This exam actually seems to be pretty enjoyable to me. I do think that the grading of these are open to massive bias from the party evaluating them, so it makes them really impractical.
The examiner’s won’t be judging based on the answer itself but based on the quality of the argument. How the case is presented.The final answer doesn’t matter all that much. And experienced humanities professors usually can very well abstract from their own position on the topic. It’s more prone to bias and is harder to grade than say a mathematical exam, but it’s far from useless.
@@rkond That's a fair point. Maybe what stands out is just how little thought is put into the questions being presented. Makes a great exercise in creative writing.
Worst than merely 'impractical'.... Here's how the exams are probably be graded: Dons look at name on test. Dons look up that name on the web....search for photos. Dons pick whichever applicants look like they'd be the most fun to flirt with/sexually harass. Dons give passing grades to these applicants and write some nonsense about their essay being "far and away above the rest"
It’s essentially an examination with an obvious heavy bias to the Humanities so talent at exquisite wordsmithery under pressure is a major factor. Sure, you have to be smart and insanely well-read, across a range of disciplines, but what puts you above every other fearsome candidate who has done likewise, basically, comes down to style, and how the internal logic of your argument hangs together. When asked how he managed to win his own, one later professor confessed he did so prosaically by cramming an entire volume of Gibbon’s _”Decline and Fall…”_ daily, perfecting the style, then retuning back again, when he’d finished that magnum opus, and doing this process for a straight three months... Edward Gibbon was independently filthy rich so he could and literally sometimes did spend an entire week on perfecting a single sentence, hence his reputation for being the sine qua non of intelligent English writing. Being the most historically famed authority, since, on the fall of Rome, he never actually visited Italy, of course. Those were the days.
Exams are fun to write if there were no pressure to ace it and make it to the top 1%. There is a huge role that anxiety and nervousness plays in how one performs in high stakes examinations.
And, the time limit. Why are we expected to finish exams in a hour or two? Or 10? Especially for deep questions like these, there should be an allowance of at least 2 weeks to properly delve into everything. The purpose isn't to test the person's ability but just to see if they've grinded away looking into things enough to be very fast at things.
Yeah, watching these videos feels like going back to school but with a safety net, knowing I can just hit pause and the exams won't be able to give me a mental beatdown.
The All Souls dress code is seemingly not actually that strict, since it specifies it is not in sub fusc, which is the dress code all undergraduate exams in Oxford (black jacket, white shirt or blouse, black trousers or skirt, white or black bow tie, gown and mortarboard).
So it's essentially an admission application given in exam format? With no right or wrong answers, they would just select the 1 or 2 people they feel are the best fit for their program.
There are technically right or wrong answers. If you study epistemology, there are certain things you look out for in each essay prompt. You would then appraise it via an epistemological lens, and your justifications should be predicated on epistemic assumptions.
I imagine you can judge the quality of some essays. Questions such as whether the brain should be studied, you could discuss the limitations and time implications in increasing the human population. If the brain is studied, it can be better emulated electronically (AI) which can be produced at a faster rate than humans. Therefore studying the brain is useful in expanding the knowledge of humans as a species as technology can progress from being a calculator to an active thinker. Then you could look at counter arguments. So I'm sure there's some assessment in terms of essay technique, but probably a lot of subjective judgment on which ideas they like the most. Bit silly that personal preference can have such a monumental impact on someone's life both educationally and financially in my opinion. The questions are actually really interesting, I've realised by how much I'm waffling here haha
@@benextinction__144 I think the "does a robot have a gender" is quite a politically charged question but at the same time it has merit because you would have to argue why you think any non biological definitions of gender are invalid or vise versa. And I think it is possible to fairly judge the argument in terms of how sound the logic is, how well it analyses and contrasts opposing views, whether or not it answers the question it claims to and more. But I also think that there's a lot of potential for bias... i.e. "hmm yes I disagree with this and since I disagree it must be because their logic is wrong not because I have an emotional investment in the issue so I'm going to mark them down."
@@ooffoo5130 yeah definitely. The examiners probably find essays on certain topics more interesting just by personal preference. There'll be so much bias in the process. If its free to apply and you're someone who's interested in humanities and the perks it gives, it can't hurt to give it a go.
@@VivekYadav-ds8oz To that point: Is a crewmate really a crewmate if they have killed more people than the impostor by encouraging the group to vote out the wrong guy?
Basically, Oxbridge tests have always been about finding out if the candidate can think for themselves rather than regurgitate anything that's been spoon fed to them. Academic work isn't about just following process it's about being creative too. These types of questions were sometimes asked in a face-to-face interview and the counter position then taken by the interviewer to see how much the candidate had thought through their answers. If the candidate continued with a good argument then the interviewer knew that there was some potential.
While i agree , i feel as if there’s a lot of bias in the questions. For example england is known to be a very transphobic country, so i would be afraid to answer with pro trans ideas
Trust me, Oxbridge is *not* about thinking outside the box. They highly value conservative mainstream views and opinions. Approaching them with any ideas outside of their comfort zone more often than not just results in being dismissed. It's for exactly this reason I stopped working with them.
@@chipifarts No, this is a completely open examination. If you're asked about transgender-related topics, then you can certainly approach it with a pro-transgender attitude.
This seems like a very fun exam. I would love to take this. So many of these questions are the ones which I have thought about especially AI and robotics.
@@marioluigi9599 its an exam focused on the way you think and your intelectual potential, this is not highschool, were you can have great ideas but fail because you didnt cite your sources properly, even if thats still a part of the test im sure whoever corrects it looks for interesting ideas, rather than sources, after all most answers can be given without a source just from your own thought, and i doubt youd pass the exam if you just answered by quoting people and studies alone
All answers call for a good logical thinking. Based on reasonable thoughts. No real right or wrong answer. Only that which is most relevant to the question.
Yeah, this is mostly a test to see how you think. In the truest sense, an IQ test. That type of intellect can do amazing things regardless of the direction it's pointed (think da Vinci).
In fairness the subject papers are much much harder than the general papers. For example the maths one is not abstract and is more like the sorts of questions one might expect - not that far off some of the Olympiad type questions. I say that however as someone who wasn’t eligible to apply because you have to get specific grades on your undergraduate/some graduate degrees. Think you had to get a good 1st class anyway something way over my head
In my opinion, every question in this exam can be turned into a debate. So It should be solvable if one has training in debating and critical thinking + a good collection of information.
As a famous fictional scientist once said: "your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should". This exam seems to check exactly that.
Synchronicity. Five minutes before watching this fascinating video about the challenges of pursuing an advanced degree, I read an online news article about Manfred Steiner, a retired American hematologist, who just earned his PhD in physics at age 89. I thought about you while reading the article. My thought was something like: "Gosh! Toby has 65 more years to change her mind."
I would recommend checking out some Mathematics admissions test (MAT)/Physics Aptitude Test(PAT) from the University of Oxford or some Cambridge STEP Maths exams/past Mathematical tripos papers! They’re all considered quite hard and have some interesting questions!
@@emilyscloset2648 I guess it can feel that way but I'm sitting it later this year so I guess I'll find out but I really like the style of question and the fact u can choose which question types u do
This is an interesting exam and it seems to be pretty enjoyable for me. (I actually even know someone who teaches in Oxford.) This exam is about general knowledge and reasoning skills. And yes, the general knowledge needed for this exam would take years(!) of learning if you want to improve it significantly because it covers a very wide area of knowledge.
I’ve only started watching haven’t checked the description but even with the thumbnail pixilated can tell this is the _All Souls_ fellowship test… I have to wonder what Tibees would do in the very final examination, which traditionally whittles those successful, down to the last two actual fellowship recipients: _a cherry pie baked with the pips still in them…_ and what the applicant ends up doing with same during a formal Hall dinner. The prize - prosaically, not prestige - is basically having your doctorate totally paid for and one recipient usually remains in Oxford, to do their thesis, the other is free to research anywhere in the world… one example of the latter is T.E. Lawrence [of Arabia]. The most little know today is the major Eurosceptic MP, John Redwood (whose “Dr” is never mentioned). Anyone on any course which sits an examination at the university is eligible to try for this notorious test - so, actually, it’s phenomenally meritocratic; if you ignore the heavy Humanities bias of it all. Next week, the most impossibly arduous examination in the history of humanity, the final test for the ancient Chinese civil service. It had no time limit in which to write one’s answer and only one question: *”Tell me everything you know.”* 🤣
@Santosh Parvatikar …and the great prize of success many thousands of thousands were confined into little cells for a month to complete the examination were all ultimately competing for? _Getting their knackers lopped off!_ The discarded, ahem, gibblets, of the then eunuchs were traditionally pickled in a jar and placed on strings suspended from the rafters of a great hall… on the basis of how these officials advanced or fell from favour in the hierarchy of the Forbidden City, the jars containing their one-time intimates were elevated or lowered to the ground; compared to those of their colleagues. Funny old world.
@@michaeljames4904 Pretty much looks like where things are headed right now. Let's start assigning gender roles to robots and stop producing electricity 1/3 of the year. The intellectuals need to reclaim their manhood from the strings they willingly hung them on.
"Music came to a full stop with Brahms." (At last, a music-relaged topic.) At the time of Brahms' death, many composers might have agreed, because the structural techniques used to generate long-form compositions were losing favour and no alternatives were immediately obvious. In his work as a music critic, George Bernard Shaw ridiculed the premiere performances of many of Brahms' works, but recanted and apologised by the time of his death in the 1940s. This is one of those questions whose answer depends not just on who you are, but on when you're writing.
One could discuss the rapid rise and culmination of the genre of music aptly called Djent, which came in full stop with the publication of procedurally generated Djent of Martensson.
thank you, i very much enjoyed this! i am a comp.sci b.a. + phd in classics so i always enjoy scientists who can engage with humanities stuff well! (sean carroll is one i especially admire too). thank you!!
That is such a cool combination. What country did you do those degrees in? I feel like some countries are very restrictive with the paths you can take meaning you have to pick either STEM or the humanities.
Many thanks for producing this. Perhaps there should be an additional paper along the lines of "suggest 20 questions for next year's paper and provide a brief answer for each." Might save the college a bit of work?
Don't lose yourself to the nonsense. Most "philosophy" people put their attention on are the oppositions to perceived reality. We don't live in ancient Greece. We should be more critical of useless information.
@@thedogrunner You're correct about that. I am more into analytical philosophy because I learn a lot of conceptualization. Tho, many of stuffs are very still weird
@@sainathmanda5803 seriously , u are ridiculous , UpSC , jee and neet can be solved by studying hard but you can't answer some QuEsTion when they just ask "water" 😂 ps: I am indian
I feel like a lot of these questions are geared towards the bias of the examiners. In order to pass it, you have to really engage their interests and intrigue them. You certainly can't go against anything they disagree with. Otherwise you won't score very high. It's a test that finds a person that they would really enjoy working with for at least the next 7 years and hopefully will become a member of staff
maybe you can put something they disagree with after all as you said i have the feeling its more about intriguing them, what if instead of say, explain how to say, get rid of racism, you make a compelling point for it, and well thats hard because when you get in a high intelectual level racism is kinda impossible to defend, but thats the thing, i think they are looking for well thought answers, and if youre smart enough to go against the common opinion and still be convincing that would be intriguing at the very least, that said i wouldnt risk it with racism lol
@@aguspuig6615 Or you could demonstrate how language is used by elites to destroy civil societies. Cross reference the other lies like sexism, homophobia, islamaphobia, police brutality, dead beat dads, etc. Make a case for Good vs. Evil instead of arbitrary name calling to smear someone's image you disagree with...
@@thedogrunner The people that destroy civil society are toxic people who apparently wanna normalise prejudice and discrimination, saying that it's all lies. Clearly all these things go on. There's plenty of videos right here on TH-cam for examples on police brutality or anything else. Go have a look at it and then tell us like a muppet that it doesn't exist And what's this thing about dead beat dads? Are you one of them and upset at people pointing it out?
This would be a fun exercise for a philosophy professor to give their students. And then have them compare answers. I actually really like these questions
“does it matter if we are alone in the universe?” - I interpreted this as a question about self, and if relationships bring value to life or do they bring about a codependent absurdity
I would prefer to be alone in the universe than not. Read the Three Body Problem and you will understand my fears. But you have an interesting take on it that would definitely give you merit.
in the singapore A levels, there is a similar exam also called General Paper, and the format is quite similar to this, 12 questions of varying topics. but you are only expected to write 1 essay in 1 and a half hours.
Defend the indefensible. Well, most epistemologists agree that knowledge is "justified true belief". For knowledge to be justified it has to be part of a chain of justifications. My belief that the the Atlantic ocean is mostly water is justified by my sense perceptions (including books I've read, experiments I could do etc.), but I can doubt my senses (cartesian doubt). All knowledge of the physical world is a "leap of faith" in this sense. I could be a brain in a vat, or a character in an alien computer game. I can't defend the claim that the world as I perceive it exists independent of me, but it is practical to act as if it does.
You could argue all this. But this kind of examination reproves you if you miss to give credit or present sources for ALL the well known arguments you made. Also Indefensible is an axiological proposition, and so is the concept of argumentative defense. Stating Axiological non-cognition (or subjectivity) alone is enough to state an attack on anything as indefensible can have (as much) value as defense. ( I would credit Pyrrho).
@@HilbertXVI Not to present, specially dealing with Oxford, is asking for a plagiarism expulsion and lawsuit. This test is done by people already enrolled at the institution.
while reducing knowledge to justified true belief was the orthodoxy in the past, hardly any epistemologists have held onto the view since a famous paper by Edmund Gettier, published I think in the 60s. It's very short and very interesting and certainly worth a read. Nowadays, some important positions are the view that knowledge is justified true belief plus some other qualification (e.g. safety or sensitivity), or the view that knowledge ought not to be reduced to a kind of belief, but is rather primitive: the most general factive mental state ("knowledge - first" epistemology)
@@Overclocked3770K Yes, I know, but I could argue that additional premises counts as justification. To say that knowledge is 'justified true belief' is not completely accurate, but it is a useful charicature. It's 'true enough', as Wittgenstein might say.
@@jollyholly2851 The Oxford admission is a requirement many can't fulfil perhaps due to geographic and financial constraints and would appreciate a chance at a prize as such.
No, it's more like intelligence-walled. For sure, I do think Oxford is inaccesible in many ways, but it makes sense for an exam that has to be at their standard to be very, very hard, maybe even for students that are at almost degree-level. Besides, you only have to choose 3 subjects, not all 30, which is what a degree would actually make you capable of in the same amount of time. I agreee that the inaccessibility should be discussed, but the exam itself is not impossible!
Philosophy undergrad here. Yeah, a lot of these questions are really important in the field! And you have no idea how sophisticated that they can get. A lot of your answers are definitely not going to be intuitive. It's possible that sophisticated answers will correspond to intuition but a simple "ofcourse!" will never cut it! I encourage everyone who enjoys these questions to read some philosophy though! :) People spent entire careers on answering these questions. The only downside is that philosophy is very difficult to read sometimes. You'll know what I mean when you crack open some Wittgenstein on that private language question. God speed!
As an undergrad in philosophy have you noticed yet that the vast majority of philosophical thinking is ambiguous and open to your own interpretation, or just plain wrong in the understanding it attempts to impart?
@@thedogrunner From the stuff I've seen I can say that sometimes it is, especially when all ideas are considered together; it's difficult to say with certainty which one is true, especially the philosophy of ethics/religion. The philosophy of physics was less arbitrary. It's difficult to say that most of philosophy is how you describe because there are so many philosophies: philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of logic, philosophy of time, philosophy of mind etc. pretty much every field of study has a philosophy and even inside those fields are more philosophies, so it's likely impossible for somebody to study them all. The main philosophies that we discover in textbooks are just an overview - the tip of an iceberg. What's your favourite area so far?
@@ripinkhanna6075 It went pretty well, I got a congratulatory letter from the examiners which said that I got longlisted-which was better than I expected.
@@thedogrunner Write about 'Give'. Can you really give something without there also being 'receive'. It implies a conscious decision to accept, or at least cooperation to allow a 'gift'.
As far as sheer volume of information, the hardest test in the world may be the All-London badge for the London taxis. You have to know literally everything about a very large, labrynthian city.
These are the questions i'm thinking right after waking up, when i'm bored of studying or questioning my life. Btw it seems fun to me i'd like to take this exam even once in my life
Innocence is undiluted potential, and I think that's why we are instinctually drawn to it. It can be lost or sacrificed, but never regained. When we say someone or something is "innocent," what we mean is that the subject is a natural existence, unburdened by metacognition.
All questions are subjective and open to different interpretations, if the answers are in line with what the examiners think, the person will get good grades otherwise not.
You dont get it and totally miss the point. The questions require a very diaciplined approach in building an argument, starting from defining the perspective for the answer. A good answer is the one that is well structured and logical. It doesnt matter if you chose white or black, it matters how you back it up. A great lawyer is the one who can make the worse criminal appear not guilty to the judge.
No. The very point of this assessment is that there is no right or wrong. It serves as a way for the applicant to first show excellent knowledge, the ability to think about a topic that is wide and probably not completely within their field of study. It also gives them the chance to build an argument, which is the real task in this exam. I would say that they deliberately make the questions general and open, to ensure that none of the examiners are experts within the field.
Ikr..so instead this exam looks for - depth and sophistication of comprehension, coherence of argument, analytical clarity and power, originality and independence of thought, clarity and coherence of structure, correctness of grammer, spelling, punctuation, potential for future intellectual development.
Dunno. I've seen (and endured myself) self-sabotage from overconfidence in preparation. Planing is the enemy of improvisation and all that. One of my instructors made a point that any examination is just a snapshot of performance on any given day. The same in kind test will have a range of valuations for the same person which cannot give a holistic evaluation of command. It's just a snapshot, so what does it really tell you? There's an engineering trope of how long does it take to cook a 5 pound roast to an internal temperature of 150F at 350F? Student 1 surmises the roast is mostly water and calculates how long it will take to raise that amount of water to 150F from known equations. Student 2 asks his mom. And student 3 conducts experiments while nibbling of roast sandwiches. Which one of these will make the best engineer? The hardest tests I've endured were ones where I did have pretty good command and for whatever reason, flamed out spectacularly; getting back on the horse to try again.
I think the difficulty of this exam would not be explaining your own thoughts about the prompt, but your ability to contextualize your answer within the broader history of the study relating to the question. You would have to cite information in your answer from a wide range of sources, all off the top of your head. They included cited information and accuracy as some of the grading criteria. It wouldn't just be about your opinions and thoughts but also your knowledge. As much fun as the questions would be to casually discuss, I know I couldn't even begin to make a good showing on this exam, or really any Oxford exam for that matter.
Wonderful video. It almost sounds like anyone can take the test as long as they can write coherent and convincing essays - just wonder what the passing criterion the Fellows use?
To be honest, the philosophy paper was more straightforward compared to other papers. There’s a plethora of philosophical literature on the given questions.
Although the questions look original and non-standard, just one look at the grading criteria says it all: It's another template-like essay to be assessed just like an SAT or GRE essays with some some twist on top. In fact such essay questions for fellowship candidates provide far more leeway for the examiner to be subjective. Grades and fellowship can thus be manipulated. It's a sort of gatekeeping, and to be honest it's just nonsense. The range of topics is also ridiculous: Law, History, Economics, Politics, Literature, Greek world, Roman world, etc. Some essay questions are stupid or 'deliberately charged': _How many numbers are there?_ _Is there a valid version of the ontological argument?_ _Should we be four-dimensionalists or three-dimensionalists?_ _Should central banks regulate crypto-currencies?_ _Why did Muscovy come to dominate Russia?_ _Can we make sense of Seneca? ..._ It's remarkable how charged (almost propaganda-like) some questions are and how stupid other questions are. Way to go for gatekeepers in high positions in our society.
@@byInventus I didn't say specifically that the first three were charged or political. They are more like casuistry. I mean they smack of equivocal and sophistical argumentation. It all borders on nonsense, to put it bluntly. The other ones I listed as examples look like charged or propaganda-like questions, except for the last one. The question about Seneca is more like the first three ones: they give too much leeway both to the applicant and examiners to potentially rig the game. At the end of the day, it's more about prestige and panache of certain colleges, rather than about real knowledge and fair examination. It's not even gonna be decided like that, like simple skill or knowledge test. It looks like it can almost be decided arbitrarily behind the closed doors whether the applicant checks some boxes (including political and others like being part of the establishment) or not.
I have only watched the first 15 seconds, but based on the question, my guess is: All Souls College, Oxford. The exams there are notoriously mind warping. And the fellows there are the brightest of the brightest.
I come up with questions like that for a hobby and try solving the dilema the questions impose. I'm kinda used to that, not smart enough to be in oxford
Honestly some of the questions are quite similar to GP essays I had to write for my Alevels. Singapore Alevels' GP paper 1 makes the candidate write an argumentative essay out of 12 possible questions. Some of those questions in the All souls college essays exams seems really similar to the more general and philosophical questions.
European Countries: Make tough exams for giving students a good future USA: Makes tough exams cuz why not? India: Makes tough exams for NOT giving students a good future China: Makes tough exams to live up to the Asian Parents memes (or else moreover the same as India) Edit: India-Makes tough exams so their students can leave India
@L. A. yeah study things that are not taught in school but in coaching institutes. This is business my dude if you ask questions based on what is taught in school things would be much easier but what they do is that they ask questions which are on the same level as the first year of engineering.
Most of this exam can be addressed by stating and developing on Axiological Non-cognition. -- A scientist talking from the position of science about if life outside of earth or any other "something" matter would state science doesn't define what matters or not. Science is not only a method, but also a limitation on the philosophical process, to the point of excluding from itself axiological prescription. -- Most of these questions, even multiple in a series can be addressed in conjunction with a single Essay.
The exam became the hardest because the answer is subjective so its impossible to get perfect answer as other may perceive it differently. Its not much of an exam but more like entertaining someone.
@Tibees I had an exam for you: the Miller Analogies Test. I thought that was the toughest in the world... but wow, this literally blew my mind. I enjoyed just thinking about the questions, the breadth and depth, wow!
I really like this type of exam I know it may not be as objective as other types of exams but I think it can better capture the things institutions should care about like depth of thought and originality. I would like to see more of these exams instead of multiple-choice exams. I don't know how you could expand this to the sciences though?
Most PhD programs in the Sciences already come with a scholarship. In Scotland, Undergraduate degrees are free for permanent residents, and then if you want to pursue a PhD in Science you will receive a scholarship as long as you get a 2:1 or above. So, it's fairly easy for Science students in Scotland to get seven years of scholarship (Undergraduate plus Postgraduate). It's the same in many European countries as well. I'm a beneficiary myself of seven years of scholarship.
Holy shit, no lol. My God these questions don't make sense. You don't have to know any of the information listed in the test in order to be able to pass college and become successful.
This exam is a joke, only gets weird people into universities. People who don't just think about life and their own future, but people who are opsessed about random unecessary information.
A fascinating video! I’d love to ask these questions at a dinner party lol. By the way, have you ever read the book “the housekeeper and the professor?“ I feel like you’d appreciate it at a deeper level than most.
These questions I think when I do nothing. Some more questions Is Atom a solar system? What do I do if I go to past? What is life? Why life? If I eat a seed will the plant grow in my body? What if 3 wishes are granted? Etc....
No one can "top" this exam. There are no wrong answers remember? One could put more or less effort in, but there is no indication that effort is the determining factor in comparing students. It's almost a test asking the question, "Just how brainwashed and out of touch from reality are you at this point?"
As someone who took A-Level General Paper in Singapore, these questions brought back some memories haha (good ones and not-so-good ones). For those who are curious, those who took Junior College in Singapore (which is about 30-35% of the cohort based on the latest statistics) will have to sit in a mandatory General Paper exam at the end of their 2 years, which comprises of 2 papers. Paper 2 is a reading comprehension paper, while Paper 1 is an essay writing paper, which is more similar to the one Toby showed in this video. Out of 12 given questions, we were supposed to select 1 question to tackle, and the paper duration was 90 minutes. Based on the syllabus, the topic areas include "issues drawn from across disciplines" and "issues of local interest and global concern". There's a whole formal methodology of how to answer different types of questions (based on topic, abstract vs non-abstract, etc.), which we learnt during our education. The paper that I took was definitely way easier than the one in the video (I can never imagine having to write TWELVE coherent/decent essays over JUST 2 days on multiple domains and abstract concepts, my brain would melt lmao), but it was a pretty interesting experience, to say the least.
Tibees exploring each and every corner of exam of today's world bring us the light of knowledge that the progress of mankind . Very good video all the exams are of difficult level from Indian jee, to Neet, China's gokao, US Putnam . Please review and unbox the Finland , Norwegian or any other Scandinavian countries exam it will be grateful too . Thanks for the information and video .
I'm just fascinated by the quality of these questions. You don't have to study for this exam. You just need to live a fulfilling life and think about stuf. Almost all of these questions came to my mind before. I answered some of them and I forgot some of them while thinking about it.
![ไข้ขึ้นเลย! เมื่อแฝดโดนจัดเต็มวัคซีนครบ2เดือน🤒 [cc] แดนแพทตี้ SS2 | EP.54 |](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/z2VHItnyyvY/mqdefault.jpg)
"An exam should serve solely to amuse the examiners. Discuss."
As useless as the examiners who are amused at the students taking it seriously.
I'd rather go to a trade school.
It would be nice if we could actually read some of the essays that were written for it
All exams eventually amuse examiners untill examiner gives the exam.😁
@@marioluigi9599 I totally agree
This exam actually seems to be pretty enjoyable to me. I do think that the grading of these are open to massive bias from the party evaluating them, so it makes them really impractical.
Almost, useless?
Yeah examiner does not like the answer FAIL!!!
The examiner’s won’t be judging based on the answer itself but based on the quality of the argument. How the case is presented.The final answer doesn’t matter all that much. And experienced humanities professors usually can very well abstract from their own position on the topic. It’s more prone to bias and is harder to grade than say a mathematical exam, but it’s far from useless.
@@rkond That's a fair point. Maybe what stands out is just how little thought is put into the questions being presented. Makes a great exercise in creative writing.
Worst than merely 'impractical'.... Here's how the exams are probably be graded:
Dons look at name on test.
Dons look up that name on the web....search for photos.
Dons pick whichever applicants look like they'd be the most fun to flirt with/sexually harass.
Dons give passing grades to these applicants and write some nonsense about their essay being "far and away above the rest"
Me: studies hard for exam
The exam: Water.
Me: Fuck
😂
I'd LOVE that question. Water is everything.
@@tibees 😀😃😄😁😆😅🤣😂😗☺😚☺🤗🤭🤫🙃 tibees i will eat you
It’s essentially an examination with an obvious heavy bias to the Humanities so talent at exquisite wordsmithery under pressure is a major factor. Sure, you have to be smart and insanely well-read, across a range of disciplines, but what puts you above every other fearsome candidate who has done likewise, basically, comes down to style, and how the internal logic of your argument hangs together.
When asked how he managed to win his own, one later professor confessed he did so prosaically by cramming an entire volume of Gibbon’s _”Decline and Fall…”_ daily, perfecting the style, then retuning back again, when he’d finished that magnum opus, and doing this process for a straight three months...
Edward Gibbon was independently filthy rich so he could and literally sometimes did spend an entire week on perfecting a single sentence, hence his reputation for being the sine qua non of intelligent English writing. Being the most historically famed authority, since, on the fall of Rome, he never actually visited Italy, of course. Those were the days.
You could try to explain the properties of water and how the Navier stokes equation is derived from it.
I *truly* wish we would sit in groups sometimes and just discuss questions just like these.
Me too
I would just ask your friends, you'll honestly probably end up having a great conversation!
Everyone would like to live the lives of the ancient Greek philosophers.
do it with your friends! great for building communication and synthesis skills, plus strengthens your bonds :)
Join or make a philosophy discussion group
Those are the questions that make me want to actually study and pursue knowledge, they are so interesting
There is so much more freedom!
Me too
Exams are fun to write if there were no pressure to ace it and make it to the top 1%. There is a huge role that anxiety and nervousness plays in how one performs in high stakes examinations.
True that
And, the time limit. Why are we expected to finish exams in a hour or two? Or 10? Especially for deep questions like these, there should be an allowance of at least 2 weeks to properly delve into everything. The purpose isn't to test the person's ability but just to see if they've grinded away looking into things enough to be very fast at things.
@@archockencanto1645 It tests for your ability to think beyond while pressurising you. It's one of the hardest examinations in the world for a reason.
It makes it more of a competition rather than an exam.
Q: How epic was Beowulf?
A: I know, right?
Haha I studied Beowulf today in English class, he was epic
If they say that this answer is wrong I have to take their heads as my trophies
Monster Grendels' tastes are plainish;
Breakfast? Just a couple Danish.
I wish Beowulf could jump out of the saga and save our day.
🤣 Perfect! You’d get full marks from me.
I'm just glad I can sit here comfortably thinking about these questions knowing I'll never have to actually write this exam
How to close the wage gap?
Urmm... the wage gap is is a myth?
Omggggggg Oxford is run by feminazis
Yeah, watching these videos feels like going back to school but with a safety net, knowing I can just hit pause and the exams won't be able to give me a mental beatdown.
@@davidstinger1134 i wish i was in your spot
Defend the indefensible.
Why All Souls College is right in having and enforcing strict dress codes in examinations...
How Joe Biden legitimately won the presidential election...
The good and valuable in the Disney Star Wars sequels.
Because the students body voted in favour to keep the dress code
The All Souls dress code is seemingly not actually that strict, since it specifies it is not in sub fusc, which is the dress code all undergraduate exams in Oxford (black jacket, white shirt or blouse, black trousers or skirt, white or black bow tie, gown and mortarboard).
Dress codes are good
So it's essentially an admission application given in exam format? With no right or wrong answers, they would just select the 1 or 2 people they feel are the best fit for their program.
so true
There are technically right or wrong answers. If you study epistemology, there are certain things you look out for in each essay prompt. You would then appraise it via an epistemological lens, and your justifications should be predicated on epistemic assumptions.
I imagine you can judge the quality of some essays. Questions such as whether the brain should be studied, you could discuss the limitations and time implications in increasing the human population. If the brain is studied, it can be better emulated electronically (AI) which can be produced at a faster rate than humans. Therefore studying the brain is useful in expanding the knowledge of humans as a species as technology can progress from being a calculator to an active thinker.
Then you could look at counter arguments.
So I'm sure there's some assessment in terms of essay technique, but probably a lot of subjective judgment on which ideas they like the most. Bit silly that personal preference can have such a monumental impact on someone's life both educationally and financially in my opinion.
The questions are actually really interesting, I've realised by how much I'm waffling here haha
@@benextinction__144 I think the "does a robot have a gender" is quite a politically charged question but at the same time it has merit because you would have to argue why you think any non biological definitions of gender are invalid or vise versa. And I think it is possible to fairly judge the argument in terms of how sound the logic is, how well it analyses and contrasts opposing views, whether or not it answers the question it claims to and more. But I also think that there's a lot of potential for bias...
i.e. "hmm yes I disagree with this and since I disagree it must be because their logic is wrong not because I have an emotional investment in the issue so I'm going to mark them down."
@@ooffoo5130 yeah definitely. The examiners probably find essays on certain topics more interesting just by personal preference. There'll be so much bias in the process. If its free to apply and you're someone who's interested in humanities and the perks it gives, it can't hurt to give it a go.
I wish SpongeBob all the best in his journey to become a fellow at All Souls College.
And I wish Homer Simpson all the best in his journey to become the master of Trinity College, Cambridge.
I though Spongebob was going to go to squidward community college.
Amogus. Discuss.
Now that's something most academics won't find easy.
Tbh if I get that question, the only words I would be able to write are SUS, IMPOSTOR, AMONG US, VOTE OUT, EMERGENCY MEETING, and REPORT BODY.
Academics aren't smart enough to answer this one
"Does it matter if there's an impostor if they're so good at being a crewmate there is no discernable difference?"
@@THEMATT222 Wait. You didn't say where ?!?
SUS.
@@VivekYadav-ds8oz To that point: Is a crewmate really a crewmate if they have killed more people than the impostor by encouraging the group to vote out the wrong guy?
I love all this questions! Congrats to whoever wrote them! Almost all of them are so thought provoking I feel this urge to write right away!
So, is the Feminist literataure too rosy?
Basically, Oxbridge tests have always been about finding out if the candidate can think for themselves rather than regurgitate anything that's been spoon fed to them. Academic work isn't about just following process it's about being creative too. These types of questions were sometimes asked in a face-to-face interview and the counter position then taken by the interviewer to see how much the candidate had thought through their answers. If the candidate continued with a good argument then the interviewer knew that there was some potential.
While i agree , i feel as if there’s a lot of bias in the questions. For example england is known to be a very transphobic country, so i would be afraid to answer with pro trans ideas
Trust me, Oxbridge is *not* about thinking outside the box. They highly value conservative mainstream views and opinions. Approaching them with any ideas outside of their comfort zone more often than not just results in being dismissed.
It's for exactly this reason I stopped working with them.
@@chipifarts No, this is a completely open examination. If you're asked about transgender-related topics, then you can certainly approach it with a pro-transgender attitude.
@@Clint945 Sorry, could you give a few examples of such scenarios? This examination seems to be extremely liberal in its attitude.
@@ripinkhanna6075 I second this question @Scotty
This seems like a very fun exam. I would love to take this. So many of these questions are the ones which I have thought about especially AI and robotics.
You can't score high from "thinking" about it. Where's your "sources", primary and secondary
@@marioluigi9599 off course I can't. That us why it is a hard exam. The questions are still a food for thought for wild thinkers like me.
@@marioluigi9599 its an exam focused on the way you think and your intelectual potential, this is not highschool, were you can have great ideas but fail because you didnt cite your sources properly, even if thats still a part of the test im sure whoever corrects it looks for interesting ideas, rather than sources, after all most answers can be given without a source just from your own thought, and i doubt youd pass the exam if you just answered by quoting people and studies alone
You are introverted
@@junc2191 yes, I am an introvert.
All answers call for a good logical thinking. Based on reasonable thoughts. No real right or wrong answer. Only that which is most relevant to the question.
Yeah, this is mostly a test to see how you think. In the truest sense, an IQ test.
That type of intellect can do amazing things regardless of the direction it's pointed (think da Vinci).
this isn't an exam for the STEM crowd... they can't think creatively.
@@Yigash but creatively in maths and science based subjects, not humanities.
i don't know whether it's the hardest exam but it's definitely the most fun i've seen
Yepp agreed. Bcz it deals with opinions and personalities.
In fairness the subject papers are much much harder than the general papers. For example the maths one is not abstract and is more like the sorts of questions one might expect - not that far off some of the Olympiad type questions. I say that however as someone who wasn’t eligible to apply because you have to get specific grades on your undergraduate/some graduate degrees. Think you had to get a good 1st class anyway something way over my head
In my opinion, every question in this exam can be turned into a debate. So It should be solvable if one has training in debating and critical thinking + a good collection of information.
As a famous fictional scientist once said: "your scientists were so preoccupied with whether or not they could, they didn't stop to think if they should".
This exam seems to check exactly that.
Synchronicity. Five minutes before watching this fascinating video about the challenges of pursuing an advanced degree, I read an online news article about Manfred Steiner, a retired American hematologist, who just earned his PhD in physics at age 89. I thought about you while reading the article. My thought was something like: "Gosh! Toby has 65 more years to change her mind."
'Can a robot have a gender?'
*STARTS TO QUESTION HUMANITY*
@A Dead Channel Pretty much.
Why is AI racist ?
"What defines a gender?"
"What is the meaning of life?"
Liberal nonsense. Run far and fast.
I would recommend checking out some Mathematics admissions test (MAT)/Physics Aptitude Test(PAT) from the University of Oxford or some Cambridge STEP Maths exams/past Mathematical tripos papers! They’re all considered quite hard and have some interesting questions!
Cambridge Tripos Part III Exam is also very challenging examination!
This.
Mat and pat are hard but could never be considered very hard. Step is cool
@@Tom-vu1wr Step is kinda brutual ngl.
It made me feel like I have no ability in Mathematics
@@emilyscloset2648 I guess it can feel that way but I'm sitting it later this year so I guess I'll find out but I really like the style of question and the fact u can choose which question types u do
I have never heard about this exam before.
Thks for sharing.
I think there was an Oxbridge exam with the question "What is courage?" The story goes that an answer "This is courage." got full marks.
Discuss.
Ridiculous standards.
@@thedogrunner I'd give it full marks too
@@steroidscarab That's not saying much.
This is myth that has long been debunked though
"A Chimera is a Chimera"
This is an interesting exam and it seems to be pretty enjoyable for me. (I actually even know someone who teaches in Oxford.) This exam is about general knowledge and reasoning skills. And yes, the general knowledge needed for this exam would take years(!) of learning if you want to improve it significantly because it covers a very wide area of knowledge.
I’ve only started watching haven’t checked the description but even with the thumbnail pixilated can tell this is the _All Souls_ fellowship test… I have to wonder what Tibees would do in the very final examination, which traditionally whittles those successful, down to the last two actual fellowship recipients: _a cherry pie baked with the pips still in them…_ and what the applicant ends up doing with same during a formal Hall dinner.
The prize - prosaically, not prestige - is basically having your doctorate totally paid for and one recipient usually remains in Oxford, to do their thesis, the other is free to research anywhere in the world… one example of the latter is T.E. Lawrence [of Arabia]. The most little know today is the major Eurosceptic MP, John Redwood (whose “Dr” is never mentioned). Anyone on any course which sits an examination at the university is eligible to try for this notorious test - so, actually, it’s phenomenally meritocratic; if you ignore the heavy Humanities bias of it all.
Next week, the most impossibly arduous examination in the history of humanity, the final test for the ancient Chinese civil service. It had no time limit in which to write one’s answer and only one question: *”Tell me everything you know.”* 🤣
@Santosh Parvatikar …and the great prize of success many thousands of thousands were confined into little cells for a month to complete the examination were all ultimately competing for? _Getting their knackers lopped off!_
The discarded, ahem, gibblets, of the then eunuchs were traditionally pickled in a jar and placed on strings suspended from the rafters of a great hall… on the basis of how these officials advanced or fell from favour in the hierarchy of the Forbidden City, the jars containing their one-time intimates were elevated or lowered to the ground; compared to those of their colleagues. Funny old world.
@@michaeljames4904 Pretty much looks like where things are headed right now. Let's start assigning gender roles to robots and stop producing electricity 1/3 of the year. The intellectuals need to reclaim their manhood from the strings they willingly hung them on.
oh it requires to have already gotten in to even try :-(
best of luck to those with the circumstances and time left in your life to try
"Music came to a full stop with Brahms." (At last, a music-relaged topic.) At the time of Brahms' death, many composers might have agreed, because the structural techniques used to generate long-form compositions were losing favour and no alternatives were immediately obvious.
In his work as a music critic, George Bernard Shaw ridiculed the premiere performances of many of Brahms' works, but recanted and apologised by the time of his death in the 1940s.
This is one of those questions whose answer depends not just on who you are, but on when you're writing.
One could discuss the rapid rise and culmination of the genre of music aptly called Djent, which came in full stop with the publication of procedurally generated Djent of Martensson.
thank you, i very much enjoyed this! i am a comp.sci b.a. + phd in classics so i always enjoy scientists who can engage with humanities stuff well! (sean carroll is one i especially admire too). thank you!!
That is such a cool combination. What country did you do those degrees in? I feel like some countries are very restrictive with the paths you can take meaning you have to pick either STEM or the humanities.
@@josephbrennan370 Australia. I had to do a masters degree to convert over to classics & ancient history before I could start the PhD.
@@doctorscoot that is so cool. I wish you good luck in life.
These are so intriguing , really nice video!
This sounds like a really fun exam to me tbh. It wouldn't be marked perfectly but it would interesting to write about these questions.
Why wouldn't it be marked perfectly?
Some of those questions made me want to learn about the topics being asked. I just think they're useful in life.
Could you elaborate on which questions you found useful for life? Certainly not robot gender...
They're impossible standards. Interesting, but why know all that?
@@thedogrunner The question: "Water."
@@aentropy Seems like losing the forrest for the trees to me.
@@thedogrunner strangely enough that could become relevant to something I may be involved in, in the near future.
Many thanks for producing this. Perhaps there should be an additional paper along the lines of "suggest 20 questions for next year's paper and provide a brief answer for each." Might save the college a bit of work?
I am a CS student into systems, and this encourages me to put more effort in reading philosophy at free time. I usually laze too much lmao
Don't lose yourself to the nonsense. Most "philosophy" people put their attention on are the oppositions to perceived reality. We don't live in ancient Greece. We should be more critical of useless information.
@@thedogrunner You're correct about that. I am more into analytical philosophy because I learn a lot of conceptualization. Tho, many of stuffs are very still weird
@@cortexauth4094
You don't need to read it philosophy, you just need to think about it. This is coming from a philo undergrad myself
There's no way she just dropped an InternetHistorian meme in here.
the king
where?
@@wdwuccnxcnh7022 Via his picture @ 3:55
This whole exam is a meme....
These SpongeBob clips are on point, 10 / 10.
missed an opportunity to use the spongebob water meme 🥺
@@tibees Toby: World's hardest exam is Oxford All souls Fellowship exam
Indians: Do you know about UPSC, CAT, IIT-JEE 😂😂😂😂😂
@@sainathmanda5803 seriously , u are ridiculous , UpSC , jee and neet can be solved by studying hard but you can't answer some QuEsTion when they just ask "water" 😂 ps: I am indian
I feel like a lot of these questions are geared towards the bias of the examiners. In order to pass it, you have to really engage their interests and intrigue them. You certainly can't go against anything they disagree with. Otherwise you won't score very high. It's a test that finds a person that they would really enjoy working with for at least the next 7 years and hopefully will become a member of staff
maybe you can put something they disagree with after all as you said i have the feeling its more about intriguing them, what if instead of say, explain how to say, get rid of racism, you make a compelling point for it, and well thats hard because when you get in a high intelectual level racism is kinda impossible to defend, but thats the thing, i think they are looking for well thought answers, and if youre smart enough to go against the common opinion and still be convincing that would be intriguing at the very least, that said i wouldnt risk it with racism lol
@@aguspuig6615 Or you could demonstrate how language is used by elites to destroy civil societies. Cross reference the other lies like sexism, homophobia, islamaphobia, police brutality, dead beat dads, etc. Make a case for Good vs. Evil instead of arbitrary name calling to smear someone's image you disagree with...
@@thedogrunner yeah thats what i was saying i dont know what gave the impression i was name calling or smearing annyone or annythigns name
@@aguspuig6615 Yep. Just adding to your point. It's a good one.
@@thedogrunner The people that destroy civil society are toxic people who apparently wanna normalise prejudice and discrimination, saying that it's all lies. Clearly all these things go on. There's plenty of videos right here on TH-cam for examples on police brutality or anything else. Go have a look at it and then tell us like a muppet that it doesn't exist
And what's this thing about dead beat dads? Are you one of them and upset at people pointing it out?
This would be a fun exercise for a philosophy professor to give their students. And then have them compare answers. I actually really like these questions
Damn I love your Chanel so much, your voice is soothing and attitude intellectual , and diversity in the subjects you handle! Great job
“does it matter if we are alone in the universe?” - I interpreted this as a question about self, and if relationships bring value to life or do they bring about a codependent absurdity
Ich kenne das Universum nicht, aber ich bin Gottes einsamer Mann
I would prefer to be alone in the universe than not. Read the Three Body Problem and you will understand my fears. But you have an interesting take on it that would definitely give you merit.
Your videos does make one think deeply. 👍 Please keep producing these thought provoking videos.
"Should there be a lingua franca in academia?" is the most English question I've ever seen.
in the singapore A levels, there is a similar exam also called General Paper, and the format is quite similar to this, 12 questions of varying topics. but you are only expected to write 1 essay in 1 and a half hours.
Defend the indefensible. Well, most epistemologists agree that knowledge is "justified true belief". For knowledge to be justified it has to be part of a chain of justifications. My belief that the the Atlantic ocean is mostly water is justified by my sense perceptions (including books I've read, experiments I could do etc.), but I can doubt my senses (cartesian doubt). All knowledge of the physical world is a "leap of faith" in this sense. I could be a brain in a vat, or a character in an alien computer game. I can't defend the claim that the world as I perceive it exists independent of me, but it is practical to act as if it does.
You could argue all this. But this kind of examination reproves you if you miss to give credit or present sources for ALL the well known arguments you made.
Also Indefensible is an axiological proposition, and so is the concept of argumentative defense. Stating Axiological non-cognition (or subjectivity) alone is enough to state an attack on anything as indefensible can have (as much) value as defense. ( I would credit Pyrrho).
@@LNVACVAC Being made to present sources in an exam is a bit impractical, no?
@@HilbertXVI Not to present, specially dealing with Oxford, is asking for a plagiarism expulsion and lawsuit.
This test is done by people already enrolled at the institution.
while reducing knowledge to justified true belief was the orthodoxy in the past, hardly any epistemologists have held onto the view since a famous paper by Edmund Gettier, published I think in the 60s. It's very short and very interesting and certainly worth a read. Nowadays, some important positions are the view that knowledge is justified true belief plus some other qualification (e.g. safety or sensitivity), or the view that knowledge ought not to be reduced to a kind of belief, but is rather primitive: the most general factive mental state ("knowledge - first" epistemology)
@@Overclocked3770K Yes, I know, but I could argue that additional premises counts as justification. To say that knowledge is 'justified true belief' is not completely accurate, but it is a useful charicature. It's 'true enough', as Wittgenstein might say.
The history of brown aka dark orange is fascinating.
Technology Connections fan here
Purple the history of a lie...
"A Chimera is a Chimera"
These questions went over my daily thinking like air over water
Because most of them are nonsensical. You aren't meant to think about nonsense on a daily basis. That's the beginning of a psychological disorder.
Or genius
@@thedogrunner genius lives just only story above madness my friend
@@thedogrunner what should you think about?
@@jaykay2218 The mind is a tool box. We don't use hammers to clean windows.
11:29 it's actually informal for an Oxford exam because sub-fusc clothing, the formal 'academic wear', is not required.
This exam is Oxford degree walled. Maybe they should discuss that.
Not so. You could just be beginning your degree at Oxford and take the exam.
@@jollyholly2851 The Oxford admission is a requirement many can't fulfil perhaps due to geographic and financial constraints and would appreciate a chance at a prize as such.
Ah, this indeed sounds like it's for clever Etonians wanting an Oxford degree.
No, it's more like intelligence-walled. For sure, I do think Oxford is inaccesible in many ways, but it makes sense for an exam that has to be at their standard to be very, very hard, maybe even for students that are at almost degree-level. Besides, you only have to choose 3 subjects, not all 30, which is what a degree would actually make you capable of in the same amount of time. I agreee that the inaccessibility should be discussed, but the exam itself is not impossible!
@@daneta.3227 If they have confidence in their test they'd let people take it regardless of their Oxford status.
Philosophy undergrad here. Yeah, a lot of these questions are really important in the field! And you have no idea how sophisticated that they can get. A lot of your answers are definitely not going to be intuitive. It's possible that sophisticated answers will correspond to intuition but a simple "ofcourse!" will never cut it!
I encourage everyone who enjoys these questions to read some philosophy though! :) People spent entire careers on answering these questions. The only downside is that philosophy is very difficult to read sometimes. You'll know what I mean when you crack open some Wittgenstein on that private language question.
God speed!
As an undergrad in philosophy have you noticed yet that the vast majority of philosophical thinking is ambiguous and open to your own interpretation, or just plain wrong in the understanding it attempts to impart?
@@thedogrunner What area of philosophy are you talking about?
@@nomoremrniceguy8106 There are a lot of areas. I'm referring to almost all of them.
@@thedogrunner From the stuff I've seen I can say that sometimes it is, especially when all ideas are considered together; it's difficult to say with certainty which one is true, especially the philosophy of ethics/religion. The philosophy of physics was less arbitrary. It's difficult to say that most of philosophy is how you describe because there are so many philosophies: philosophy of mathematics, philosophy of logic, philosophy of time, philosophy of mind etc. pretty much every field of study has a philosophy and even inside those fields are more philosophies, so it's likely impossible for somebody to study them all. The main philosophies that we discover in textbooks are just an overview - the tip of an iceberg. What's your favourite area so far?
These are the questions my subconscious makes up when I'm having a nightmare about an exam I didn't study for ha
These are the questions I think while taking a dump.
Exam Question: "Water."
My Answer: "Yes."
We have to do this in Singapore a levels -_- I didn't do well.
Are Singapore A-levels similar to A-levels in the UK? If so they sound much more interesting than UK A-levels.
@@josephbrennan370 It’s by Cambridge I believe
You can’t study for it. You just gotta be someone who is curious about everything and READS a lot.
This was a very enjoyable video. I sat this exam in September: 2 General papers and 2 Philosophy papers- it was quite a unique experience!
How did it go? Did you get invited to a viva?
@@ripinkhanna6075 It went pretty well, I got a congratulatory letter from the examiners which said that I got longlisted-which was better than I expected.
@@PhilosophicalTrials Ah, I see: that's really impressive! Which degree are you currently doing?
@@ripinkhanna6075 Thanks! I'm currently doing a PhD in Philosophy.
@@PhilosophicalTrials A very intriguing degree, that one! I wish all the best to you in your future career.
"Is there something to be said for boredom?"
Me: I have no binge to answer to.
Could actually write a ton about just “water”. The original giver of life and something no living thing on earth that we know of can live without.
Or just try to explain the properties of water and how the Navier stokes equation is derived from it.
Or you can write about water being the prime culprit of human suffering since it allows life to exist and, by so, suffering too. :D
Water never "gave" life.
@@thedogrunner Write about 'Give'. Can you really give something without there also being 'receive'. It implies a conscious decision to accept, or at least cooperation to allow a 'gift'.
@@leagarner3675 What a can of worms...
As far as sheer volume of information, the hardest test in the world may be the All-London badge for the London taxis. You have to know literally everything about a very large, labrynthian city.
But what do they really know about water?
These are the questions i'm thinking right after waking up, when i'm bored of studying or questioning my life.
Btw it seems fun to me i'd like to take this exam even once in my life
Sounds like you need a trade.
Innocence is undiluted potential, and I think that's why we are instinctually drawn to it. It can be lost or sacrificed, but never regained. When we say someone or something is "innocent," what we mean is that the subject is a natural existence, unburdened by metacognition.
So true, the hardest exam is which we don't prepare for 😂😂😂
Your unibrow is bigger than the bridge in my hometown lake
@@rishabhjain3840 my friend, it is bifrost bridge 😆
Exactly
'Defend the indefensible'
What an amazing question, let's see some more
'Defend Tweeting'
Hey I've seen this before!
All questions are subjective and open to different interpretations, if the answers are in line with what the examiners think, the person will get good grades otherwise not.
You dont get it and totally miss the point. The questions require a very diaciplined approach in building an argument, starting from defining the perspective for the answer. A good answer is the one that is well structured and logical. It doesnt matter if you chose white or black, it matters how you back it up.
A great lawyer is the one who can make the worse criminal appear not guilty to the judge.
No. The very point of this assessment is that there is no right or wrong. It serves as a way for the applicant to first show excellent knowledge, the ability to think about a topic that is wide and probably not completely within their field of study. It also gives them the chance to build an argument, which is the real task in this exam. I would say that they deliberately make the questions general and open, to ensure that none of the examiners are experts within the field.
Alot of interesting Questions and topics in this exam, thx for showing!
The hardest exam: one that we can never prepare for. Discuss.
That's called life.
Ikr..so instead this exam looks for - depth and sophistication of comprehension, coherence of argument, analytical clarity and power, originality and independence of thought, clarity and coherence of structure, correctness of grammer, spelling, punctuation, potential for future intellectual development.
Dunno.
I've seen (and endured myself) self-sabotage from overconfidence in preparation. Planing is the enemy of improvisation and all that. One of my instructors made a point that any examination is just a snapshot of performance on any given day. The same in kind test will have a range of valuations for the same person which cannot give a holistic evaluation of command. It's just a snapshot, so what does it really tell you?
There's an engineering trope of how long does it take to cook a 5 pound roast to an internal temperature of 150F at 350F? Student 1 surmises the roast is mostly water and calculates how long it will take to raise that amount of water to 150F from known equations. Student 2 asks his mom. And student 3 conducts experiments while nibbling of roast sandwiches. Which one of these will make the best engineer?
The hardest tests I've endured were ones where I did have pretty good command and for whatever reason, flamed out spectacularly; getting back on the horse to try again.
I think the difficulty of this exam would not be explaining your own thoughts about the prompt, but your ability to contextualize your answer within the broader history of the study relating to the question. You would have to cite information in your answer from a wide range of sources, all off the top of your head. They included cited information and accuracy as some of the grading criteria. It wouldn't just be about your opinions and thoughts but also your knowledge. As much fun as the questions would be to casually discuss, I know I couldn't even begin to make a good showing on this exam, or really any Oxford exam for that matter.
"It's about Lord Byron, Ada Lovelace's father" I just love that this is the place where it's defined that way round.
Probably because Ada Lovelace is more famous than Lord Byron
joe byron
Watching your videos makes me happy :)
Wonderful video. It almost sounds like anyone can take the test as long as they can write coherent and convincing essays - just wonder what the passing criterion the Fellows use?
Oh God these are such good questions. I could use half of those as conversation starters tbh
To be honest, the philosophy paper was more straightforward compared to other papers. There’s a plethora of philosophical literature on the given questions.
These read like the sort of exam questions you’d get in a stress dream.
Ma'am, any update on *joy of mathematics* ? 😭😭😭
One of your best videos , Really a lot to learn
Although the questions look original and non-standard, just one look at the grading criteria says it all: It's another template-like essay to be assessed just like an SAT or GRE essays with some some twist on top. In fact such essay questions for fellowship candidates provide far more leeway for the examiner to be subjective. Grades and fellowship can thus be manipulated. It's a sort of gatekeeping, and to be honest it's just nonsense. The range of topics is also ridiculous: Law, History, Economics, Politics, Literature, Greek world, Roman world, etc. Some essay questions are stupid or 'deliberately charged':
_How many numbers are there?_
_Is there a valid version of the ontological argument?_
_Should we be four-dimensionalists or three-dimensionalists?_
_Should central banks regulate crypto-currencies?_
_Why did Muscovy come to dominate Russia?_
_Can we make sense of Seneca? ..._
It's remarkable how charged (almost propaganda-like) some questions are and how stupid other questions are. Way to go for gatekeepers in high positions in our society.
How are the first three questions you listed "charged" or "propaganda-like"?
@@byInventus I didn't say specifically that the first three were charged or political. They are more like casuistry. I mean they smack of equivocal and sophistical argumentation. It all borders on nonsense, to put it bluntly. The other ones I listed as examples look like charged or propaganda-like questions, except for the last one. The question about Seneca is more like the first three ones: they give too much leeway both to the applicant and examiners to potentially rig the game. At the end of the day, it's more about prestige and panache of certain colleges, rather than about real knowledge and fair examination. It's not even gonna be decided like that, like simple skill or knowledge test. It looks like it can almost be decided arbitrarily behind the closed doors whether the applicant checks some boxes (including political and others like being part of the establishment) or not.
I have only watched the first 15 seconds, but based on the question, my guess is: All Souls College, Oxford. The exams there are notoriously mind warping. And the fellows there are the brightest of the brightest.
I come up with questions like that for a hobby and try solving the dilema the questions impose. I'm kinda used to that, not smart enough to be in oxford
Honestly some of the questions are quite similar to GP essays I had to write for my Alevels.
Singapore Alevels' GP paper 1 makes the candidate write an argumentative essay out of 12 possible questions. Some of those questions in the All souls college essays exams seems really similar to the more general and philosophical questions.
While watching this video, I was wondering if this was really made by you. Damn, this was such an amazing 14 minutes video
It's the only exam where being intoxicated while answering may actually be a good strategy.
European Countries: Make tough exams for giving students a good future
USA: Makes tough exams cuz why not?
India: Makes tough exams for NOT giving students a good future
China: Makes tough exams to live up to the Asian Parents memes (or else moreover the same as India)
Edit: India-Makes tough exams so their students can leave India
Right
Absolutely right...India's education system is worst in the world
@@MrMehta-tx5ji As much as we yell about IIT-JEE, it sucks that JEE is the only exam getting us to IIT xD
@L. A. you also right
@L. A. yeah study things that are not taught in school but in coaching institutes. This is business my dude if you ask questions based on what is taught in school things would be much easier but what they do is that they ask questions which are on the same level as the first year of engineering.
Most of this exam can be addressed by stating and developing on Axiological Non-cognition.
--
A scientist talking from the position of science about if life outside of earth or any other "something" matter would state science doesn't define what matters or not. Science is not only a method, but also a limitation on the philosophical process, to the point of excluding from itself axiological prescription.
--
Most of these questions, even multiple in a series can be addressed in conjunction with a single Essay.
I LOVE those questions!
These questions are so good, I think if you steal a question that you’re interested with money and knowledge you can develop a massive project
The exam became the hardest because the answer is subjective so its impossible to get perfect answer as other may perceive it differently.
Its not much of an exam but more like entertaining someone.
I’d spend the entire exam time trying to work out which question to answer.
this isnt an exam it's a "how much do we want to work with you" questionnaire.
Most of these have very straightforward answers to me. I wonder if that is because I think about things differently or not different enough.
Fun fact: rage and love can both be expressed by red.
You pass.
It's a color that represents passion.
@Tibees I had an exam for you: the Miller Analogies Test. I thought that was the toughest in the world... but wow, this literally blew my mind. I enjoyed just thinking about the questions, the breadth and depth, wow!
I really like this type of exam I know it may not be as objective as other types of exams but I think it can better capture the things institutions should care about like depth of thought and originality. I would like to see more of these exams instead of multiple-choice exams. I don't know how you could expand this to the sciences though?
Most PhD programs in the Sciences already come with a scholarship. In Scotland, Undergraduate degrees are free for permanent residents, and then if you want to pursue a PhD in Science you will receive a scholarship as long as you get a 2:1 or above. So, it's fairly easy for Science students in Scotland to get seven years of scholarship (Undergraduate plus Postgraduate). It's the same in many European countries as well. I'm a beneficiary myself of seven years of scholarship.
Holy shit, no lol. My God these questions don't make sense. You don't have to know any of the information listed in the test in order to be able to pass college and become successful.
This exam is a joke, only gets weird people into universities. People who don't just think about life and their own future, but people who are opsessed about random unecessary information.
The hardest exam for an individual is one regarding a topic the person has absolutely no interest in.
A fascinating video! I’d love to ask these questions at a dinner party lol. By the way, have you ever read the book “the housekeeper and the professor?“ I feel like you’d appreciate it at a deeper level than most.
These questions I think when I do nothing.
Some more questions
Is Atom a solar system?
What do I do if I go to past?
What is life? Why life?
If I eat a seed will the plant grow in my body?
What if 3 wishes are granted?
Etc....
Hats off to the ones who top this examination....💯🎀
No one can "top" this exam. There are no wrong answers remember? One could put more or less effort in, but there is no indication that effort is the determining factor in comparing students. It's almost a test asking the question, "Just how brainwashed and out of touch from reality are you at this point?"
As someone who took A-Level General Paper in Singapore, these questions brought back some memories haha (good ones and not-so-good ones).
For those who are curious, those who took Junior College in Singapore (which is about 30-35% of the cohort based on the latest statistics) will have to sit in a mandatory General Paper exam at the end of their 2 years, which comprises of 2 papers. Paper 2 is a reading comprehension paper, while Paper 1 is an essay writing paper, which is more similar to the one Toby showed in this video. Out of 12 given questions, we were supposed to select 1 question to tackle, and the paper duration was 90 minutes. Based on the syllabus, the topic areas include "issues drawn from across disciplines" and "issues of local interest and global concern". There's a whole formal methodology of how to answer different types of questions (based on topic, abstract vs non-abstract, etc.), which we learnt during our education.
The paper that I took was definitely way easier than the one in the video (I can never imagine having to write TWELVE coherent/decent essays over JUST 2 days on multiple domains and abstract concepts, my brain would melt lmao), but it was a pretty interesting experience, to say the least.
The questions in this paper seem to be very philosophical this requires some time to build opinions on each topic which makes it really difficult.
Tibees exploring each and every corner of exam of today's world bring us the light of knowledge that the progress of mankind . Very good video all the exams are of difficult level from Indian jee, to Neet, China's gokao, US Putnam . Please review and unbox the Finland , Norwegian or any other Scandinavian countries exam it will be grateful too . Thanks for the information and video .
So basically it's a clever way for the University to divert funds to their friends.
I just love your voice
Thank you 😊💓
I'm just fascinated by the quality of these questions. You don't have to study for this exam. You just need to live a fulfilling life and think about stuf.
Almost all of these questions came to my mind before. I answered some of them and I forgot some of them while thinking about it.
Yeh and have primary and secondary sources ready. Preferably with page numbers
You dont just think shortly about these questions
I came across this channel randomly. It's awesome. This woman is also very beautiful, intelligent, and has such a calming voice.