Reason Magazine
- reason.com
- reason.tv
- reason.org
- Donate
- Site Search:
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsadvertisements
Critique de la raison dialectique for Dummies
At the American Prospect blog, Dana Goldstein writes that "French teenagers are smarter than all of us" because certain French baccalaureate exams, taken by those who desire to attend college, include pretentious questions requiring the young respondents to feign familiarity with the work of various philosophes. From Goldstein:
Now check out these sample questions from the French baccalaureate exam, which students begin taking today. Bonne chance!
Okay, so there is no country quite as philosophique -- and, at times, absurd -- as France. And to be fair, Le Bac is a college entrance exam, not a high school graduation exam. Still, the majority of French high school students sit for the test. Could you ever imagine the SAT or ACT asking students to write an essay on such complex, intellectual topics?For the Literature stream:
1) Does objectivity in history suppose impartiality in the historian? 2) Does language betray thought?
For the Science stream:
1) Is it absurd to desire the impossible? 2) Are there questions which no science can answer?
Well, I certainly hope the average 17 year-old American
won't be asked if "language betrays thought" as a college entrance
requirement. But a few points here: Many students sit for
the test, but just how well do they do? As London Times
correspondent Charles Bremmer
notes (his son took his Bac exams today and Bremmer
complains that "The French curriculum and teachers are slanted
solidly to the left," demanding that his son tailor answers to
political fashions), the tests have been dumbed down (or graded on
a significant curve) since the 1970s, when a paltry 20 percent
managed to pass. Indeed, if one looks at international ranks from
PISA and OECD French scores are pretty mediocre (but still better than
American scores), despite massive expenditures on education and the
chin-stroking college entrance questions that ask if it is "absurd
to desire the impossible."
Also, is it just me or does Goldstein sounds more like Alan Bloom
than a liberal writer at the American Prospect? As Bremmer
points out, some critics contend that "The baccalauréat is too
elitist" and is unfair to both immigrants and members of the
proletariat. Sure, we can use the test as a political and cultural
cudgel ("Europeans are so cultured, so smart, so
philosophique, compared to us lunk-headed Americans!"),
but how would the Prospect brigade react to this
uncomfortable statistic, provided by The Times: "Fewer
than half the children of working class parents earn the
certificate that gives passage to university."
elisesmith|6.18.09 @ 6:12PM|#
The French are very rooted in their Culture. This seems to be a core reason why the French are not very fond of the Americans (Americans are very rooted in our own culture, as in we believe that everyone should speak "our" language etc..). In terms of this entrance exam, maybe it wouldn't hurt America if we started asking our students questions like this on their SAT's or ACT's. I believe that the average American 17 year-old is capable of applying themselves on this level of critical thinking. They are just not forced to think critically about something such as this. When initially reading the question I thought, "What the heck did I just read?" then I reread the question and realized it is really not as complicated as it sounds. It is just at a different level of thought and worded in a more eloquent way than the average American thinks. In all I don't think it could hurt America to be presenting questions such as these to our high school students, we need to quit dumbing it down.
EJM|6.18.09 @ 6:15PM|#
..."French teenagers are smarter than all of
us"...
That said,
Chinese teens may be smarter than French ones.
Paul|6.18.09 @ 6:25PM|#
(Americans are very rooted in our own culture, as in we
believe that everyone should speak "our" language
etc..).
Who's 'we'? Oh, YOU believe that everyone should speak "our"
language. Or wait, was that a kind of double-back speak which
really means "everyone else who's unenlightened like me, but I say
"we believe" (because I'm American, even if implicitly not included
in my own example) because Americans are "rooted in their
[emphasis mine] culture". The word "their" now suggesting some
separation between you and American culture. You're so above it
all, man.
hammeredHead|6.18.09 @ 6:29PM|#
It appears that French univerities leave graduates with even fewer practical skills than American ones.
Russ 2000|6.18.09 @ 6:42PM|#
Does language betray thought?
I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you.
|6.18.09 @ 6:43PM|#
In terms of this entrance exam, maybe it wouldn't hurt
America if we started asking our students questions like this on
their SAT's or ACT's.
Right. Cuz you can't start too early teaching them how to churn out
meaningless bullshit.
Russ 2000|6.18.09 @ 6:46PM|#
Are there questions which no science can answer?
Yes. For example - How many questions can be asked?
Seems silly to ask for essays on Yes/No questions.
|6.18.09 @ 7:09PM|#
It appears that French univerities leave graduates with even
fewer practical skills than American ones.
Hmmm.....graduating with fewer practical skills than none at all.
That must mean having skills that actually retard your ability to
lead a successful, happy life.
The bac should have included the simple question: "Is A =
A?"
That would send the student into an infinite loop, like the
androids on Mudd's Planet.
Mad Max|6.18.09 @ 7:20PM|#
More questions for the French baccalaureate exam:
1) If you were Pascal, how much would you wager on God? What about
Seabiscuit?
2) Is Cartesian dualism a valid explanation of the universe? Or is
the universe simply a giant baguette in the shopping-bag of
eternity?
3) Complete the following: An Existentialist and a
Deconstructionist walk into a bar . . .
4) If God is truly good, why is American television so
popular?
ASSIGNMENT: Go to an outdoor cafe, light up a cigarette, and start
a philsophical conversation.
|6.18.09 @ 7:26PM|#
I think questions like this can test potential college students
on certain abilities that are relevant in the real world. But only
if the people grading the answers judge the quality of the writing
and the thought behind the response, rather than applying some
ideological test.
I worry that Americans often lack the ability to express themselves
in writing, and this is a serious detriment to their ability to get
along in the work world (at least, in a lot of jobs). Aside from
testing for the ability to compose cogent writing on the fly, these
questions test something far more important for people in the
modern world: the ability to affectively bullshit.
jtuf|6.18.09 @ 7:39PM|#
In terms of this entrance exam, maybe it wouldn't hurt
America if we started asking our students questions like this on
their SAT's or ACT's. I believe that the average American 17
year-old is capable of applying themselves on this level of
critical thinking.
I would rather American 17 year olds spend that time exploding
random stuff in garbage cans. That's how most of my friends spent
their high school years, and they ended up working in technical
fields. There's a big difference between a science program designed
to make kids sound smart and a science program designed to raise
engineers and inventors. We can't test for the next big invention,
because we don't know what it will be yet. Rather than giving
student hob nob questions like, "Is it absurd to desire the
imposible", let them spend that time having creative fun with
actual slimy/explosive/crawling/growing/rocketing stuff.
Invisible Finger|6.18.09 @ 7:54PM|#
Is it absurd to desire the impossible?
Not if I'm getting paid for it.
EJM|6.18.09 @ 8:00PM|#
Then again, maybe they should ask, "How many licks does it take to get to the Tootsie Roll center of a Tootsie Pop?"
Fascitis Necrotizante|6.18.09 @ 8:08PM|#
For point of reference, see these prompts from the most recent SAT writing exam. I don't see how having more straightforward, less bullshitty questions makes it any more difficult to assess a student's ability to structure and write a thoughtful response.
|6.18.09 @ 8:12PM|#
For the Science stream:
1) Is it absurd to desire the impossible? 2) Are there questions
which no science can answer?
To be fair, most French science consists of dejectedly commenting
on the absurdity of their particle accelerators when the rest of
the universe outdoes their experiments by millions of orders of
magnitude every second of every day (while breathing out cigarette
smoke and sighing). Oh, le Higgs Boson, we have found it, but what
does it matter?
|6.18.09 @ 8:40PM|#
If France were really cool, its tests would include real
questions:
"Attempt to trisect an angle."
"How do entangled particles communicate?"
"Prove the Riemann hypothesis."
For something less technical, how about "Explain why the U.S. is a
great power and France isn't."
Edwin|6.18.09 @ 8:55PM|#
at first I was kind of bugged reading this, becuase it reminded
me of how stupid liberals/leftists are and how they want to push
that stupidity on all of us.
But then it put me in a good mood, because apparently American
education isn't that bad if this is the sh*t that passes for
"education" in other countries. If these are the questions they ask
in other countries, it doesn't matter if they get better test
scores, because these are nonesense questions - and two of them
were in the SCIENCE portion of the exam! In America at least the
hard SCIENCES haven't been gutted!
I mean really these are silly, almost nonesensical questions. They
certainly are useless questions.
|6.18.09 @ 9:35PM|#
Comment of the day:
"Seamus | June 18, 2009, 6:43pm | #
In terms of this entrance exam, maybe it wouldn't hurt America if
we started asking our students questions like this on their SAT's
or ACT's.
Right. Cuz you can't start too early teaching them how to churn out
meaningless bullshit."
As a PhD student and bourgeois, I find these questions fun to
consider, but a someone who takes Sextus Empiricus seriously, I
know that there are no right answers to these kinds of questions. I
could argue both sides equally well.
EscapedWestOfTheBigMuddy|6.18.09 @ 10:54PM|#
Are there questions which no science can answer?
Well, assuming that all real sciences can be modeled with
mathematics (true, more or less), and that this makes them formal
systems (also more or less true), then Gödel (a Kraut, I believe,
so take that Frenchies) settled the matter back in the
1920's.
OK. I'm going for a beer. Who's with me?
anarch|6.18.09 @ 10:55PM|#
maybe it wouldn't hurt America if we started asking our students questions like this on their SAT's or ACT's
Since they're all yes/no questions, it wouldn't help, either. So I
ask: If something doesn't help where help is needed, does it
hurt?
ev|6.18.09 @ 10:59PM|#
This is so stupid. I'm an intelligent man, but these questions
are bullshit. Now, if they're graded looking at the level of
thinking the writer exhibited and in the manner which they wrote
it...ok.
But seriously. Does language betray thought? I don't know what the
fuck that means.
Is it absurd to desire the impossible? I could answer that, and my
answer would be an emphatic NO, but yeah...what is the
answer?
This has to just be a writing exercise. A silly, French
exercise.
Mike|6.18.09 @ 11:36PM|#
OK, I guess I'm a supernerd. I thought that these questions were really cool, and I'd happily replace the new Writing section on the SAT with this. OK, most students don't know enough to do anything but BS them, but a student who is smart enough to want to go to one of the more selective colleges ought to have at least something to say. The only thing I would worry about is the fact that all of the graders would be grading for political correctness, not clarity of thought.
|6.19.09 @ 12:21AM|#
1) Does objectivity in history suppose impartiality in the historian? 2) Does language betray thought?
Are these 'yes or no' questions? If so, they're damnably easy.
Logfile|6.19.09 @ 12:26AM|#
"But seriously. Does language betray thought? I don't know what
the fuck that means."
They are asking you if you think the particular traits of the
language you speak has a limiting effect on your ability to express
thought. Or, even more damaging, does the fact that people often
think out things with "mental" words limit one's ability to think?
As in, if there are not sufficient words to describe something,
does it make it less likely that someone will think of it?
Basically, its a question with no real world value. Philosophy
geeks would find it interesting, but that's about it.
Alex|6.19.09 @ 12:38AM|#
Extremely difficult tests, ones with a failing super-majority, do not test knowledge since not much can be gleaned (this is especially true of multiple-choice tests). Instead, the function of such tests is to limit the number of people getting accepted, thus creating implicit acceptance caps where explicit ones would be unpopular.
Naga Sadow|6.19.09 @ 12:55AM|#
Apparently my bullshit lobe is fully functional because I had something similiar on an ITBS test once upon a time. I'm paraphrasing but it went something like "Why is the United States so great.". I wrote an entire essay, filling the spaces around the actual wording space, explaining what a retarded question that was being asked of me to answer. Sadly, I got only an 89th percentile ranking. I blame it on the politically loaded essay question for not getting my rightfully earned "top percentile" ranking.
anarch, answering bac|6.19.09 @ 6:19AM|#
Is it absurd to desire the impossible? I could answer that, and my answer would be an emphatic NO
Why "No"? To me it seems obviously "Yes," and now, at the risk of
proving the terrorists have won (by taking seriously the question),
I'm curious to learn how it could be "No."
Desiring the impossible may be unavoidable, for example in cases
where the desiring agent does has not yet learned that a particular
desire is unfulfillable (eg, holding an impractical wish), and in
cases where knowing that a desire will necessarily be frustrated
does not immediately extinguish the desire because not all our
desires are immediately responsive to reason (eg, being subject to
an habituated appetite).
Absurd may therefore mean neither (in the first of these two cases)
foolish, because information necessary for wisely desiring is
lacking, nor (in the second case) discretional nor blameworthy,
because in the second case desiring the impossible may be at least
provisionally unavoidable.
But to desire the impossible - ie, the unattainable - still seems
absurd, as it is an investment of resources in a futile pursuit,
which could be the very definition of absurdity, whether or not
benignly or even praiseworthily pursued.
Art-P.O.G.|6.19.09 @ 6:30AM|#
But to desire the impossible - ie, the unattainable - still seems absurd, as it is an investment of resources in a futile pursuit, which could be the very definition of absurdity, whether or not benignly or even praiseworthily pursued.
I disagree. Although many praiseworthy goals are outside the
limit of attainability, I think it is reasonable to use our desires
to motivate us as close to those "heights" as possible.
:::metaphorically adjusts black beret
These can't possibly be yes/no questions, but as essay questions,
they're pretty good.
Art-P.O.G.|6.19.09 @ 6:33AM|#
correction: these can't ::reasonably:: be yes/no questions. I see it like R. Pointer said above.
Art-P.O.G.|6.19.09 @ 6:50AM|#
And as lawyerly as it sounds, to riff of what you said, anarch, I guess it depends on which definition of "absurd" one uses.
Fluffy|6.19.09 @ 7:47AM|#
They are asking you if you think the particular traits of
the language you speak has a limiting effect on your ability to
express thought.
Well, they are and they aren't.
Because they could have asked, "Do the particular traits of the
language you speak have a limiting effect on your ability to
express thought?" and a person of reasonable intelligence who can
write clearly could devise an appropriate answer to the question
even if they have never considered the proposition in exactly this
way before.
Using the shorthand, "Does language betray thought?" [in English at
least, and I assume it is true in French as well] makes it
necessary for the respondent to be familiar with the terms applied
to the question by a specific group of philosophers. Essentially
they're concealing the real question behind a poetic/literary way
of asking the question, making it more a test of your familiarity
with the customary mode of expression of philosophers than the
ability to think.
Art-P.O.G.|6.19.09 @ 7:54AM|#
Essentially they're concealing the real question behind a poetic/literary way of asking the question, making it more a test of your familiarity with the customary mode of expression of philosophers than the ability to think.
True. An alternate reading is "does language sometimes reveal thoughts the author/speaker would rather leave concealed?" Of course, that's too simple a question, I guess.
anarch|6.19.09 @ 8:47AM|#
Art-P.O.G. at 6:50 am, I hear you (cf. the etymology of
absurd).
And now that we've attained comity, would you care to explain the
name you use here?
PR|6.19.09 @ 9:01AM|#
Is it absurd to desire the impossible?
Yes, but if France wants to pretend to be a world power I don't see
any harm in it.
|6.19.09 @ 9:02AM|#
And now that we've attained comity, would you care to
explain the name you use here?
Yes, Art, I've often wondered about that, myself.
|6.19.09 @ 9:10AM|#
"Fewer than half the children of working class parents earn the
certificate that gives passage to university."
If only American universities were so discriminate maybe more
Americans wouldn't have useless college degrees and thousands of
dollars of debt.
|6.19.09 @ 9:18AM|#
Art-P.O.G. at 6:50 am, I hear you (cf. the etymology of
absurd).
And now that we've attained comity, would you care to explain the
name you use here?
Click on his name - you may find a few clues. ;-)
|6.19.09 @ 9:22AM|#
OMG! I am bookmarking the fuck out of that. And kudos, Art, for not having a MySpace page that makes my eyes want to vomit. (I need to click on more name links...)
Forty-Two|6.19.09 @ 9:26AM|#
Although many praiseworthy goals are outside the limit of
attainability, I think it is reasonable to use our desires to
motivate us as close to those "heights" as possible.
this is why I consider myself a libertarian.
Art-P.O.G.|6.19.09 @ 10:13AM|#
. And kudos, Art, for not having a MySpace page that makes my eyes want to vomit.
Thanks. Hmmm...still trying to do that one piece of design that
justifies my existence on this planet (it's harder than it
sounds).
My name...well the art part is self-explanatory (been
drawing/painting for a long time), but the "P.O.G." is the acronym
for the military term "personnel other than grunt".
Granite26|6.19.09 @ 10:24AM|#
I could see 'Yes it does, and that's why policing the French
language is a jackass idea' as a good premise for the Language
betray Thought question...
Or the other way, for statist mind control :)
Wade|6.19.09 @ 11:04AM|#
Sounds like they are trying to measure the students potential for bullshit, which is pretty much what Europe runs on these days.
anarch|6.19.09 @ 11:36AM|#
Uh, clicking on his name yields a pop-up warning box:
You are about to log in to the site "hotmail.com" with the username "james%2El%2Egriffin", but the website does not require authentication. This may be an attempt to trick you.
So I think I'll rest content with the explanation received
heretofore, thanks.
|6.19.09 @ 12:16PM|#
4) If God is truly good, why is American television
Jerry Lewis so popular?
Fixed.
Zeb|6.19.09 @ 12:24PM|#
American television is so popular because television from other
countries sucks even more.
Useless educations is great. As long as you realize that it is not
the whole world and get yourself some practical skills as well.
adherent of the doctrine of ra|6.19.09 @ 12:26PM|#
If God Man is truly good,
why is American television Jerry Lewis
Springer so popular?
hmm|6.19.09 @ 3:13PM|#
Potential questions from the much needed internet version of the
Bac exam. To allow people to continue to use the internet.
1) Anteater or not an anteater? Is the animal's proclamation sufficient to justify its being an anteater.
2) Cheezburger, shuld haz or not shuld haz.
3) Is porn clogging the internet tubes or unplugging the male tubes?
4) Is a rabbit with a pancake on his head art, a social statement, animal cruelty, or just a rabbit with a pancake on his head. (RIP Oolang)
Grammar Vichy Governor|6.19.09 @ 6:30PM|#
sufficient to justify its being an anteater
Anyone who manages both to use a gerund with the genitive
and correctly spell the possessive of it is
automatically waived all entrance requirement and goes directly to
Heaven.
Vichy joez|6.19.09 @ 6:33PM|#
"all entrance requirement" was of course intentionally so phrased in order to acclimatize the victor to his destined profession of waiting tables in ethnic restaurants.
MattXIV|6.19.09 @ 7:59PM|#
There's been quite a bit of information lost in translation in
this story. The exams are divided into streams depending on the
field the student is intending to go into. Thus, only one of the
stream question sets would be asked to a given student and the
students pick one of the philosophy essay questions from their
stream to answer and the philsophy questions don't carry that much
weight on the exam except in the literary stream.
Lycee students have a manditory philosophy class in their senior
year - it replaces what in the US would be 12th grade English. I'm
guessing the "correct" answer to the questions is to name check the
major parties and summarize their ideas then agree with one of them
and that the resulting writing is not too different than when US
high school seniors regurgiate the themes of a novel for their
English class essays.
And then we have our "L'ultraliberisme est effrayante!" question -
"What is gained by exchange?" I'm guessing "comsumer surplus +
producer surplus" isn't going to get the full points...
And because it just wouldn't be France without a work
stopage:
Mercredi, les professeurs de philosophie de l'académie de Lille ont décidé en assemblée générale de protester contre la dégradation des conditions de correction du baccalauréat, en refusant de prendre en charge un tiers des copies à corriger
Site comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245