Oxymorons and foreknowledge of exam topics

You're right.

Every year, for the Master of Wine exams (a two word syllabus - 'know everything') many of the students prepare a spreadsheet showing the frequency of the appearance of such 'nasty' topics as filtration, yeast strains, HACCP quality control and bizarre vine diseases, in previous years' exams. Then they decide 'what is likely to come up'.

Such prophesies are - rightly - doomed to failure. If a particular subject keeps on cropping up, it's because it's important, not an indication of 'done to death, so less likely this year' These people are usually the ones who fail, having spent too much time trying to double-guess examiners and not enough time learning stuff.

The term social science is not an oxymoron. It's just an insult thrown around by people who believe their own subject to be of more import than that studied by other. If they actually bothered to read some social science they might gain some insight as to why they behave that way!

The practice of hints being given is hardly new and has existed for as long as I can remember. It varied in it's intent and its accuracy. I didn't condone it then and I don't do so now. That doesn't necessarily make it wrong.

quote:

The term social science is not an oxymoron. It's just an insult thrown around by people who believe their own subject to be of more import than that studied by other. If they actually bothered to read some social science they might gain some insight as to why they behave that way!

The practice of hints being given is hardly new and has existed for as long as I can remember. It varied in it's intent and its accuracy. I didn't condone it then and I don't do so now. That doesn't necessarily make it wrong.

Lighten up a bit. I am not denigrating Social Science as a subject, although I wonder just how much Hard Science is involved. The intent was to provoke posting of other oxymorons for (hopefully) general amusement.

In my own speciality (Anaesthetics), we often said that "empathic surgeon" (or something similar in meaning) was an oxymoron - and I've even said that to surgical colleagues with no offence being taken, and equally scurrilous remarks being made back - all part of friendly banter, and we both had respect for each others' special knowledge/experience. The one I liked best was when one of our Ortopaedic Surgeons (now also retired) told me he had an afternoon free, and would I "teach him all about anaesthetics"? My reply was yes, but what would I do with the other 3 hours!

My (original) point is that suggesting likely exam questions tends to discourage students from reading the rest of the syllabus. My nephew, alas, is one of those ardent left-wing young men who fail to see that anyone else's opinion might have some validity. I argue with him often, as my own politics are quite different from his, and it always seems that I am far more willing to accept he might be right on some points than he will accept my views. Probably a feature of his youth. It can be fun baiting him, though.

I would agree with Mike he that "Social Science" isn't an oxymoron. The topics studied in Social Science (perhaps more than some others) need a rigorous and "scientific" approach. The subjects are often inherently polluted with personal experience and prejudices. It is only through studying these things in a professional and systematic manner than any sense can be made of them. It is science. "Gut-feel' and intuition make us all think we already know the answers - not a good place to be. Hell, some if us think we know the answers to things in fields in which we have no experience at all (nuclear power, anybody?). How arrogant will we be, and therefore likely to be prejudiced in the areas covered by the social sciences?

No, the social sciences are real and worthwhile fields. Like all areas of academia, there is great, good, average, poor and atrocious work undertaken.

(Dr John, now I'll lighten up a bit too)

quote:

My nephew, alas, is one of those ardent left-wing young men who fail to see that anyone else's opinion might have some validity.

It's so well known that right wingers are openminded then?????

...."ardent young man" .... would have been sufficient, I think.

quote:

It's so well known that right wingers are openminded then?????

...."ardent young man" .... would have been sufficient, I think.

I could have made exactly the same comment about left wingers, but ...

I have friends and relatives who span the political spectrum. I suspect that political beliefs follow the usual bell-shaped curve, and that I am a small amount to the right of the central peak. Of course, there are those on both sides who are at the extremes. Some of my own prejudices/beliefs/attitudes would probably be considered left wing, others right wing. For instance, I'm an atheist, and believe that uncontrolled immigration is a potentially disastrous thing. One of those tends to be associated with the left, and the other with the right.

The left-wing bit was purely to show which side of the argument my nephew and I are usually on. I think I may have ruffled a few feathers here, but too many people who are not to the left of centre seem afraid to give any opinion for fear of offending.

Right wing does not mean "Christian zealot who hates all foreigners" as so often seems to be the concensus view. I hate stereotypes, though I suppose I am as guilty as most of occasionally using them.

Is Socialist Workers an oxymoron?

quote:

am not denigrating Social Science as a subject, although I wonder just how much Hard Science is involved

Perhaps I should refine this a bit ...

I think of Hard Science as that where you look at data, formulate a theory, and then test that theory by experiment. By that strict definition, Paleontology/Evolution are probably not hard science either. For instance, it's difficult to see how you can test a political theory - how to you set up a control group and double-blind everybody? That is not to say that you can't make meaningful conclusions without those criteria, but just that they are probably less certain of being correct.

I have a feeling this may degenerate into a discussion of scientific/political theory - well away from my original thread idea, which was to criticise giving foreknowledge of examination topics, with perhaps an added bonus of additional oxymorons.

One oxymoron I enjoyed a couple of years ago was "live ghosts" seen on posters in relation to a tour of "haunted" sites.