Let's re-evaluate Arts

Dave!

Oh Sangre...... you loveable minx, you!

GusherING

I find it interesting that you don't want to chop Latin. I actually did Latin for the first semester of first year but then changed to Greek and Roman as they moved way too fast through the course for somebody with only Junior Cert Latin!

When I did Latin though, there were about 9 people in the class, 2 of us were Arst students, the rest of us were doing MA's in Classics. If I had to pick a subject to cutback it would probably be Latin, but tbh, you wouldn't save much money by doing so!

tintinr35

Sangre wrote:

No cutbacks please! If there weren't people doing subjects like History of Art then how could I feel superior?

enjoy it cause the "feeling" of superiority is all u will ever have!!!

bluepencilcase

hrmph... after studying a wee bit of philosophy I came to realise that it is something which both matters not at all but also, in a way, is the only thing that matters. I've always thought that at least a year's worth should be compulsory in schools: philosophy breeds civilization and we could do with a bit of that.

and also: To each his/her own: that's what makes arts geat- there aren't paths laid down but new tracks to be beaten, and i for one love that fact.

beanyb

Firespinner wrote:

and finally we come to the trickiest subject to judge - Philosophy. As a subject over the ages it has spawned many other now cherished fields of study such as Economics, Politics, Sociology and even Mathematics. For this it deserves respect. But, its children have outgrown it and no longer nurse on't. Has it got any other fields in the metaphorical womb? No. It has given all it can to society. All that is left now is random thoughts, worded to sound profound, telling us nothing. It has become a hollow science, all meaning long since stripped from it. It is one of the oldest disciplines, but it has been exhausted. It is with great regret that I must Cap it.

As part of our 1st year history course last year we did a course on the 12th century renaissance. Before this renaissance and the ones that came later most scholars believed that they had discovered all that was there to be discovered. Can you imagine what the world would be like if new philosophers had not challenged this view, which is fairly similar to the view you yourself are now expressing? They did not see the possibility of someone like Marx emerging and having such a huge impact on the world. You're defence of history was that we need to recognise where we came from. Well recognise the arrogance of the past, and please do not go down the same road.

hullaballoo

pretty*monster wrote:

Can a mod add 'First years don't know everything about everything and thankfully the liberal arts can survive their disdain' as a option please

You're the boss.

humbert

I think Firespinner assessed each of the courses well and fairly, however I don't know how much funds resources are put into exch at the moment so couldn't really comment of whether or not they should be cut back. Also I think that the diversity adds to the arts course and I'd hate to see courses being cut back based on their practical worth.

Blowfish

hullaballoo wrote:

You're the boss.

Oh good, I can vote now!

Chinafoot

humbert wrote:

I think Firespinner assessed each of the courses well and fairly

Can't say I agree tbh. I've spent 3 years in Arts and I wouldn't even attempt to evaluate a subject that I have never experienced myself, nevermind trying to do so after my first year.
You'll notice that economics was deemed the most important - what a coincidence that economics is one of firespinner's subjects.

Personally I think it's a pointless thread. You can't expect people to make a choice on what they would cut back on when a lot of people here will have no experience with the subjects in the poll. It's like having an attitude of "Ah philosophy, that sounds a bit wánky. Cut back on that.", while you have never even sat in one philosophy lecture.

For me Arts comes to down to what you are interested in and expanding on that knowledge. It's a kind of personal development degree in a way. Yea it might not land you a career like commerce will, but the qualification will still stand to you regardless.

There should be more funding, not cut-backs.

humbert

peachypants wrote:

There should be more funding, not cut-backs.

Well I certainly agree with that, I was particularly imperssed with his assessment of philosophy, though I missed the bit where he described it as a bit wanky:) I would be surprised if firespinner didn't take the course he deemed to be one of the most important tbh.

Chinafoot

humbert wrote:

Well I certainly agree with that, I was particularly imperssed with his assessment of philosophy, though I missed the bit where he described it as a bit wanky:) I would be surprised if firespinner didn't take the course he deemed to be one of the most important tbh.

Oh I agree...however I don't think you can try an appear to be giving a fair assessment of other subjects when you have only spent a year in the Arts course and haven't experienced them.

Also it could be a case that he has deemed economics as most important because he takes it, not the other way around.

*shrug*

Rnger

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

Ah the arrogance of youth...

What I was going to say but in a far more civilised manner. Less ***'s needed...

blondie83

Sangre wrote:

No cutbacks please! If there weren't people doing subjects like History of Art then how could I feel superior?

Ah Sangre your the best!

But on a more serious note

Peachypants wrote:

Ah you see this is the fundamental difference between you and I firespinner...I would never, ever consider knowledge of a subject to be "useless" simply because I don't plan to have a career in it.

Thats exactly it. Knowledge is knowledge and stays with you whether you plan to make a career out of it or not. I'm an engineer, but that diesn't stop me from reading poetry I like, or learning about archeology and celtic civilisation in my spare time (both topics I'm very interested in). The idea that such subjects should be cut because they're not "practical" or we don't need that many archeologists is ridiculous! It's analogous to say a community centre only offering writing courses to those people that are good enough to become writers, and refusing to allow in everyone else who wants to do it because they enjoy it

Hermione*

I think peachy and pretty*monster put it best for me. Arts is about expanding your knowledge and awraeness of a subject, purely for the benefits of that knowledge. For me, it has a lot to do with learning for the sake of learning (and of course, to pass exams ). I took history simply because I've loved the subject since primary school. It's all I've ever really wanted to do.

As peachy said, it's about personal development, not the commercial realisation of your knowledge after you graduate.

anonymous_joe

Bear in mind that Firespinner's attempting to be vaguely objective. One could argue that philosophy's a useless crock of sh1t if one was so inclined... (I'm not of course but let's not digress...)

I mean, what is a useless subject? Personally, I don't see any knowledge as inherently useless, and wouldn't ever argue in favour of the abandonment of branch of knowledge.

As far as I'm concerned, the arts degree is of great importance to UCD. Almost all of its bad reputation stems from the 'Orts' thing, as well as the fact that a lot of people had it as a back-up (myself included) and a lot of arts students are people who didn't get the course they wanted. Ignore that sh1te, and you'll notice that arts is a challenging degree, has plenty of interesting subjects and is important in maintaining the cultural wealth of this country.

Oh and, what would you rather talk about, philosophy, or quantitative analysis for business?

humbert

anonymous_joe wrote:

Oh and, what would you rather talk about, philosophy, or quantitative analysis for business?

On one occasion in the not too distant past I've had to endure a first year philosophy student, I'd rather have talked about pulling my teeth out witha pair of plyers tbh, but that's not the point. I'm not going to repeat what firespinner said and don't think I could say it better myself. I'm not suggesting it should be cut just that it's not of much practical worth any longer. I repeat I'm not suggesting that this disqualifys it as worth studying out of interest.

Hermione*

anonymous_joe wrote:

As far as I'm concerned, the arts degree is of great importance to UCD. Almost all of its bad reputation stems from the 'Orts' thing, as well as the fact that a lot of people had it as a back-up (myself included) and a lot of arts students are people who didn't get the course they wanted.

I really wanted arts. All my cao choices were either history or politics or both.
I turned down my parents offer to pay whatever it cost for science or comp sci or anything more employment friendly. I put it to Dad that I only really enjoyed history, so what was the point of a degree I didn't enjoy. He saw my way of thinking after a while.

anonymous_joe

humbert wrote:

On one occasion in the not too distant past I've had to endure a first year philosophy student, I'd rather have talked about pulling my teeth out witha pair of plyers tbh, but that's not the point. I'm not going to repeat what firespinner said and don't think I could say it better myself. I'm not suggesting it should be cut just that it's not of much practical worth any longer. I repeat I'm not suggesting that this disqualifys it as worth studying out of interest.

I'd still rather that than Quants... /Shudder

pretty*monster

humbert wrote:

Well I certainly agree with that, I was particularly imperssed with his assessment of philosophy, though I missed the bit where he described it as a bit wanky:)

Firespinners treatment of philosophy was an opinion, not an assessment. An uninformed opinion at that.

hullaballoo

I don't know, I have had fairly good chats with philosophy students. Some of them take the wrong stuff out of it, and that can be depressing, but others view things differently, and that can be quite enlightening.

Aside from philosophy, I would contend that rather than cutting back on what some people have termed the "useless" subjects, they should expand the courses that are offered, both in terms of range and depth.

I'd like to see more courses being offered in more specific areas. I think a degree in diplomacy would be a very handy thing to have - the doors that would open up to graduates would be almost innumerable.

In addition, the subjects are taught in a very shallow way at the moment, and I think that deepening these should be a priority.

Education is not just about preparing yourself for a career for some people. Sometimes, people just want to learn. I would fully advocate that.

Hermione*

hullaballoo wrote:

I'd like to see more courses being offered in more specific areas. I think a degree in diplomacy would be a very handy thing to have - the doors that would open up to graduates would be almost innumerable.

Education is not just about preparing yourself for a career for some people. Sometimes, people just want to learn. I would fully advocate that.

Word to that hulla

A diplomacy degree would be great, especially since I've already reserched the diplomatic corps as a creer. UCC introduced a degree a few years ago in government and public service/ studies that I applied for.

Blowfish

Hermione* wrote:

I really wanted arts. All my cao choices were either history or politics or both.
I turned down my parents offer to pay whatever it cost for science or comp sci or anything more employment friendly. I put it to Dad that I only really enjoyed history, so what was the point of a degree I didn't enjoy. He saw my way of thinking after a while.

tbh, I have no respect for people who do pick a course simply because it would be a good career oportunity. I've met a few of them and had a few in my course, and they are always the first to complain about how crap the course is and how much of a waste of time college is. People should pick courses that they enjoy learning about. If you don't, you will never enjoy college at all, so well played Hermione*:)

Hermione*

Blowfish wrote:

tbh, I have no respect for people who do pick a course simply because it would be a good career oportunity. I've met a few of them and had a few in my course, and they are always the first to complain about how crap the course is and how much of a waste of time college is. People should pick courses that they enjoy learning about. If you don't, you will never enjoy college at all, so well played Hermione*:)

Thank you! You've just made me smile My sis killed herself to get the points for her dream course -law - and it really pissed me off that people thought she'd done so much 'better' than me. Admittedly she got 100 points more than I did, but we both really wanted our respective courses and got them. Her course just had less places than mine.

humbert

pretty*monster wrote:

Firespinners treatment of philosophy was an opinion, not an assessment. An uninformed opinion at that.

pedantic much?:)

Chinafoot

humbert wrote:

pedantic much?:)

It's a fair point though. How can you assess something without actually experiencing it fully?

I do history and english but could only give an assessment of my areas of the course. I didn't do American Modernism this year, I did 19th century literature and for me to pass comment on the former would be, like pretty*monster said, an opinion and an uninformed one at that.

Meh.

humbert

I didn't really want to get into this but he assessed it on the knowledge he has of it, on this his opnion was founded. It's very easy to criticise him on the grounds that his knowledge is lacking but not very constructive. It would be more constructive to state whether you agree or disagree and why!

Chinafoot

Which pretty much everyone has done. A lot of people didn't want to vote (until the extra option was added) because you can't expect people to make decisions about courses they know nothing about. They have voiced their disagreement and said why they disagreed and why they wouldn't be voting for a subject to be cut-back.

This thread is going a bit off-topic. I reiterate my previous opinion...Meh.

snickerpuss

Although i do think that no arts subjects need to be cut back, since theres no good reason to and some, like welsh have only 2 people in first year to begin with so thats clearly unneccesary (and also celtic civ is for firsties only afaik)

But i do have to put in a word for history of art: I don't think UCD would cut this back, not cos its valuable and good for society etc etc but becuase we get bucketloads of American/European JYA students and i bet that gets a whole lot of money for UCD.
Seriously i think they outnumber the Irish students.

EDIT: Also they seem to be adding more and more bizarre subjects, you think philosophy is useless? They just added candian studies, irish studies and film studies! So me thinks they're not planning on purging the arts of seemingly "useless subjects"

Crash

If i might just point out - it might be interesting to take a step back from Firespinners first possibly inflammatory post and look at the actual question. I know myself from looking at some of the funding things for trinity under the new plan that certain arts area's are going to be hit very very badly, especially languages, and I do hate that idea, so so much.

But it is interesting to think which area's you would cut back on, or rather how you would change certain area's to make them more viable?

Its a very interesting and very worrying idea (at the mo i have no faith in the members of college who would be the decision makers at the moment )

anonymous_joe

snickerpuss wrote:

Although i do think that no arts subjects need to be cut back, since theres no good reason to and some, like welsh have only 2 people in first year to begin with so thats clearly unneccesary (and also celtic civ is for firsties only afaik)

But i do have to put in a word for history of art: I don't think UCD would cut this back, not cos its valuable and good for society etc etc but becuase we get bucketloads of American/European JYA students and i bet that gets a whole lot of money for UCD.
Seriously i think they outnumber the Irish students.

EDIT: Also they seem to be adding more and more bizarre subjects, you think philosophy is useless? They just added candian studies, irish studies and film studies! So me thinks they're not planning on purging the arts of seemingly "useless subjects"

Does anyone know what that actually entails?

Oh and crash, seen as Trinity has some of the most renowned language departments in the world, that's not a shame, it's a ****ing disgrace.