<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This week has been hectic; so much work. And I still have a Physics test tomorrow, which I really need to study for. It has to do with waves, which doesn't seem to be complicated, but I just suck at sciences. Chemistry, Physics have all been terrible for me. I'm so grateful to have passed previous courses...but I don't think I'll get away with it this time.</div> Wow that's a class you shouldn't screw with. Don't mess with science and math unless you know you'll get a huge curve (which I did know beforehand in my biology classes so I slacked off and got away with it).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 13 2008, 09:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This week has been hectic; so much work. And I still have a Physics test tomorrow, which I really need to study for. It has to do with waves, which doesn't seem to be complicated, but I just suck at sciences. Chemistry, Physics have all been terrible for me. I'm so grateful to have passed previous courses...but I don't think I'll get away with it this time.</div> Wow that's a class you shouldn't screw with. Don't mess with science and math unless you know you'll get a huge curve (which I did know beforehand in my biology classes so I slacked off and got away with it). </div> My previous physics teacher passed me because....we're both Russian...I would assume. My current teacher isn't bad at all, but damn I just can't wrap my head around physics. It's crazy, and I really don't want to spend another semester doing this garbage.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 09:41 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 13 2008, 09:37 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 09:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This week has been hectic; so much work. And I still have a Physics test tomorrow, which I really need to study for. It has to do with waves, which doesn't seem to be complicated, but I just suck at sciences. Chemistry, Physics have all been terrible for me. I'm so grateful to have passed previous courses...but I don't think I'll get away with it this time.</div> Wow that's a class you shouldn't screw with. Don't mess with science and math unless you know you'll get a huge curve (which I did know beforehand in my biology classes so I slacked off and got away with it). </div> My previous physics teacher passed me because....we're both Russian...I would assume. My current teacher isn't bad at all, but damn I just can't wrap my head around physics. It's crazy, and I really don't want to spend another semester doing this garbage. </div> Well, depending on your major it's not really going to be garbage... Physics is also easier than Organic-Chemistry/Biochemistry/etc. Much less memorization.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 10:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This week has been hectic; so much work. And I still have a Physics test tomorrow, which I really need to study for. It has to do with waves, which doesn't seem to be complicated, but I just suck at sciences. Chemistry, Physics have all been terrible for me. I'm so grateful to have passed previous courses...but I don't think I'll get away with it this time.</div> I thought Physics was awesome last year. Then, this year I decided to take the AP course to get the credits, and a day hasn't gone by that I haven't regretted that choice. I now hate this field of science. It's not that it's hard, just very, very annoying. Too much work for a senior with only 20 days of class left.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (JCB @ Mar 13 2008, 09:44 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 10:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>This week has been hectic; so much work. And I still have a Physics test tomorrow, which I really need to study for. It has to do with waves, which doesn't seem to be complicated, but I just suck at sciences. Chemistry, Physics have all been terrible for me. I'm so grateful to have passed previous courses...but I don't think I'll get away with it this time.</div> I thought Physics was awesome last year. Then, this year I decided to take the AP course to get the credits, and a day hasn't gone by that I haven't regretted that choice. I now hate this field of science. </div> Ah yes I made that same mistake my senior year in High School. The problem is that they try to cram more than just Physics 1 into those courses or prepare you for a 4.0 career at MIT or something. That doesn't exactly reflect how that course is really taught in College.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Well, depending on your major it's not really going to be garbage...</div> It's garbage. Agree with me! <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I thought Physics was awesome last year. Then, this year I decided to take the AP course to get the credits, and a day hasn't gone by that I haven't regretted that choice. I now hate this field of science. It's not that it's hard, just very, very annoying. Too much work for a senior with only 20 days of class left.</div> For the most part, lucky you. I excel in history and english, but math and science is terrible for me. I would love to be able to balance these subjects better.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Well, depending on your major it's not really going to be garbage...</div> It's garbage. Agree with me! <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I thought Physics was awesome last year. Then, this year I decided to take the AP course to get the credits, and a day hasn't gone by that I haven't regretted that choice. I now hate this field of science. It's not that it's hard, just very, very annoying. Too much work for a senior with only 20 days of class left.</div> For the most part, lucky you. I'm not a math or science kind of guy. I excel in history and english; I wish I had more balance though. </div> Ah you're a history major (I assume...), that explains a lot. **** Physics then, don't worry about it. I thought you were an engineer or something, lol. :]
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 13 2008, 09:49 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (The Joker @ Mar 13 2008, 09:48 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>Well, depending on your major it's not really going to be garbage...</div> It's garbage. Agree with me! <div class='quotetop'>QUOTE </div><div class='quotemain'>I thought Physics was awesome last year. Then, this year I decided to take the AP course to get the credits, and a day hasn't gone by that I haven't regretted that choice. I now hate this field of science. It's not that it's hard, just very, very annoying. Too much work for a senior with only 20 days of class left.</div> For the most part, lucky you. I'm not a math or science kind of guy. I excel in history and english; I wish I had more balance though. </div> Ah you're a history major, that explains a lot. **** Physics then, don't worry about it. I thought you were an engineer or something, lol. :] </div> My mom is a history person, while my dad is more of math guy. ****. Either way, I have to pass physics. There's really no way around it.
Haha, I got an 83 on my SS Works referenced. It's worth 20% of our marking period. I can still pull an A- :/ And I've finally been able to reach an A+ in Algebra II ^-^ (Getting stuck at 96.4 two quarters in a row sucks).
I'm so frustrated with this "Politics & Morality" course I'm taking. I mean, I'm doing good in it (at 80% right now and I aced the last test). But the content of the course and the professor just annoy the hell out of me. First of all, who decides to teach a political theory class with Shakespeare? It's such a stretch. I suppose you could extract some topics from his plays (we're studying 'Othello,' 'Julius Caesar.' and 'Macbeth') and make connections to actual political philosophers, but this one's basically been an English course disguised as a Poli-Sci/Phil course. She makes no attempt to make those connections and spends the entire time giving her interpretation of the text (her lectures consist of rhetorical question after rhetorical question). The professor is just ridiculous. Aside from the way she's formatted her course, she's unbelievably arrogant in regards to her own interpretation of the the plays. I don't know how you can assume that your interpretations are infallible if they agree with and contradict existing scholarly opinions so arbitrarily. She'll "prove" her own opinions by referring to secondary sources (essays by Harold Bloom, Jan Blits, etc.), but when she contradicts them or someone raises a legitimate objection, she dismisses them, usually by mentioning some evidence that she doesn't bother to actually show us. That just leads into how intolerant she is of other opinions. Aside from warning us about how hard it is to prove our own independent opinions in essays/tests (ie: regurgitate what I lectured or fail), she's actually given people lower participating marks because they consistently disagree with her. I have no idea how she got a job as a UofT professor. /rant
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Mar 13 2008, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm so frustrated with this "Politics & Morality" course I'm taking. I mean, I'm doing good in it (at 80% right now and I aced the last test). But the content of the course and the professor just annoy the hell out of me. First of all, who decides to teach a political theory class with Shakespeare? It's such a stretch. I suppose you could extract some topics from his plays (we're studying 'Othello,' 'Julius Caesar.' and 'Macbeth') and make connections to actual political philosophers, but this one's basically been an English course disguised as a Poli-Sci/Phil course. She makes no attempt to make those connections and spends the entire time giving her interpretation of the text (her lectures consist of rhetorical question after rhetorical question). The professor is just ridiculous. Aside from the way she's formatted her course, she's unbelievably arrogant in regards to her own interpretation of the the plays. I don't know how you can assume that your interpretations are infallible if they agree with and contradict existing scholarly opinions so arbitrarily. She'll "prove" her own opinions by referring to secondary sources (essays by Harold Bloom, Jan Blits, etc.), but when she contradicts them or someone raises a legitimate objection, she dismisses them, usually by mentioning some evidence that she doesn't bother to actually show us. That just leads into how intolerant she is of other opinions. Aside from warning us about how hard it is to prove our own independent opinions in essays/tests (ie: regurgitate what I lectured or fail), she's actually given people lower participating marks because they consistently disagree with her. I have no idea how she got a job as a UofT professor. /rant</div> That actually sounds like a very interesting problem, do you have any specific examples to cite? Good rant either way.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Mar 13 2008, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm so frustrated with this "Politics & Morality" course I'm taking. I mean, I'm doing good in it (at 80% right now and I aced the last test). But the content of the course and the professor just annoy the hell out of me. First of all, who decides to teach a political theory class with Shakespeare? It's such a stretch. I suppose you could extract some topics from his plays (we're studying 'Othello,' 'Julius Caesar.' and 'Macbeth') and make connections to actual political philosophers, but this one's basically been an English course disguised as a Poli-Sci/Phil course. She makes no attempt to make those connections and spends the entire time giving her interpretation of the text (her lectures consist of rhetorical question after rhetorical question). The professor is just ridiculous. Aside from the way she's formatted her course, she's unbelievably arrogant in regards to her own interpretation of the the plays. I don't know how you can assume that your interpretations are infallible if they agree with and contradict existing scholarly opinions so arbitrarily. She'll "prove" her own opinions by referring to secondary sources (essays by Harold Bloom, Jan Blits, etc.), but when she contradicts them or someone raises a legitimate objection, she dismisses them, usually by mentioning some evidence that she doesn't bother to actually show us. That just leads into how intolerant she is of other opinions. Aside from warning us about how hard it is to prove our own independent opinions in essays/tests (ie: regurgitate what I lectured or fail), she's actually given people lower participating marks because they consistently disagree with her. I have no idea how she got a job as a UofT professor. /rant</div> If it is such a ridiculous class, then why did you choose it in the first place?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 13 2008, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Mar 13 2008, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm so frustrated with this "Politics & Morality" course I'm taking. I mean, I'm doing good in it (at 80% right now and I aced the last test). But the content of the course and the professor just annoy the hell out of me. First of all, who decides to teach a political theory class with Shakespeare? It's such a stretch. I suppose you could extract some topics from his plays (we're studying 'Othello,' 'Julius Caesar.' and 'Macbeth') and make connections to actual political philosophers, but this one's basically been an English course disguised as a Poli-Sci/Phil course. She makes no attempt to make those connections and spends the entire time giving her interpretation of the text (her lectures consist of rhetorical question after rhetorical question). The professor is just ridiculous. Aside from the way she's formatted her course, she's unbelievably arrogant in regards to her own interpretation of the the plays. I don't know how you can assume that your interpretations are infallible if they agree with and contradict existing scholarly opinions so arbitrarily. She'll "prove" her own opinions by referring to secondary sources (essays by Harold Bloom, Jan Blits, etc.), but when she contradicts them or someone raises a legitimate objection, she dismisses them, usually by mentioning some evidence that she doesn't bother to actually show us. That just leads into how intolerant she is of other opinions. Aside from warning us about how hard it is to prove our own independent opinions in essays/tests (ie: regurgitate what I lectured or fail), she's actually given people lower participating marks because they consistently disagree with her. I have no idea how she got a job as a UofT professor. /rant</div> If it is such a ridiculous class, then why did you choose it in the first place? </div> It's hard to tell what class is going to be wack or not, even with ratemyprofessor. Plus Chutney is scared of Math (yellar coward) and he's running out of Poli-Sci courses to take. He had no choice.
I've been depress as of lately, I think I need a girlfriend or a slap in the face to bring me back to reality.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bynumite @ Mar 13 2008, 11:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've been depress as of lately, I think I need a girlfriend or a slap in the face to bring me back to reality.</div> Reality.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bynumite @ Mar 13 2008, 10:30 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I've been depress as of lately, I think I need a girlfriend or a slap in the face to bring me back to reality.</div> Don't turn emo on me! Nah just playing. But why are you depressed? What happened?
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (huevonkiller @ Mar 13 2008, 10:15 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Mar 13 2008, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm so frustrated with this "Politics & Morality" course I'm taking. I mean, I'm doing good in it (at 80% right now and I aced the last test). But the content of the course and the professor just annoy the hell out of me. First of all, who decides to teach a political theory class with Shakespeare? It's such a stretch. I suppose you could extract some topics from his plays (we're studying 'Othello,' 'Julius Caesar.' and 'Macbeth') and make connections to actual political philosophers, but this one's basically been an English course disguised as a Poli-Sci/Phil course. She makes no attempt to make those connections and spends the entire time giving her interpretation of the text (her lectures consist of rhetorical question after rhetorical question). The professor is just ridiculous. Aside from the way she's formatted her course, she's unbelievably arrogant in regards to her own interpretation of the the plays. I don't know how you can assume that your interpretations are infallible if they agree with and contradict existing scholarly opinions so arbitrarily. She'll "prove" her own opinions by referring to secondary sources (essays by Harold Bloom, Jan Blits, etc.), but when she contradicts them or someone raises a legitimate objection, she dismisses them, usually by mentioning some evidence that she doesn't bother to actually show us. That just leads into how intolerant she is of other opinions. Aside from warning us about how hard it is to prove our own independent opinions in essays/tests (ie: regurgitate what I lectured or fail), she's actually given people lower participating marks because they consistently disagree with her. I have no idea how she got a job as a UofT professor. /rant</div> That actually sounds like a very interesting problem, do you have any specific examples to cite? Good rant either way. </div> Well we're just finishing 'Julius Caesar' right now. Not sure if you've read the play, but she's been arguing the entire time that Caesar was aware of the assassination plot the entire time and went along with it to cement his status as a mythical, god-like figure throughout history. There's nothing really wrong with that. It's a bit abstract, but there are some solid arguments for it and she backs it up by referring to an essay by Blits. But, at the same time she completely refutes an essay by Harold Bloom (she was all on his jock when we were reading 'Othello') and another essay by Blits off-hand, without even bothering to explain why. In fact, despite their relevance to the topic, she's relegated them to "recommended readings" hoping that no one would bother to read them and she wouldn't have to deal with questions about them. In our exam handout, she wrote that we could read those essays when we studied, but warned us that they're academic validity is questionable (Where's the explanation? These are two famous writers who have been published and you just dismiss them summarily like that?) This one dude argued that Antony's reaction to Caesar's dead body (he was surprised, overwhelmed with grief, eventually vengeful) seems to indicate that he was unaware of Caesar's plan to overthrow Republican Rome, and this in turn might mean that the following events are coincidence more than a delicate plan. She countered by stating that Antony was acting at the time and showing his deceptive side. That's it. No textual proof. Nothing at all. Today, she spent some time talking about how Cassius turns into a more sympathetic, likable character towards the end of the play. I felt that he showed some cowardice in that he wasn't even willing to commit suicide himself (he needed someone else to stab him) and his death was pretty embarrassing (he killed himself thinking one of his men was captured, but he was actually being congratulated by his own troops). She argued that his vulnerability made him more likeable, without really clarifying such a vague term. I'm not assuming I'm right, because I'm not very experienced with Shakespeare, but her response was pretty unsatisfying. Some girl got a C+ as her tentative participating mark, despite being the most vocal student in our class. The only explanation I can come up with is that she tends to butt heads with the prof a lot. There's more, but I fall asleep in that class a lot.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Brian @ Mar 13 2008, 10:23 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Mar 13 2008, 10:14 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>I'm so frustrated with this "Politics & Morality" course I'm taking. I mean, I'm doing good in it (at 80% right now and I aced the last test). But the content of the course and the professor just annoy the hell out of me. First of all, who decides to teach a political theory class with Shakespeare? It's such a stretch. I suppose you could extract some topics from his plays (we're studying 'Othello,' 'Julius Caesar.' and 'Macbeth') and make connections to actual political philosophers, but this one's basically been an English course disguised as a Poli-Sci/Phil course. She makes no attempt to make those connections and spends the entire time giving her interpretation of the text (her lectures consist of rhetorical question after rhetorical question). The professor is just ridiculous. Aside from the way she's formatted her course, she's unbelievably arrogant in regards to her own interpretation of the the plays. I don't know how you can assume that your interpretations are infallible if they agree with and contradict existing scholarly opinions so arbitrarily. She'll "prove" her own opinions by referring to secondary sources (essays by Harold Bloom, Jan Blits, etc.), but when she contradicts them or someone raises a legitimate objection, she dismisses them, usually by mentioning some evidence that she doesn't bother to actually show us. That just leads into how intolerant she is of other opinions. Aside from warning us about how hard it is to prove our own independent opinions in essays/tests (ie: regurgitate what I lectured or fail), she's actually given people lower participating marks because they consistently disagree with her. I have no idea how she got a job as a UofT professor. /rant</div> If it is such a ridiculous class, then why did you choose it in the first place? </div> Come on man, you're telling me you see "Politics and Morality" and automatically think of Shakespeare? That was a total curveball. I was expecting some Aristotle, Machiavelli, Rousseau, Hegel, etc. And the shitty professor was just bad luck. I don't have a flexible enough schedule to switch courses at this point, so I'm just sucking it up.
I don't know why but I've just been feeling kind of gloomy and sad...weird I need to go hit on some girls and play basketball tomorrow.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Chutney @ Mar 13 2008, 10:42 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}></div><div class='quotemain'>Well we're just finishing 'Julius Caesar' right now. Not sure if you've read the play, but she's been arguing the entire time that Caesar was aware of the assassination plot the entire time and went along with it to cement his status as a mythical, god-like figure throughout history. There's nothing really wrong with that. It's a bit abstract, but there are some solid arguments for it and she backs it up by referring to an essay by Blits. But, at the same time she completely refutes an essay by Harold Bloom (she was all on his jock when we were reading 'Othello') and another essay by Blits off-hand, without even bothering to explain why. In fact, despite their relevance to the topic, she's relegated them to "recommended readings" hoping that no one would bother to read them and she wouldn't have to deal with questions about them. In our exam handout, she wrote that we could read those essays when we studied, but warned us that they're academic validity is questionable (Where's the explanation? These are two famous writers who have been published and you just dismiss them summarily like that?) This one dude argued that Antony's reaction to Caesar's dead body (he was surprised, overwhelmed with grief, eventually vengeful) seems to indicate that he was unaware of Caesar's plan to overthrow Republican Rome, and this in turn might mean that the following events are coincidence more than a delicate plan. She countered by stating that Antony was acting at the time and showing his deceptive side. That's it. No textual proof. Nothing at all. Today, she spent some time talking about how Cassius turns into a more sympathetic, likable character towards the end of the play. I felt that he showed some cowardice in that he wasn't even willing to commit suicide himself (he needed someone else to stab him) and his death was pretty embarrassing (he killed himself thinking one of his men was captured, but he was actually being congratulated by his own troops). She argued that his vulnerability made him more likeable, without really clarifying such a vague term. I'm not assuming I'm right, because I'm not very experienced with Shakespeare, but her response was pretty unsatisfying. Some girl got a C+ as her tentative participating mark, despite being the most vocal student in our class. The only explanation I can come up with is that she tends to butt heads with the prof a lot. There's more, but I fall asleep in that class a lot.</div> Yes I am familiar with the story and I'm going to have to agree with Blit's pragmatism. Her thoughts on Antony seem especially egregious. It's terrible what some teachers do to students who disagree, props to you for getting away with sleeping.
