent immigrants from very traditional cultures, or the right-wing country lads who have never been surrounded by progressive viewpoints and get angry.

So I absolutely try to be neutral, but not all arguments are equal, and staying on-topic is crucial, and a student who is actively pissing me off as I read their essay (for whatever reason) is less likely to do well.

[Anonymous No.15572445]

>>15570498
>studies philosophy, humanities or social sciences at university
why would any reasonable thinking smart human study anything other than STEM at university ? the degree is literally toilet paper and you can read anything yourself without your professor shaping ideas for you

[Anonymous No.15572457]

>>15572445
Because STEM is for autistic people and tons of cushy office jobs even in 2020 just want the applicant to have a university degree and couldn't care less what your major was.

[Anonymous No.15572458]

I got B's for being an ass kisser and A's for being contrarian.

[Anonymous No.15572462]

>>15571109
>>15571109
>I'm a filthy socialist, but if you argued that all taxes are bad convincingly enough (given what year of undergrad you are), you'd get a first class from me.
lmao imagine having a PhD and being dumb enough to believe in impartiality of your judgement, you'd give your student a C if he dared to deviate from your progressive views

[Anonymous No.15572471]

>>15572445
Ask me how I know you have a shallow reading of everything you read and that you don't know how to write.
Not saying that you have to do one of these degrees to be a good reader or writer just that people that don't see their value and have this opinion are likely not.

[Anonymous No.15572526]

>>15572315
You’ve never had a heterodox belief in your life

[Anonymous No.15572533]

>>15572445
>aww geez he could hook up a computer monitor in minutes he's a real wiz with the computahs I tell you
>no clue what to do in life
>enroll to study computer science
>not too difficult but absolutely soul draining
>2nd year
>come back from christmas break
>chit chat with school friends
>literally everyone spent their vacation time PROGRAMMING
>not even school projects just some PROGRAMMING FOR FUN
>realize there are people out there who actually enjoy doing this stuff
>I didn't realize studying something you liked was an option
>switch to humanities
>study history
>get to experience what those nerds had with their little programs
>finish a master's degree
>never been unemployed since graduating

I would lie if I told you my work is something I'd do for free, but at least I don't hate it the way I absolutely loathed the thought of working in IT for the next 40 years.

[Anonymous No.15572562]

>>15572471
What value does writing essays for 4 years to please your dearest cock loving socialist professor bring ?

[Anonymous No.15572577]

>>15572315
>You are just a bad writer but keep coping.
I've long finished my studies and am an adjunct, as I said. Perhaps you're just a retard?

[Anonymous No.15572584]

Yes coffee is good for you

[Anonymous No.15572586]

>>15570498
Back in college, it happened once, with one professor who was a militant feminist. I told her that if she ever asked anything about the role of the women in some greek tragedy (she was teaching a course on that) I said I would definitely provide an answer from a patriarchal point of reference (not that I care but I was sick of this feminist interpretation of EVERYTHING.)
She said, as long as it stood by itself, she would be fine with it. I did. She graded properly.
She was an exception, though.

[Anonymous No.15572593]

>>15572562
What is the point of talking to you if you arrive obviously uninterested in honest conversation?
"Go fuck yourself", this is the proper answer.
Not him.

[Anonymous No.15572594]

>>15570498
If you don't fuck your professors it doesn't matter what you write. I assume same if you fuck them but I just dropped out

[Anonymous No.15572598]

>>15571529
>At this point, social sciences are nothing more but a way to achieve success in a hierarchical dominant culture. What is even the point?
You could say that about literally anything. Having a job is nothing more but a way to achieve success in a hierarchical dominant culture. Society is built on the premise that people find ways to achieve success in a hierarchical dominant culture

[Anonymous No.15572600]

>>15570498
Be like Ben Shapiro when he studied at Yale for his law degree. Argue for leftist points while you're there so that, when you graduate, you can eviscerate your opponents with facts and logic ;^)

[Anonymous No.15572609]

>>15572598
>hierarchical dominant culture
which is the only one that can exist in reality

[Anonymous No.15572611]

>>15570498
nobody gives a fuck about your fucking grades here

fuck off to paris

[Anonymous No.15572630]

>>15571109
This. Honestly most kids, even kids in top colleges, cannot write and cannot think in an organized manner. This is even more true for STEM students taking GE courses, although they can at least grasp logic.

[Anonymous No.15572867]

I have never graded anyone down for disagreeing with me. You are supposed to be evaluating the quality of their argument internally, not the validity of their initial assumptions. I've given people perfect grades for papers on rape culture and toxic masculinity even though I found their premises bogus on a personal level. The papers were good and they were acceptable enough paradigms within the context.

[Anonymous No.15572914]

>>15570498
>>15570512
>>15570532
You guys sound like shit writers. i literally wrote in my thesis about "globohomo" and advocated for an aesthetic from medieval christianity and my professor gave me an A.

The professor commented "Disturbing....but very well written." Similar professors have commented likewise.

If you present ideas they dislike and write it in a mediocre fashion, then yes you will be punished. You do need to be 10x better in how you present it compared to your classmates NPC ideas, but the time spent doing this is much better than going around doing partying and wasting your precious youth.

[Anonymous No.15573000]

so apparently half of /lit/ are professors can you larpers fucking stop already

[Anonymous No.15573049]

>>15572914
damn I want to read this; post it

[Anonymous No.15573051]

>>15572347
Lol. I’m curious, what separates a credible source from an incredible one in philosophy?

[Anonymous No.15573548]

Philosophy student. In my experience, 9 times out of 10, the students who disagree with what is taught either misunderstand what’s going on or bring in outside elements unrelated to the argument. In a class about Descartes, there was this one guy constantly raising up his hand “but SCIENCE says that’s not TRUE”.
Usually profs present a set of basic premisses when it comes to the topic or the text studied. That’s what the class is based on. No one cares if you come up with your own ideas, especially at the undergraduate level. For some reason some people think philosophy is where they get to “express their opinions”. No, fuck off. Learn the arguments, learn the systems, and work WITH them. You do not have good ideas, you are 20 years old.

[Anonymous No.15573593]

>>15573548
Yeah, students in my philosophy faculty are retarded as well. They commonly misunderstand the essence of the proofs given in the works (or do not read it at all) and then act with great agitation when they smell something contrary to one of their ill-thought preconceptions.
Christ, it is not difficult to show that some proofs are, indeed, false. and that some are deficient but pointing toward the truth. But have the decency to fully understand them first.
Due to experience, I commonly assume that the student is the one who is in the wrong, when there is a clash with the professor.

[Anonymous No.15573631]

Double majoring in Math/Philosophy. I have yet to learn the opinions of any of my teachers on the the subjects they teach. It never comes up and nobody asks. The feedback I've gotten on my work so far has been constructive; they suggests points of failure in the writing as well as success and where it could be taken further, if one is interested enough. All work at my school is marked blind, so they have no idea who wrote it. It's a good setup.

[Anonymous No.15573671]

>>15573593
Thankfully, most of those people were either taking philosophy as electives in the first two years, switched to a different program (like this guy who couldn’t understand that Kant is not talking about psychology, eventually switched to psychology) or at least learned to shut up.
It’s always worse with political or ethical philosophy, obviously, glad I don’t have to go through that anymore.
It’s a safe bet assume the prof is right, and in the situation where he is just flat out wrong, just talk to him after class. I find it incredibly rude for a student to “correct” a prof in front of his class.

[Anonymous No.15573811]

>>15570498
Yes. I personally know a professor who has told me about several students he has given a non-passing grade to, largely because of the ideological implication of their research papers.
Also: this absolutely happens on wider scale, as well - can even be a subconscious thing.

[Anonymous No.15573817]

>>15572437
>You want to argue that Poe foresaw his cousin-bride's death, though she was 17 at the time he wrote the story and Madeline is Virginia? Now you have your work cut out for you. I will try to keep an open mind, but the odds of you ending up with a convincing paper are slim.
What about something like 'Poe's writing was by definition informed by the women and contexts he knew in his own life' while drawing a connection to the extended death of his aunt (Virginia's mother) or something.

[Anonymous No.15573821]

>>15573000
kek

[Anonymous No.15573827]

>>15573811
What was the class?

[Anonymous No.15573830]

As a professor at Cambridge I can tell you that if you aren’t prepared to swallow these kids, bitch ain’t getting no where with me, real nigga shit

[Anonymous No.15573832]

>>15573827
Philosophy.

[Anonymous No.15573847]

>>15573832
What was the content of the class? What were the ideological implications? Curious

[Anonymous No.15573872]

>>15572598

The belief is that in the past the hierarchy was based on merit. This belief is due to the fact that if you go far enough in the past, the hierarchy was directly determined by nature. Who died and who didn't. Who found food, and who didn't. Who could protect themselves, and who couldn't. Who could build something that worked, and who couldn't.

Today, none of that applies. People are so out of sync with reality that failure and success are entirely determined by the opinions of authority, rather than the rule of the Cosmos.

But anyone who buys into this modern belief that hierarchy is determined this way will be crushed by reality.

[Anonymous No.15573879]

>>15572211
I got told this exact thing by someone in med school once; that was a sad day for me

[Anonymous No.15573885]

>>15573872
>wash beniz XDD

[Anonymous No.15573915]

>>15573885

Better than having my face covered in mediocre peoples' shit.

[Anonymous No.15574152]

>>15572347
Why exactly is it not a credible source? Because "Islamophobia"?

[Anonymous No.15574174]

>>15572437
You've equated "against the professor's view" with "obviously far-fetched, possibly racist, usually right-wing". That just shows how ridiculously insular and left-biased academia is, that conservative ideas are automatically provocative and dissenting.

[Anonymous No.15574241]

My professors could never give me a soild A for any paper. They always made sure to keep me around the A- mark. I'm a good writer, but I don't really write what they wanted me to write. It waa always some bullshit about oppression, women, minorities, or some other liberal hogwash. My writing and ideas were always original, so they could not technically give me a poor grade. Honestly, (this isn't an attempt to make myself out to be some genius) I think my ideas were too big for them. My analysis of Huckleberry Finn had the entire classroom captivated. Even when I had to read their comments on my paper, it was often incomprehensible critique. They wanted me to parrot their opinions practically verbatim.

[Anonymous No.15574276]

>>15574241
This is why I can’t go to school. I got an A literally just memorizing what the handouts said and writing them verbatim in the tests.
>Solid work! Strong essay
Bro I just said exactly what you wrote

[Anonymous No.15574298]

It depends on the subject and the point you disagree on.

If you have a basic understanding of tact, decorum, and context (such as the fact that you are not sticking it to the man or doing ground breaking new thinking as an undergrad if you explicitly attack SJW shit) you will have no problem.

In philosophy in particular, if your reading of a text (for ex, that Descartes' proof for the existence of God is acceptable) that is uncommon and the professor doesn't agree with, as long as you argue and write it well you will get a good grade, even a better one for trying something risky.

[Anonymous No.15574301]

>>15574276
>Bro I just said exactly what you wrote

It's almost as if it is intended to teach you that parroting an authority is the path to success.

[Anonymous No.15574315]

I took a philosophy class once that was on European existentialism, but the last quarter of the class was focused on African Americans because the professor was a mulatto. It ended up being me and this giant dude from Texas arguing against the professor and half a class worth of female humanities majors that America shouldn't just be a free for all that's open to anyone. Still got an A in the class though

[Anonymous No.15574316]

>>15574276
The moment you realize that acquaintances and superiors just want you to mimic them and talk about them, the sooner you will realize that few people have inherent worth. Cherish the ones that truly wish for your creativity. Few people will.

[Anonymous No.15575038]

>>15571322
there’s a reason you’re just a shittt adjunct lol

Hint: it’s because you’re stupid

[Anonymous No.15575080]

>>15570498
Philosophy professors at my program seemed to understand in principle that they're supposed to embrace differing viewpoints.
However, sometimes they fail to differentiate a different reading from a wrong reading. The solution to this is just to go extra steps of making clear what you are saying. Philosophy papers benefit a lot from just being honest and thorough, even conversational. If you're clear and respectful it shouldn't be so much of an issue.

If your views are so dislikable to them that this isn't enough, then it's not unlikely that something is wrong with your views, because it's unlikely for you to have extreme views that are also credible.

[Anonymous No.15575100]

>>15571910
>physics here
>I was into Aristotelian physics openly and brashly because nobody else ever raised their hand so there was a free pass any time expressing unorthodox views seemed appropriate
>The history of physics and philosophy of physics profs loved me so much I got a chance to do tutorials for them

[Anonymous No.15575103]

>>15570498
question ignored
Why do people bring coffee into class when it's gonna make 'em have to leave and take a post-coffee poop at some point? Where is the academic integrity?

[Anonymous No.15575110]

>>15570498
Not in my case, it you give good arguments and you know what you are talking about. Maybe you are a dumbass

[Anonymous No.15575120]

>>15575110
*Except if the teacher is a woman.

[Anonymous No.15575156]

>>15575100
Unironically based

[Anonymous No.15575371]

>>15575103
gives me an excuse to walk out of class, I get restless listening to people's bullshit

[Anonymous No.15576577]

>>15573817
Well, arguing inspiration from biography is often dangerous, but that's not such a bad starting point. I'd read with an open mind.

[Anonymous No.15576609]

>>15570498
Yes and yes. It's an unfortunate reality but academia, at least in the humanities, is often about conforming to the ideas of your professor in return for a good grade (and even then it can be a hit or miss). I have had a few professors who are truly amazing human beings and encourage you to explore ideas on your own, challenge them, and expand your intellectual horizons overall. But these professors are few in number. The only one I had like that in recent years just retired and it made me feel sad. If you're going to study something in university I would suggest strongly considering your options and evaluating what you want to do career wise. Want to become a professor of literature for example? Then by all means major in English lit. But don't expect to be given free rein over your writing unless you are willing to be take a negative grade. Academia is a fucking joke nowadays.

[Anonymous No.15576656]

>>15574174
No, you're conflating the two categories much more than I did. My own viewpoints aren't the issue: the established scholarship on the writers I'm teaching is an ongoing conversation, whether left or right in its leaning, and it's usually based on many scholars' research. I don't care what my students' political views are, and I generally don't wish to hear about them. For undergraduate students, arguing within the generally-accepted range of interpretation may seem unoriginal, but since 99% of them know nothing about the author and are not going to do any research of primary sources, they should be wary of arguing against the experts too blithely, or getting too far over their heads. When they rush in where angels fear to tread, I'm the poor sap who has to read sweeping generalizations about entire movements, decades, or cultures they are wildly ignorant of. For the most part, politics don't need to enter into papers I have assigned at all, so if I am being presented with a dose of the students' political/social/religious/cultural idiosyncratic viewpoints, it usually means they're writing a very poor paper and not following instructions. The Poe examples I gave, for instance, had nothing to do with political leanings, but some were shakier than others and would be much harder to prove. When a student starts using "I" statements, or telling me their opinion on an author's views, I cross those passages out and tell them stop wasting my time. This just happens more often with notably conservative students.

[Anonymous No.15576685]

>>15570498

teach college here
I like opposing viewpoints unless you're an asshole about it
the ass lickers are more pathetic than the hotheads
still try to be fair

[Anonymous No.15576914]

>>15576656
you were the one who put the right-left dichotomy in their ideas. this suggest is a useful dichotomy for you.

[Anonymous No.15576957]

>>15573548
Can confirm this. Vast majority of the time when a student senses they're saying something controversial or unpopular or politically charged they do what >>15572437 says and act like a martyr before they even get into their argument. Usually it's the students who don't understand how to make an argument, which is understandable. If you don't know how to argue, you won't be able to separate being sassy about your personal opinions from stating your case neutrally.

I've experienced this mostly with SJW students who think being sassy or "brave" about something is enough to get me to write "Hell yeah, sister!" on their paper and give them an A+ immediately.

[Anonymous No.15577067]

>>15576957
i think you understimate the horde mentality. which resemble pretty much what you feel when somebody is saying something controversial, specially if is controversial in its roots. the horde simply dismiss it like it not exist the argument.

>from stating your case neutrally.
there is not neutrality in ideas.

[Anonymous No.15577172]

>>15570498
I'm a big fan of seeing what I can say in class. So I'll do my best.

>philosophy
Not so much with philosophy. I personally have never met a professor that wouldn't let you argue a point, even as a devil's advocate. They'll certainly get angry if you make stupid arguments based on ignoring material they posted or explained. There's a distinction from material you're learning and learning how to argue.
>English
This one depends. My 101 and 102 teachers were great and let us all speak our minds, within reason. But those ones see all kinds of people. Later English classes are way more totalitarian like that, and filled with stranger people. The only other courses I took to the end were in creative writing, and I enjoyed those. I dropped anything I thought I'd hate.
>social sciences
This one is harder, because on paper, there are some objective standards in the social sciences. A small pool of their principles are based on scientific, at least empirical, observation.
Anthropology, for example, is built from research, and unlike other social sciences, accepts that it is qualitative and there's a great deal of the field that isn't scientific like the sciences. It accepts it's not using the same methods. But on the other hand, they're the most prone to being totalitarian in how you think about things like race, to which I've seen many of them contradict themselves. The psych professors I've heard about tend to be every bad stereotype.
I have talked to a working anthropologist professor who agreed with many points you could find on /pol/. For example, she thought modern architecture was inherently flawed, and even pointed to studies she read on how greenery and beautiful architecture could improve the psychological well-being of a community, and even measurably have reduced crime.

On grades: many colleges actually have some rules in place on how grading works. Some places have a set curriculum, and if the student gets good grades on assignments, but the instructor D's or F's them anyway because fuck them, the instructor could get into trouble. But that'll vary based on your college and state's system of higher education.

[Anonymous No.15577365]

>>15570498
>Do you think many professors give you a lower grade if you try to argue an idea they don't like?
That depends on the professor. I've argued directly against my main advisor on multiple occasions, and he's even yelled at me, but we are still on very good terms. Others may not be as forgiving.
>Do you ever try to please the professor's views so that you can get a better grade?
No. I would rather shoot myself than do such a thing.

[Anonymous No.15577684]

>>15572119
excellent post

[Anonymous No.15577788]

>>15572533
>computer science
>working in IT
i will never understand why 70% of people seem unable to distinguish a STEM bachelors degree from a community college IT certification

[Anonymous No.15577839]

>>15572598
The difference is that the dominant culture has become critical theory, which was used as a way of deconstructing the old structure.
So the ways to promote oneself into this hierarchical "critical culture" today is to critique more and more, and to deconstruct more and more things we view as normal.
If you critique, you climb the social ladder, you are rewarded, and that's been around since the 1970s.
That's why we're entering a new age of destruction in social sciences with virtue signaling to the point of absurdity.

[Anonymous No.15578256]

>>15570498
Honestly, their classes prepare you a lot for office politics and dealing with our chimp hierarchy, not necessarily physical reality and invention.

[Anonymous No.15578358]

Happened to me. My marks ranged from A’s to C’s. Learn your crowd and don’t be stupid, it’s part of the reason my gpa wasn’t too great.

[Anonymous No.15580007]

>>15575110
>Maybe you are a dumbass
I'm not even at university ESA fuck. I simply asked a question.

[Anonymous No.15580182]

>>15570505

[Anonymous No.15580371]

>>15576957
I've had some annoying left-wingers too, absolutely. Making them read Nabokov or Lovecraft helps get them indignant, but even older feminist works that don't go far enough can trigger them. Still, their papers are usually a bit more competent than the Trump youth types, in my experience. The worst papers, of course, come from exchange students who should never have been allowed into the program. I know my worst students from China, etc. are cash cows and just have to survive their one mandatory English course to get their STEM degree, but their work is unspeakable, and they understand nothing in lectures.

[Anonymous No.15580441]

>>15570498
I just had a cup of light roast coffee, AMA.

[Anonymous No.15582363]

>>15572914
One of my friends at university is literally under investigation for saying globohomo during a society event.