philosophy meta-forum

Oxford

Lorenzo

21 day(s) ago

"It is about defending one's own cultural and intellectual heritage. There is no problem with teaching other stuff (although I do not think of Islam as a "religion" but as a death cult), but you have to stick to your strengths and defend your base."

I'm sure there might be other reasons for insisting that second and/or third year students take courses on Christian theology, but this one strikes me as very poor. You can get any number of degrees at Oxford already where you don't engage with the cultural or intellectual heritage you have in mind. (Chemistry?) And I can't think of any reason to think that the university should be concerned with defending cultural or intellectual heritage as opposed to, say, providing a place for teaching and research. Insisting that such teaching and research will, inter alia, help to defend some heritage seems to conflict with the core mission of any respectable university. (Oxford isn't Biola.)

Proclus

21 day(s) ago

I hope Trump's NcNugget and ketchup flavored semen is to your liking.

What a pathetic little bugman you are. Hateful, resentful, whiny, unable to handle conflict and disagreement without running to the nearest authority figure. It's quite sad.

Uku

Uku

21 day(s) ago

This is the future you imagine for us, nothing but sex-obsessed vulgarity. Why not try to be a better person?

Your ideology hates everything good and beautiful and it has warped your soul.

Charles

21 day(s) ago

And Trump's semen has stained your teeth.

This is the future you imagine for us, nothing but sex-obsessed vulgarity. Why not try to be a better person?

Your ideology hates everything good and beautiful and it has warped your soul.

Uku

Edvard

21 day(s) ago

Hello, Lorenzo. It used to be possible for Theology students to specialise in the way you suggest earlier in the thread before the most recent syllabus change; the new syllabus does not really offer more papers in, say, Islamic doctrine than it did before. The real problem seems to me to be that the Oxford Theology faculty is set up for one thing (they have many excellent scholars in, for example, NT and Christian Doctrine), but is offering something else (a pick-anything-you-like smorgasbord) - the net result will be, for the time being at least, that a lot of excellent tutors will not be teaching anyone, and the few teachers of 'fashionable' subjects will be hopelessly overwhelmed. There's also been a move towards more 'trendy', politically-orientated papers ('gender+x' and what have you), which are clearly one individual's hobbyhorse that no one else wants to teach. Oxford does have particularly good resources for teaching papers on Christian history and doctrine due to the historical contingencies of its library holdings and museums, and the UK Theology scene from which it draws a lot if its scholars is still predominantly Christian, so it does seem to make some sense for it to retain certain strengths in that area.

Philippa

20 day(s) ago

Hi Edvard,

Interesting. This problem, which I don't take to be trivial, differs pretty significantly from any consideration about heritage, but maybe that's a good thing. My main concern with this, though, is that the rationale for not changing the design of the degree seems to be that despite the interests of the students, students should be made to take courses in areas that don't particularly interest them so that the workload can be distributed more fairly across the faculty. I think that's a weird rationale for requiring theology students with interests in their 'trendy' areas (or areas outside of Christian theology) to take courses in Christian theology. In essence, the idea is that you'd use the rules and regulations to keep people in unpopular areas busy. I don't see how this serves the students particular well. (If the numbers for Sanskrit start to flag, should we make the students studying physics take a course or two?) And if the issue is just about the mismatch between the areas of student interest and teaching strength, why the initial outrage? Our department, in my view, has too many philosophers of language. I don't think the solution to this is to require all students to learn more about Grice or attitude ascriptions to keep the numbers up in unpopular courses.

Anyway, that's my initial reaction. I'm sure I'll have to change my view eventually.

Lorenzo

Eduard

20 day(s) ago

Theology has lower entrance requirements, attracting students of lower ability, making room for SJWs. That is also why thia bullshit generally does not fly in the sciences.


Allowed tags: 'p', 'b', 'em', 'blockquote'. URLs are automatically linkified.
posts per page.