Stress test for France's young philosophers

I did not envy my son this morning when, along with 331,575 teenagers across France, he sat down at 8am for the four-hour ordeal of le bac philo.

The philosophy test, or rather torture, is still the "royal subject" of the baccalauréat, the national high school examination that opens the way to university and adulthood. Apart from students in trades and technical schools, all pupils are obliged to take the philosophy exam.

Literacy may be declining in France like everywhere else but it says something about the intellectual skills still required of the young that about half of all late teenagers in France earn a baccalauréat that includes philosophy.

The bac, with its centralised, simultaneous examinations is a ritual of a rare kind. For weeks the media have built up to the big moment of the bac philo -- the opening test -- with tips on subjects and handling stress and bac memoirs from celebrities. Today, television and radio are reporting from the school gates.

The philosophy questions have just been released. My son, who's just 18, was required to dissert on one of the following two questions: What is gained by exchange ? (Que gagne-t-on à échanger) and Does technological development transform mankind?  (Le développement technique transforme-t-il les hommes ?). [More questions below]

You can't just wing it with a ramble around the subject. Like most French disciplines, structure and method are vital. The reasoning has to follow rules and you must cite the appropriate great thinkers as you set out your argument.

The baccalauréat has demanding equivalents in other countries. But the continuing rigour of the system helps explain why the average French person is more articulate, more able to express him or herself on abstract subjects, than, say, average Britons or Americans.

The baccalauréat, inaugurated by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1808, was designed to promote the post-revolutionary ideal of a nation of rational citizens. Luc Ferry, a philosopher who served as Education Minister from 2002-2004, explained it on the radio this morning as the kids were drafting their philo answers: "When the bac was created, the idea was that in order to become a citizen and be capable of voting, you had to be able to sort out ideas and argue them in public. That remains true today," he said (I wonder how many professional philosophers have served as Education Minister in the UK).

There is much that can be criticised in the baccalauréat and a system run by a Ministry of Education that commands an unbelievable 1.2 million staff. The baccalauréat is too elitist, some say. Fewer than half the children of working class parents earn the certificate that gives passage to university. Others say standards have been dumbed down too far now that 63 percent of all teenagers earn the bac, compared with just 20 percent in 1970.

It's also true that the French education system emphasises information and rules rather than imagination and that secondary students perform modestly in international comparisons, such as that of the annual OECD ranking. Another point, from which my two teenagers have suffered in childhoods in French schools; is a teaching culture which relies more on criticism than encouragement.

Xavier Darcos, the teacher who is current Education Minister (and is probably about to be replaced) has been warring with the unions over redeploying resources and cutting teaching staff. Something must be wrong, he says, if France spends more than the European average on education but scores mediocre results. The unions answer that by saying the OECD rankings -- which routinely put Finland top in Europe -- are biased towards nordic and and Anglo-Saxon methods and do not take account of French priorities.   

President Sarkozy has run into resistance from the education establishment in his attempts to remedy some of the flaws. His latest idea, floated last week, is for schools to open outside classroom hours and at weekends to offer extra-curricular activities. Traditionally, French schools are teaching machines. Sports, hobbies and other youth activities are largely organised by other institutions.

But putting aside the problems, the baccalauréat remains a sterling asset for France. It's internationally admired and its international -- less Gallic -- version is taken in many other countries. Perhaps I am out of date and I certainly would not have fancied doing le bac philo myself. But it remains impressive that so many kids reach a level at which they can hold forth for four hours on existential matters such as the following from today's other general baccalauréat streams. 

 For science students: 1) Is it absurd to desire the impossible? 2) Are there questions which no science can answer?

For the literature stream: 1) Does objectivity in history suppose impartiality in the historian ? 2) Does language betray thought ?

My son's two questions came from the economics and social science stream. He choses the one on exchange and reassures me that he wrote a suitably leftwing answer which did not sing the praises of commercial exchange. He kept it broad and talked about moral matters (The French curriculum and teachers are slanted solidly to the left).  As well as the essay, the students have the option of writing a commentary on a short unprepared text.

 

Comments

[Mauvezin]

@CB
"... they can hold forth for four hours on abstract matters of existence..."
******************
Mais que dites-vous donc là !?
L'abstraction est la réalité de l'esprit.
M***E pour votre fiston ;)

[Richard]

Very different to the "General Studies" A-level I took with two classes of preparation!

But to put this into context, I'm sure that the students are prepared for the Philo exam just as they are for any other subject. So answering the seemingly complex question will be a matter of using the structure and tools they've been given.

You're right to point out though that it is an asset to everyone to be able to structure arguments.

I think that the structure of the French system will be its undoing. Experts such as Sir Ken Robinson highlight the need for education systems to be adaptive to get the best out of everyone and allow the creativity the 21st century economy requires. Can the rigid French system deliver this change?

I expect not.

[DODO]

OT :

Charles. As a perfect French I became, I was taking my coffee with two Croissants while reading the Canard Enchainé.
Do you know you are in the front page of the canard for your "How Sarkozy stood up to Obama?"
Yes Charles.
C'est pas joli de se cacher derrière ses petits camarades.

[Oui, mais ce n'était pas méchant de la part du Canard. La presse française utilise les médias etrangers pour rapporter ce qu'ils n'osent pas dire eux-mêmes -- comme le Canard a fait avec mon blog cette semaine! CB]

[Rick]

Is logic an optional component? It’s just that I’ve noticed a gaping hole when it comes to joined-up thinking; this from certain contributors who – to judge by sheer productivity – pride themselves on their skill in reasoned debate.

[DODO]

"The baccalauréat, inaugurated by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1808,"

Charles,

He was Général Bonaparte until 1800 when he became Napoléon Bonaparte (first Consul) then
Napoléon (or Napoleon 1° - Empereur) in December 1804.

Ask Charles Jr, he will tell you that structure and method are vital ;)

"He choses the one on exchange and reassures me that he wrote a suitably leftwing answer which did not sing the praises of commercial exchange." CB

You have a very wise son, Charles. On ne parle jamais de corde chez un pendu.

[Yes, DODO, he was the emperor at the time but in English he's known as Napoleon Bonaparte. Incidentally I think Luc Ferry also got his chronology muddled this morning, talking about the Republic at the time of the bac's beginnings. CB]

[azloon]

[As well as the essay, the students have the option of writing a commentary on a short unprepared text] CB

what is a 'short unprepared text?' why was this option offered? [I mean a short previously unseen text. That option is actually harder than the essay, according to the kids, because you have to be extremely creative and thorough in your analysis. CB]

These questions of the 'le bac philo' are terrifying. i can see why the educational elite in France have such a high opinion of themselves. having to survive an exam such as this would naturally create people who feel they have 'dodged a bullet' in life, risen to the highest intellectual challenge, much as people who survive 'boot camp' in the u.s. marine corps, or others who survive the dangerous hazings of secret societies, forever remain convinced of their superiority.

What are the 'structures and methods' you mention as necessary to answer these questions? Can a student study the answers given in previous exams and, for his/her preparation, practice writing answers which use source material possibly applicable to any abstract, existential question?

or would this be exposed as a 'smokescreen' by graders of the exam? how could they distinguish between relevant and irrelevant source materials without a unreasonably high degree of subjectivity?

Do older French survivors of le philo bac sit around in cafes proposing answers to the current year's questions? or are they inclined to think, "those poor bastards -- i'm glad i'm finished with all that merde.' ??

[I'd need the full four hours to reply to all of that. Perhaps bac veterans would like to explain la méthode to Azloon. And yes, old hands do discuss the new year's crop. Famous writers and philosophers are regularly asked by the media to sit down and provide a model answer to the year's questions. The media also publish suggested ideal essays soon after the exams. CB]

[MCG]

I am always impressed when France 2 interviews ordinary citizens. Where others might be angry or even hysterical, the average French person seems capable of organizing his or her thoughts and speaking them calmly.

[DODO]

"What is gained by exchange ?"
CB

I hope your son did not fall into what the teacher call 'a trap' - le piège.
The trap there was to do a long list of :
exchange x gain
( comercial, moral, intellectual etc..)
What filo use to ask is the understanding of the concept. There we have two clear concept : Gain and Exchange.
So, I believe, the answer was to developp them.
With Gain you could enter in the notion of (among others)
ethic of the gain,
épicurism (la limitation des désirs et des plaisirs du gain )
Morale ( when the gain stop to be moral)
etc...

With exchange you had the concept of Universalism, materialism etc...

Then link the two concept.
My two cents : try to put a reference to Nietzsche and to 'Ainsi parlait Zarathoustra.
Whatever the question is, do a link to the above. It is briliant, it allway impress the corrector.
And it is easy using imagination even if it is 'tiré par les cheveux'

[Thanks for the thoughts. I have only had a quick phone talk with my son, but he assures me that he brought in Nietzsche and Also sprach Z. That impressed me all right but I don't know if he fell into the piège. CB]

[DODO]

azloon

The methodogie is the following : show that you understand the question and the words of the question( they learn in philo the notion of CONCEPT).

Then ARTICULATE your answer. It is to say show that your answer is the result of your OWN REFLEXION using all the concepts as a tool.

In short, show that you are not a parrot or the kind of guy who think 'it is this way because my father told so'

Believe me, the corrector don't care if your answer is in agreement with what he/she think.

[DODO]

he assures me that he brought in Nietzsche and Also sprach Z. That impressed me all right but I don't know if he fell into the piège. CB]

LOL !

[Pauline L]

AZLOON "Do older French survivors of le philo bac sit around in cafes proposing answers to the current year's questions? or are they inclined to think, "those poor bastards -- i'm glad i'm finished with all that merde.'??

The latter without a doubt! To be fair, I found the study of philosophy a very interesting challenge at the time and would do it again given the chance, but the exam is fierce and I am glad it's behind me! Mine was on Art (the actual question eludes me, but as it was Bac Literaire it was suitably complicated). I was delighted with my mark of 12 out of 20 (one of 2 marks above la moyenne out of a whole year of essays...).

Due to the complexity of the subject, students at the time (11 years ago) in general considered themselves happy to get marks of 8-10/20, would have been ecstatic to get between 10 and 12, and would have thought they were near genius to get anything above 12 - maybe 1-3 students out of a class of 30 would ever get that, and they were generally the class nerds who were good at everything. I don't know whether that's still the case!

But for a french student, to get through a philo exam and come victorious (8 out of 20 and above) is something to be very proud of.

[dot king]

Hard work and application, I hope CHARLES, your son got through with flyng colours.

On today's 13h news, two philosophy experts were asked about the "exchange" question. One thought it would be "dangerous" to slant the answer towards the present financial crisis to the exception, or near exception, of other aspects of the philosophical context of "exchange", while the other thought that philosophy certainly had its place in analysing present-day issues, including the world financial crisis and issued a plea for the exam markers (who might be refusing to mark some of the papers in protest over their deteriorating work conditions) not to be hard on those who used this context over a "pure" approach, as long as they related their arguments to the philosophers studied.

Question: What is to be gained by the marking of only four in every five exam papers and is a probability or a mathematical approach needed to predict the effect on the Bacc Phil overall result?

AZLOON - as far as I can gather from pupils and teachers I know, just as in any other subject, the students are taught the basic tenets of the "main" philosophers throughout history. They then have to hope that they can apply what they know best to one of the questions in their specialist area and quote the appropriate philosophers in an argumented answer.
Just like when you study literature - the final year might be on Shakespearean Tragedy, so you need to know two or three plays very well and hope one comes up in the exam - and - just in case you're unlucky - you need some knowledge of the rest and a quotation to throw in here and there.
Peasy really . . .

[azloon]

[The methodogie is the following : show that you understand the question and the words of the question( they learn in philo the notion of CONCEPT).

Then ARTICULATE your answer. It is to say show that your answer is the result of your OWN REFLEXION using all the concepts as a tool] Dodo

Thanks, Dodo, for trying to explain 'structures and methods' to me. Not being French, and having had to confront this hazing, a lot of it 'goes over my head.'

on the exam, is it permissible in one's answers to CAPITALIZE certain words as a way of suggesting that you know more about the subject than you are capable of articulating? :)

[Dominique II]

One would think one is discussing the mandarinal exams of Imperial China! Come on, it was hard work and there was much need for clarity, method and openmindedness, (yes, even in France) but youth is the time for that ("préparatoires" can only be followed by robust, motivated, and it was once said virgin, young people - "bac" is less onerous but not an exercise to do more than twice in a lifetime).

The real challenge is not the bac, a tough rite of passage but little more, it is the Concours Général... Winning essays are usually published in prestigious papers. And they are impressive, especially when considering the writers' age.

[DODO]

on the exam, is it permissible in one's answers to CAPITALIZE certain words as a way of suggesting that you know more about the subject than you are capable of articulating? :)
AZLOO

Comme ce n'est pas encore fait sur Internet mais écrit à la main sur une feuille de papier, et comme c'est écrit en français pour des Français, je pense que non.;)

[Matthieu]

Azloon
"Do older French survivors of le philo bac sit around in cafes proposing answers to the current year's questions? or are they inclined to think, "those poor bastards -- i'm glad i'm finished with all that merde.' ??"

beeing personally a "survivor"of this mess I can tell you that it is the second one for sure.

Charles, you are right to say that it is a national institution; personally to achieve a "16 sur 20" in philo will be definitely the satisfaction of my old days.

[Julio]

Mr Bremner made the front page of this week "Canard Enchainé" with his post about Sarko trying (and failing miserably) to impress president Obama.

Does the "costume" fits you allright , Charles ?

[Don]

[My son's two questions came from the economics and social science stream. He choses the one on exchange and reassures me that he wrote a suitably leftwing answer which did not sing the praises of commercial exchange. CB]

This shows the nonsense of these exams. His grade SHOULD NOT depend on which side of the argument he takes; your son should be judged by the quality of his thought and the teachers should be “intellectual” enough to appreciate a good argument even if they don’t share the student’s point of view. Your son has learned what his teachers, who have all the power, want him to say and think so he does the wise thing and gives it to them. The fact that the system works this way is the ultimate proof of its total lack of TRUE intellectuality.

The sign of a true intellectual is someone who can question assumptions and the French system doesn’t seem to value this or your son would not have had to take a leftist approach to his answer.

Having been in the Ph.D. program in Philosophy at Columbia University (New York)
I went on to get several (3) graduate degrees in Computer Science and Math – two subjects which require some serious analytical thought. I find that most philosophy is nonsense, but has the air of intellectuality. Sartre is probably the best known French intellectual and philosopher of the 20th Century and he was a Communist and denied the atrocities of Stalin up to the very end. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sartre So much for this phony intellectualism.

[Scotian]

Azloon,

[These questions of the 'le bac philo' are terrifying. i can see why the educational elite in France have such a high opinion of themselves. having to survive an exam such as this would naturally create people who feel they have 'dodged a bullet' in life]

The thing is that these "elite" from the educational system have most probably gone through much worse later. To access "prestigious" schools and public institution, you have to pass "concours". And compared to those, the "bac" is not much more challenging than sunday paper quizz games. Add to this that one of the most renowned school, "polytechnique", is military ruled.

My modest non-"elite" self has been through "classes préparatoires scientifiques" (2 years after bac), and some of it reminded me indeed of the training scenes in "Full Metal Jacket". Hard, but I remember feeling my brain working like a Swiss clock. But, yes, I'd be surprised if I can achieve now more than 10% of what I could then, intellectually speaking.

[DODO]

The real challenge is not the bac, a tough rite of passage but little more, it is the Concours Général...
DOMINIQUE II

And so are the concours for all Grandes Ecoles.
I agree with you on what you said about the two years of Classes Préparatoires.
My daughter did it (Option ES). Yes, two very hard years, but it pay for the price.
I don't know what the son of Charles think about it ( even if it is too late now)

[Clem]

About the Bac Philo :

The questions may sound terrifying, but remember that there is always the "Commentaire de texte", like in every others 'matières' : In French Literature, Economy, Philosophy, you always got the choice between a dissert' and a Commentaire de texte.

I think the commentaire is actually easier, despite what I’ve recently heard or read : Because for a dissert’, you have to know about a great deal of things ‘sur le bout des doigts’. Of course, a pupil knowing nothing cannot succeed if he tries to make a commentaire de texte, but he can help himself with the text.

I can remember my Bac Philo : The two questions seemed to dangerous to me, so I took the Commentaire : It was a text by Kant, about Moral. (I can’t remember which book it was from), basically, he was talking about two different kind of moral (Si je me souvien bien, la morale “accessible” à la masse, et une autre morale, plus utopique, mais qui de fait entraîne l’homme à s’améliorer). I write a decent commentaire, and I got 11/20 (Coeff. 4, Economique & Social like CB’s son.).

How did I get an 11 out of 20? Because the most important thing for a french teacher is METHOD : The plan, the plan and the plan, that’s what this is about : An introduction announcing the plan, two different sections (three is better) and a conclusion.

The “plan” is sacred for french teacher : J’ai même une anecdote à ce propos, racontée par un professeur de faculté qui a un double doctorat et une agrégation. A un de ces oraux, le jury l’a fait plancher sur un sujet absolument impossible, dont même eux n’avaient aucune idée (quelque chose du genre l’energie géothermique en Ukraine, du temps de l’URSS, donc avec des données limitées. Le prof, même si il ne savait strictement rien, a fait un bon plan. Il a eu 15. L’exercice avait uniquement pour but de tester les capacités du candidat à s’organiser. C’est une des caractéristiques du système scolaire français.

Sorry for all the mistakes in english.

And Charles, good luck for your son, in this section, everything is important, en espérant une mention bien !

[Dominique]

Charles says

"the continuing rigour of the system helps explain why the average French person is more articulate, more able to express him or herself on abstract subjects, than, say, average Britons or Americans."

Maybe...but would that explain that the average French person is less articulate, less able to express him or herself on practical subjects, than, say, average Britons or Americans?

As one of the french people who went actually through this exam, i'll provide you with what i did in 1982 in philofor my BAC C!!

I had to choose between 3 options :

1- Que signifie "être esclave"? (What does "being a slave" mean? (so french!!))
2- Toute vérité est-elle vérifiable? (Is any truth "checkable"?)
3- a boring and comple text i could'nt even read.

I chose subject 2 : Toute vérité est-elle vérifiable? I was proud of what i did and thought i could get a good mark.

The typical "plan" (methode in anglosaxon language) for philo is :

- Inroduction : where does this question come from?

- Thèse : anything that leads to answer "YES" to the question (or anything optimistic)

- Antithèse : anything that leads to answer "NO" to the question (or anything pessimistic)

- Synthèse : short resume leading to the conclusion that should open the subject to an other endless subject such as "What would a world without slave be like?"

Well....i am not sur this is good advice....i got a 2/20 wich is about ....the worse you can get...

[DODO]

His grade SHOULD NOT depend on which side of the argument he takes;
DON

Don, WHY DID YOU capitalize " SHOULD NOT" ?
Could you PLEASE paid more ATTENTION to AZLOON'S message ? ;)

BTW : since the grade don't depend on wich side of the argument he takes, you are OT.

[DODO]

i got a 2/20 wich is about ....the worse you can get
DOMINIQUE

That's the problem of those with White-Black or Yes-NO formatation.

For example : The question today was "What is gained by exchange ?"
You can't do it with Thèse - Antithèse ?

[the frog]

funny, when the Brits don't talk of the weird albatros sex life, they bash the frenchitude

[I wonder what an albatros sex life is. CB]

[qwerty]

"Well....i am not sur this is good advice....i got a 2/20 wich is about ....the worse you can get.." Dominique. ouch.

Unfortunately my philo professor was not Raphael Enthoven whom i just saw on FR2 correcting the subjects, but an obese blond woman who gave me relatively mediocre marks (i did my maths during philo), but still i managed to get 14/20 at the bac analysing a text from Kant by way of disserting about Spinoza (knew and still know nothing about Kant but Spinoza was a favourite of mine i seem to remember).

shows the the philo exam is a throw of the dice....

Are French students really more articulate (says CB) than their anglosaxon counterparts? I think US/UK students are far more encouraged to think creatively and to express dissenting views in class.

[Francois D]

He kept it broad and talked about moral matters (The French curriculum and teachers are slanted solidly to the left).

Your son was right. Having been taught in a Catholic school we had been prepared to this technique for avoiding to be recognized.

But a good corrector should not judge opinions but culture, including references to ancient philosophers and the reasoning ie means to arrive at conclusions.

I heard today on radio that philosphie could be taught another year. This would be is good new.

Philosophy also has the advantage of making you discover ancient Greece. Greek philosophers are the references and Germans comme in second position.

I read at least one philosophy book a year (during holydays). Luc Ferry's books are very good and I recommend his latest about Kant. I am always fascinated by philosophers culture.

[Francois D]

The good exercise: what is a "good copy".
http://www.dailymotion.com/relevance/search/philosophie/video/x22yzy_quest-ce-quune-bonne-copie-de-philo_politics

And also Jean d'Ormesson; (philosophy is good for brain plasticity).

http://www.lefigaro.fr/actualite-france/2009/06/18/01016-20090618ARTFIG00532-la-dissert-de-philo-de-jean-d-ormesson-.php

[DODO]

"I think US/UK students are far more encouraged to think creatively and to express dissenting views in class. "
qwerty

Sorry but as you said 'I think' it means : it is just your opinion.

The same as to say : I think Brazilian students are far more encouraged to think creatively and to express dissenting views in class.

No independant source, no démonstration.

the same is to say :
I think 1 + 1 = 3

[Dominique]

Dodo,

"For example : The question today was "What is gained by exchange ?"
You can't do it with Thèse - Antithèse ?"

Thèse : what you gain
Antithèse : what you loose
Synthèse : up to you!

result : 1/20?

[Daniel Strohl]

[I wonder what an albatros sex life is. CB]

CHARLES, THE FROG does probably not include you in the category of Brits he is thinking of :). This category is limited to a very few specimens - at least on this blog. Elsewhere, I don't know :).

"and he was a Communist" (DON)

I would summarize (and somewhat caricature :) this reasoning as follows :
- a Communist is stupid and bad faithed
- a Mac Carthy follower is intelligent and good faithed.

As far as I am able to remember, our teachers of the time of my baccalauréat tried to demonstrate us more elaborate thinking processes, i.e. less binary ones :).

PS:

Sorry for the anachronism :). In 1953/54, I am afraid that the word "binary" was not much used in philosophy classes :). At least, I can't remember having heard it. But memory fades with growing age (and even more so when one enters the dreaded fossil category :).

[Daniel Strohl]

AZLOON,

"Do older French survivors of le philo bac sit around in cafes proposing answers to the current year's questions? "

As far as I am concerned, the answer is NO :). If I am sitting around in a cafe, I will most probably be having a drink while reading a paper - that's all!

PS: one of the charms of sitting at a "terrasse de café" is to have a (discreet :) look at nice girls passing by...

[Jurgen]

For science students:
1) Is it absurd to desire the impossible?
A. NO
2) Are there questions which no science can answer?
A. Probably

For the literature stream:
1) Does objectivity in history suppose impartiality in the historian ?
A.YES
2) Does language betray thought ?
A. YES (But not when utilised by Politicians)

Am I over simplifying and thus trivialising the object of these questions? probably, but since the questions do not state how the answer is expected to be presented, can anyone say the answers given are wrong?

[Rick]

The founder of the ‘Revue historique’ (1876), Gustave Monod, ‘demanded that philosophy should be altogether abolished in schools: it was justified only when the faculties were not functioning properly: but now that higher education was being revived, it should return to where it belonged.’ (This was in the aftermath of the Franco-Prussian war).

Monod complained that boys were being accustomed ‘to talk and write about things they did not understand’. And sometimes, philosophy led the boys ‘to contract a dangerous excitation of the brain’. French philosophy was ‘distinguished by its obscurity and its subtlety . . . Philosophic loquacity and gibberish are, in my view, among the most certain causes of the intellectual decadence from which we suffer’. Monod was an historian.

Writing in 1894, the psychologist, Ribot, also thought philosophy went over most boys’ heads, boring the majority while intoxicating the rest with generalisations and formulae they could not understand. Monzie, in 1925, warned of ‘extreme ideas’ and ‘doctrines which attract by their novelty or trenchant character’. Until Simone Weil’s time, philosophy continued, facilely, ‘to equate truth with beauty . . . Marx entered the syllabus only in 1960’(!) [Zeldin].

In 1939, the questions of 1867 were still considered relevant, without any modifications. In 1957, a question on behaviourism revealed that some students attributed this theory to a Monsieur Behavior (what’s new!). ‘The cramming books – of which there were extraordinarily large numbers – divided philosophy into a number of –isms and showed how standard questions could be answered by standard replies . . . One witty teacher sarcastically produced a ‘perpetual answer’ or ‘master key’ which could be applied to any question’.

One wonders if all the above is hopelessly out of date. [Source: ‘France 1848-1945, Intellect and Pride’ by Theodore Zeldin, OUP, 1977 pp218-21]

[Peter J]

"The baccalauréat, inaugurated by Napoleon Bonaparte in 1808, was designed to promote the post-revolutionary ideal of a nation of rational citizens " (CB)

General education in France wasn't a Napoleonic development. There was a tradition of basic schooling long before this.

During the Peninsula wars in Portugal and Spain, between Wellington and Napoleon's Forces, the British and their Allies were surprised to find that their rank & file French prisoners were almost always literate, being able to both read and write, and were for the most part conscripts.

In the British army, the equivalent ranks were either conned into taking the King's shilling, usually by getting them blind drunk; or were pressed into service - having been given one of three choices by the magistrates. They had the option of hanging, hard penal servitude, or join the army...... but not necessarily in that order.

For those who did join up willingly - principally the Irish & the Scots, they did so to avoid starvation. Very few had any schooling at all.

ps:

My Uncle taught Philosophy at a number of major Universities from the mid-50's to the early 90's rising to Head of Dept, and occupying the Chair of Philosophy at his last posting. When budgetary cuts were announced in his dept. and he had to choose and inform those colleagues who were to be made redundant, he had a nervous breakdown.

conclusion:

However intellectual one's reasoning and thought processes may be, the realities of daily life are just as hard as in any other field.

[surcouf]

"Do older French survivors of le philo bac sit around in cafes proposing answers to the current year's questions? or are they inclined to think, "those poor bastards -- i'm glad i'm finished with all that merde.' ??"

Ni l'un ni l'autre pour ma part ! I had the baccalauréat last year, the subject was so terrible :" Une connaissance scientifique du vivant est-elle possible ?" (in english it must be something like "can we have a scientific knowledge of the alive ?")
I made an introduction, a plan, a conclusion... and I got 11 (en série littéraire coefficient 7 ça fait mal :-))
J'étais tellement content hier de ne pas être à la place de ces pauvres élèves (j'ai déjà donné, merci), but spending 4h on such a subject is really an interesting experience (almost fun). I don't study philo anymore but I don't regret we have to do so in terminale. I gives an interessant and new point of view on the world.

[Peter Athey]

For CB:

Everything you didn't know that you wanted to know about the albatros and its sexual habits - taken from your own newspaper.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/uk/science/article6514861.ece

[Rick]

‘Adversity’s sweet milk, philosophy’(!)

Which of the following is short of a ‘bac phil’?

‘Sarcasm, irony and "offensive" -French meaning- posting always seem fair and constructive [...]on this blog except when coming from the French .’

‘Could you consider arguing without patronising? Or are you that intoxicated by your remarkable abilities to "pontificate" that you really believe you 're doing us/me a professoral favor by providing your sentencious remarks not to mention, your boxing countings?’

‘It has been a common pattern on this blog for prejudice about France and the French to be aired as well established fact, without the slightest supporting argumentation, while counterarguments from the French (or the more honest part of the blog's public) were dismissed as devoid of substance.’

‘Toi y en a avoir raison et toi y en a bien bon de t'intéresser à nous autres Français.’

‘I won't waste your time, and first mine, by answering your variously hemiplegical views.’

‘the idea that French laws are primarily focused on restricting liberties while AS ones are the virtuous opposite is as silly as it is glib.’

‘I do note however that 'questioning' in the French education system is not particularly encouraged.’

[Rick]

Some readers may find this informative; others, a lifeline...

‘The French do not like to hear their language spoken badly. They would rather butcher yours than hear theirs being eviscerated: hence their rude tendency to reply in bad English . . . The French are addicted to ideas, and their language, with all its wonderful imprecision, is a perfect vehicle for abstraction.’

‘The British are, by contrast, rooted in the concrete. Their talent for comic detachment enables them to communicate in ways that are not necessarily linked to the expression of ideas. Indeed they mistrust ideas, which are seen as the domain of the pretentious. A sense of the absurd or a sense of irony will be enough to make someone entertaining in Britain, whereas both of these faculties are frequently lost on the French.’

[Source: ‘The Secret Life of France’ by Lucy Wadham, Faber and Faber, 2006, pp 78-9]

[Joëlle]

CB refers to a "a teaching culture which relies more on criticism than encouragement", which is so true of France. Every year in his September speech to parents, my sons' headmaster says he would like to place this academic year "sous le signe de la confiance" - the parents' in the teachers, the teachers' in the parents, and most of all everybody's in the children. And every year the non-French parents think, "hey, maybe things are finally going to change!" But they never do...

[Rick]

'Napoleon said, ‘There is no occupation more honourable, or more useful to nations, than to contribute to the extension of human ideas. The real power of the French Republic must henceforth lie in the assurance that no new idea exists that is not hers.''

[Ibid. p 80]

[NICK]

On the question of whether teachers marking exams are fair-minded or not I would dare to hope most of them are. Even so I have come across some dubious activity as an examiner for the bac in English. For the orals one year I shared a classroom with a woman 'd'un certain âge' who spent the whole twenty minutes talking to the candidates in French, becoming especially animated when it was 'un beau gars'! Normally, the pre-correction meeting is chaired by a university lecturer; in one case, an inspector (IPR) barged in and took over; her English was third-rate and confusion and chaos resulted so that no-one knew exactly what marking-scale to apply or which of the QCM answers were the correct ones. The occasional teacher simplifies his task by giving each pupil the same mark, particularly in the oral.Naturally, all but the most conscientious hike marks of nine up a point in the written exam so as to have less candidates for the oral.

[i can see why the educational elite in France have such a high opinion of themselves. having to survive an exam such as this would naturally create people who feel they have 'dodged a bullet' in life, risen to the highest intellectual challenge] Azloon

Exactly ! I passed it 6 years ago, I had 16/20 (I took the unprepared text) and afterwards, I couldn't stop boasting about it ! even now as you see, I can't help myself heheh.
But in other people's mind, it's like you have understood everything in life and your future success is guaranteed.
Well, not so much, philosophy's still philosophy and it can't bring you to more down to earth job.(sadly for me)

[Do older French survivors of le philo bac sit around in cafes proposing answers to the current year's questions? or are they inclined to think, "those poor bastards -- i'm glad i'm finished with all that merde]

err, French people seem to complain more than think about philosophy even in cafes, these times. Instead of wondering "Does objectivity in history suppose impartiality in the historian ?" they more likely wonder how they'll find another job or pay the mortgage. Though maybe they ask themseves if it is 'absurd to desire the impossible', like winning the lottery every friday :)

[mathiine]

sorry i forgot to sign my later post.
Mathiine

[azloon]

This is at least the third time in two years that French exams, and schools generally, have been discussed here on the blog. so i've had some time to consider many points of view before before forming my own opinion about le bac philo and later even more intimidating exams of the abstruse variety.

my impression, at this point, is that France is unique among nations in holding on so ferociously to this intellectual tradition of testing abstract reasoning. Not unique in making students 'sweat profusely,' as we only have to look to Asia to see this human disposition to punish its young. but in its embrace of the abstract.

I believe i am safe in saying that if a u.s. school, almost anywhere here, gave its students an examination question which asked, "what is gained by exchange?' with no additional explanation, that this school would come under a lot of pressure from angry parents. few, if any, would understand the point of such a question, its relevance to the modern world. I'm not saying le bac philo, as presently constituted, is bad, and that other systems are better. it's mostly just an observation, noting a major difference in educational philosophy. if there were a perfect country on earth, we might wish to emulate their educational system. alas, there isn't, so we cobble together the best ones we can.

Personally, i find the idea of testing abstract reasoning ability, at least to a limited extent, an interesting idea, and marginally useful.

Rick, Zedlin, Wadham quotes are interesting. I could have written hers, if i could write, and were British. :)

[James]

"...structure and method are vital. The reasoning has to follow rules..." CB
--------------------

Could someone discuss the plan (structure, method, and rules). Especially, could someone provide a link on the web (in French) discussing these structure, methods, rules...

Merci

[Dominique II]

RICK I genuinely wonder what you make of that Napoleonic quote.

Read quickly, it is of course easy to conclude that Napoleon wanted the French Republic to regulate ideas. (One has to assume he wrote this while still in the employ of the Republic). Boos from the crowd, what a tyran (and small to boot).

However, grammatically correct reading of this snippet would show Napoleon advocating the embrace, by the Republic, of all new ideas. An anti-conservative stance which his well documented respect for, and modicum of proficiency in, science and research.

So once again, which was your reading?

[DODO]

Napoleon said "...." [Ibid. p 80]
Rick

Ibid. p 80???
Ibid what ?

[Maggie]

I too would like to know more about the "plan" -- structure, method etc, and how it differs from an "outline".

Is "thesis / anti-thesis" really so different from an argument with "pros and cons"?

But this isn't philosophy, anyway, it's language/expression.

[Rick]

'I genuinely wonder what you make of that Napoleonic quote.' [DOM2]

I hestitate to say what it means, DOM. I think it's got something to do with:

'The French are addicted to ideas, and their language, with all its wonderful imprecision, is a perfect vehicle for abstraction.’

Plus, the high regard in which '---ions' are held. Mr Blimp reaches for his golf club if he sees one of those what-you-me-call-it's lurking around in the undergrowth. He'll probably give it a quick swing of his Number 8 iron. Only an American would resort to artillery.

SEBASTIEN, the disgraceful episodes of England's past are legion, too many to mention. The disgraceful episodes of France's past are suspiciously few. Any traction here?

DODO: it means the same book as the one immediately previously quoted from.

[DODO]

DODO: it means the same book as the one immediately previously quoted from.
Rick

Rick,

Ce n'est pas que je ne sais ce que cela veut dire, mais je n'osai pas croire que vous puissiez citer cette Dame (Lucy Wadham)comme source Napoléonienne !!
Avouez que c'est un peu fort de café.
I am not any Jean Tulard, but I wrote several essay on Napoleon.
I don't claim to know the in and out of Miss Lucy Wadham but I believe to know a little bit more than she claim to know, on Napoleon.

Indeed the wise specialist use to remember the Napoleon's last will says :
"8° Je désavoue le Manuscrit de Sainte-Hélène et autres ouvrages sous le titre de Maximes, Sentences, etc... que l'on s'est plu à publier depuis six ans : ce ne sont pas là les règles qui ont dirigé ma vie."

On ne prête qu'aux riches

[Rick]

Why didn't he say 'bright ideas', or ‘inventions’, ‘new techniques’, or 'cunning ploys‘, DOM2? Any mad man has 'ideas'! I suppose you're going to tell me that 'ideas' is the umbrella term. Sadly, the meaning gets diluted in the process.

To answer your question (‘Which was your reading?’), hand on heart I can reply that I didn’t have a SINGLE idea as your question suggests I should have. Your first interpretation (state regulation) never entered my head. The second (‘advocating the embrace, by the Republic, of all new ideas’), neither. Not in the way that you emphasise ‘all new’.

Please ask other posters if they thought this too. For me, ‘The real power of the French Republic must henceforth lie in the assurance that no new idea exists that is not hers’ meant asserting that French brains and physical force should endeavour... no, I didn’t! You’ve put that in my head!

Confession time: it was all so abstract, DOM. I didn’t really have a thought at all... it was a mental image (now promise you won’t get angry!!) of a cockerel atop dung-heap trumpeting ‘We’re going to become very important!’

If you find my reading slewed, can I quote, in exoneration: ‘The French are addicted to ideas, and their language, with all its wonderful imprecision, is a perfect vehicle for abstraction’?

We MUST face facts: the 'Manche' separates different ways of thinking, and expressing thoughts... which, after all, was Ms Wadham's whole point.

[Rick]

DODO, Ms Wadham wasn't writing about Napoleon; she was writing about the French. In a gay, entertaining, and light-hearted manner! Definitely not academic! This particular section was about: Language, Yoghurt, and Hot Rabbits.

[sebastien]

RICK:

Do you mind, I'll have you know we do disgraceful episodes just as well as the English. Here are some off the top of my head:

the sack of Jerusalem
the Albigensian Crusade ("Tuez-les tous, Dieu reconnaîtra les siens" and all that);
the arrest, torture and butchery of the Knights Templar
the St Bartholomew's Day Massacre
the crushing of the Vendée revolt
the Terror (the Noyades at Nantes particularly charming)
slavery (we're in good company here)
the decision to exclude slaves from liberty, equality, fraternity
the horrors of the slave revolt in Saint-Domingue (and the despicable treatment of Toussaint L'Ouverture)
Napoleon's massacre of prisoners after the siege of Jaffa
19th and early 20th century colonialism, covering innumerable episodes
the Dreyfus affair
the treatment of the 1917 mutineers
Vichy
the suppression of the 1947 Madagascar insurrection
the Algerian war and ramifications
post-colonial African meddling

If this list is "suspiciously" short, it's only because I have a day job! All of them (except the latest manifestations of the last item) are routinely mentioned in school history books (though I'm not suggesting that school history books are paragons of objectivity). All countries put the accent on the least inglorious aspects of their history; I'm not sure that there's much less sweeping under the carpet elsewhere than here.

[DODO]

RICK
You quoted Ms Wadham as a source in order to confirm your argument. Didn’t you ?
You quoted her as a source for the supposed Napoleon’s sentence. This supposed Napoleon’s sentence is part of your argument. It is not ?
I am telling you that :
Point one : You can quote her, if you want, for the price, the color, the taste or the shape of the yoghourt in France. She has some valid argument.
Point two : Don’t quote her as a Napoleonic source. Napoleon never said what she claim he said.
Point Three : Not only Napoleon never said it, but he also warned us in his last will that many (if not) of the supposed Napoleon’s sayings” are FALSE.
I defend your right to make your point, but I can’t accept doing it with false source.
Vos êtes d’accord ?

[Rick]

DODO, I think you’ve been cunningly saving your best point till last. If you say Napoleon never said it, then that’s good enough for me. Do, please, pass on the message to DOM2 who, evidently, is as uninformed as I am.

SEBASTIEN, you never fail to deliver! Brilliant! Two questions. Are English schools’ history books any more objective? Yes, it’s all Hitler and stuff at GCSE. Historians have been shoved aside by Geographers in school: ‘l’ultra-liberalisme’ (pupil choice of subjects studied) be damned! The kids choose Geo because it’s easier.

I remain fascinated by the paradox: the national story (+narrative history i.e. simplified, distorted) versus topic study (awareness-raising, non-history, sociology of the past?) versus History, neat in a crystal glass.

Honour-bound, I’ll compose a list of my own. (I don’t suppose it’ll silence the bleaters, though!) For form’s sake, I’ll try to make it two items longer than yours. But I’m off for a ‘Kultur’ weekend now.

[Joëlle]

Re. the marking of the Bac Philo, there's a famous true story of a member of the Académie Française (I forget who) who recently "took" the Bac Philo anonymously, and his "copie" was marked by a number of official correctors...his scores ranged from 5/20 to 17/20, depending on who corrected. Nuff said (incidentally my 18-y-o son chose "est-il absurde de désirer l'impossible?")

[Pascal Bruckner gave his answer to that question on Dominique Souchier's programme on Europe 1 this morning at about 0950. He said it was very difficult. You can listen to it on their site europe1.fr CB]

[dot king]

"what is gained by exchange?' with no additional explanation,

AZLOON

But there is no need for an additional explanation, it's a question in the philosophy exam, so the context is the philosophy exam and the arguments the students will put forward for and against the proposition will have been covered in the year leading up to the exam.
In any case it's not about having an answer, but about being able to think around the question and put forward points of view by applying different philosophies.

When you go into an exam room, normally you are prepared (in your mind) for that exam.

The questions seem abstract and meaningless to us (you mainly, so it would seem :)), but the students have been preparing for such questions for a year and should have an arsenal of arguments supported by quotations to bring to bear.

Congratulations MATHIINE - and good luck for the rest.

[john gregory flinn]

"... and Does technological development transform mankind? (Le développement technique transforme-t-il les hommes ?)"

'technique' means technical, not technological.
Thus the question translates as "Does technical development transform mankind."
Which is a very different question to the one quoted.

For example one could discuss how the lives of handicapped people are transformed by the latest prosthetic developments, surgical implants etc., or how carbon-fibre bicycle components aid racing cyclists.
On the other hand, Charles your translation induces a response more akin to - has the introduction of the contraceptive pill affected society, or, has mankind affected the climate by using fossil fuels as a source of energy?

[azloon]

Dot

I didn't think these questions were 'meaningless.' they certainly can't be meaningless if one has been preparing for them for months/years. anything has meaning within its context (a possible le bac philo question: does everything have a meaning within its context?).

i was just struck by the level of abstraction which is evident in all the questions. and how passe this type of socratic inquiry seems to be in modern education. yet France holds on to it.

i am in favor of liberal, not specialized, education for young people. so presumably le bac philo should appeal to me.

i do know i wouldn't be in favor of placing too much importance on developing abstract reasoning ability in the general population of students, or place it as a necessary prerequisite for further education.

there are obviously some kids who will gravitated to it, and find value in it for them, maybe even enjoy it, but many others for whom it seems silly and without earthly purpose.

[Edward Johns]

"you must cite the appropriate great thinkers as you set out your argument. "
No different to religious faith then--its right because the 'great thinkers' / God say so.

[dot king]

"there are obviously some kids who will gravitated to it, and find value in it for them, maybe even enjoy it, but many others for whom it seems silly and without earthly purpose."

AZLOON

Yes, if course, and there are some kids who find the whole school system silly and without earthly purpose - you also say

"how passe this type of socratic inquiry seems to be in modern education. yet France holds on to it."

Now why does it seem passé? Being able to think and reason is "passé"? To be able to think about a question / problem by saying "Well, this is how ***** would have addressed it, and s/he was wrong / right because ******, but there is still room for futher consideration of ***** because that aspect has not yet been fully investigated.

This is "passé"??
Poor "avancé" America, if this is the case.

[dot king]

"you must cite the appropriate great thinkers as you set out your argument. "
No different to religious faith then--its right because the 'great thinkers' / God say so."

EDWARD JOHNS

NO, no no. The operative word is "argument" - what YOU are giving as an example is more akin to doctrine.
Being able to apply the philosophy of (say) Kierkegaard to a given question to be able to quote him in support and then to be able to quote someone else in opposition, and then to give your own point of view with your reasoned argument in support of it and your conclusion, is not :
"right because the 'great thinkers' / God say so."

The whole point is to philosophise (it's a philosophy exam, remember?) not to take on board ideas wholesale and unquestioningly.

[azloon]

Dot

by 'passe' i just means not current.

because of my history here :), you're impulse is to jump on me rather than give me the benefit of the doubt. i acknowledged the (limited) value of teaching abstracting thinking, but pointed out it isn't given the same emphasis elsewhere as in France, i don't think. anyone?

the de-emphasis of this sort of teaching isn't necessarily an advance. just a fact.

France, in my opinion,often gets hung up for WHAT'S GOOD FOR EVERYONE, e.g. 'everyone' needs to be skilled in the socratic method, and 'everyone' needs to wear the same clothing (or can't wear certain, non-Republican clothing). it becomes a trap that is hard for the country to extricate itself from, witness the wildly varying (and ambivalent) opinion in France today about burkas. there is not enough room in the French psyche to allow differences to exist without feeling excessively threatened.

[Daniel Strohl]

AZLOON,

You wrote above: "witness the wildly varying (and ambivalent) opinion in France today about burkas"

CHARLES wrote an article in today's paper titled: "French women may face ban on head-to-toe Islamic dresses"

There are over hundred reader comments, many of them interesting (and even a few of them - you will not believe me - praising the French for their courage in the burka matter. However, I didn't notice among these blessed few any pseudo of the regulars on CHARLES's blog :).

Hereafter a quote of one of these comments:

"In many parts of the USA it is illegal to wear a covering on your face that conceals your features, goes back to the 1800's and was aimed at bandits hiding their features to get away with robberies.

mike, burt, iowa, usa"

Azloon, are you aware of this ancient law or regulation, and if yes, is it in force for instance in Arizona? If yes, it may be a good legal protection against possibly unwanted religious immigration :).

PS:

My opinion on the matter: - no burkas in public on French territory. In 1957, serving on a French tanker, I made two calls on the Arab side of the Persian Gulf. Each time, the local Customs came on board, and immediately locked under seal all alcoholic beverages for the whole time of the calls. Seals were opened only when the ship was leaving. Meanwhile, we had to drink water :).

I didn't like it (I was not alone, as far as I remember :), but we had no choice. It was their law, and probably still is. As the maxim goes: "Autre pays, autres moeurs".

If I believe one or two of the above mentioned comments, it is really not advisable (in fact strictly forbidden) for a woman to run around for instance in Saudi Arabia dressed in Occidental fashion (hair uncovered, short skirt :).

The French female TV reporters in these countries always wear a head scarf in front of the cameras (I guess elsewhere in public also). May be female American TV reporters are dispensed of this annoying formality. I don't know - I never watch FOX NEWS :).

[Daniel Strohl]

SEBASTIEN,

"I'm not sure that there's much less sweeping under the carpet elsewhere than here"

Probably the only noticeable differences could be the colour of the carpet and the type of broom used :).

[dot king]

"France, in my opinion,often gets hung up for WHAT'S GOOD FOR EVERYONE,"

AZLOON

There are a good many arguments for saying it's the USA that gets hung up on "what's good for everyone" - unfortunately they rarely mean within their own borders, let alone their schools.

"it becomes a trap that is hard for the country to extricate itself from,"

AZLOON

Yes, indeedy!

[dot king]

"there is not enough room in the French psyche to allow differences to exist without feeling excessively threatened."

AZLOON

Keeping it short, just extract "French" from that sentence and replace it by "Americans" - works just as well . . . .

[Daniel Strohl]

DOT,

RE: your post dated 21 JUN 12:28

Et toc! :)

[azloon]

Dot, yeah, we have our own peculiar 'trappy' areas but public dress codes, except in secondary schools, is not one of them. and , yes, we are threatened by different ideas. no big surprise. but i thought this was a blog about France, not the u.s. :) finally, yes, in the international arena, we do have some strong (and unhealthy) notions about what is good for everyone outside our borders.

Daniel, i am not aware of any u.s. laws prohibiting face cover, except that i do recall banks, on our national costume day -- Halloween -- posting signs on bank doors barring entry to persons wearing masks. but this is a local matter not a legislative one, i believe.

[CHRIS]

Philosophie is the most boring thing I have never done in my life. I didn't learn and understood anything whereas I am a good student. French system is old and doesn't want to change whereas France spend a lot of money to pay these philosophy teachers who are not usefull at all.

[azloon]

["what is gained by exchange?' with no additional explanation,

AZLOON

But there is no need for an additional explanation, it's a question in the philosophy exam, so the context is the philosophy exam and the arguments the students will put forward for and against the proposition will have been covered in the year leading up to the exam.
In any case it's not about having an answer, but about being able to think around the question and put forward points of view by applying different philosophies.]

Dot, my point was about a typical american parent's reaction to discovering this question on a child's secondary school exam. i realize the French students are prepared for this, parents are aware and approve of it, so no problem. btw, abstract questions such as these can be found here in university level Philosophy courses, but for the most part, these are optional courses. it is not considered a national priority here to train students in classic philosophy. vive la difference, or something like that.

there seems a formulaic aspect to answering these le bac philo questions. French students, like students everywhere, want to know 'how to nail' the exam, so they study old exams, memorize dates, and quotations that are applicable to varying questions, but when its over probably won't retain very much. which is fine since it this a national 'hazing which the country believes is in the interest of its students. but let's don't carried away about how superior French students might be because they know 'what the meaning of "is' is.' i am sure Clinton had a French advisor who helped him with that one.:)

[azloon]

Dot, ah, I think Chris has made the argument that you've resisted so strenuously from me:

["Philosophie is the most boring thing I have never done in my life. I didn't learn and understood anything whereas I am a good student."] Chris

so, as we all know in our hearts, even if we don't admit it easily, "different strokes for different folks."

there are times the French should resist the fictional notion of the 'republican student/citizen,' and believing the government can define this person. it just doesn't 'fly' sometimes, like here.

[dot king]

Dot, my point was about a typical american parent's reaction to discovering this question on a child's secondary school exam.

AZLOON

Do you know, I'd understood that - incredible as it might seem to you, I'd understood that. One of my points (granted it needed extrapolating and it's early in Arizona) was that if you realise that the children are prepared for this exam and are taught for that purpose for a year leading up to it, then if it were included in the same way in the USA curriculum, it wouldn't come as a surprise to any dumb cluck whose kid had got that far in their education.
BTW "secondary school exam" as you call it, doesn't say enough (but you are aware of this, non?). This is the year called "terminale", the very end of school education and the year before university for many - isn't it just as well that they've learned something about different approaches to thinking and reasoning before going into higher education?

I don't know where you get you whole 2nd paragraph's argument from, unless you are just "busking" as you do, all education is based on looking at what has gone before and learning from it and moving on.

No-one had introduced, before you, above, the notion of "superior".

It's quite simple really - French students who get as far as pre-university level in their formal education, study the basic tenets of philosophy in that final school year. What's wrong with that?

BTW you might be interested to hear that I'm getting lots of work translating job assessments for an USA-based American firm head-hunting French executives - and this is a firm that hasn't gone under . . . )

Little left upper-cut on the chin for you - wake you up a bit :)

[Dominique II]

RICK you admit you quoted a sentence by Napoleon without having the least notion of its meaning, yet with a clear visualisation of the "cockerel" uttering it...

While I'll concede that what I don't understand can include a lot of tripe, I am gracious enough to admit that it may have a meaning I'm not up to grasping.

Try that approach, it saves a lot of ill will and could even lead to some enlightening.

[Daniel Strohl]

AZLOON,

Ok - thanks for your info regarding the face covering US "laws". It spares me to commit a stupid post on "stupid" Americans :).

"it is not considered a national priority here to train students in classic philosophy"

I got through this "French national priority" (almost :) unscathed, along with many others...

BTW, this reminds me of a well known quote attributed to Patrice de Mac Mahon, duc de Magenta,(1808 - 1893), French general and later Président de la République:

"Typhoid fever is a terrible sickness. Either you die from it or you become an idiot. And I know what I'm talking about, I had it."

PS: may be you will be enlightened to learn that Mac Mahon was of Irish descent. Ceci explique cela :).

[azloon]

["Typhoid fever is a terrible sickness. Either you die from it or you become an idiot. And I know what I'm talking about, I had it."] Mac Mahon quoted by M. Strohl

LOL

yes, i remember you mentioning this Frenchman with a decent sense of humor. no big surprise that he was 'irish,' et c'ect dommage his humor didn't spread to the general population. :)

i am happy to hear you didn't win the 'le bac philo' blue ribbon in your youth. no doubt this explains your eminent ("your eminence") good sense.

[dot king]

"i am happy to hear you didn't win the 'le bac philo' blue ribbon in your youth. no doubt this explains your eminent ("your eminence") good sense."

AZLOON

So now you're saying that anyone who DOES hold a Bac Philo is not someone with "good sense"?
You are PLEASED that someone you know and like DOESN'T have something?

Hmm! What a strange being you are.

"I am happy to hear you don't have bubonic plague, or la petite variole" , yes, there would be a sense in that, but, "I am happy you don't have a Bac Philo", no, on the whole that isn't a sensible thing to be happy about.

And if your reply is "I was being ironic", then mine is "So was I" :)

[Rick]

‘RICK you admit you quoted a sentence by Napoleon without having the least notion of its meaning, yet with a clear visualisation of the "cockerel" uttering it...’

A reminder, DOM2: “Indeed they mistrust ideas, which are seen as the domain of the pretentious. A sense of the absurd or a sense of irony will be enough to make someone entertaining in Britain, whereas both of these faculties are frequently lost on the French.”

[Lex Stevens]

"I am happy you don't have a Bac Philo" - Dot

This mirrors the American immunization approach to eductation: "Biologly? I've had that." Think of the idea as the pathogen.

Someone who is not an American might readily think that a country that has suffered three economic downturns in the past thirty years due to Derivatives would find a better understanding of abstract thought an advantage. I think the problem stems from a flaw in logic based on the American mythos: America is the greatest country on earth, therefore all American 'ideas' are the greatest ideas on earth.

[Peter Athey]

Lex Stevens;

Many (if not most) of the derivatives that have led to the economic downturns as you say, have been developed by French mathematicians - specialists in Financial Instruments used in the Global Financial sector.

The French 'Grandes Ecoles' and Universities such as Paris VI turn out VERY bright mathematical minds. When they graduate they can then go on to post-graduate studies where they specialize in Financial Mathematics and Risk Management at special institutes developed for just such a purpose. When they finish their studies they are snapped up by banks and financial institutions in London and NY amongst others.

One of the top brains in this field is Nicole El Karoui - a world-reknown specialist in Stochastic Differential Equations and Probabilities used for Risk Management in Banks, Insurance Companies and other financial Institutions. She teaches at Polytechnique and at University here in France. She more or less invented the field of derivatives in 1988.

The major problem has been that while the financial engineers know what they are doing and have confidence in the validity of their equations, their superiours don't understand a thing and have misused them - hence the downturns.

But then, this is an argument used by the NRA (National Rifle Association) in the USA - "Guns don't kill ....... people do".

[Daniel Strohl]

LEX,

"America is the greatest country on earth"

Nations like France, Germany, UK etc. held in the past similar views of their respective countries :). However, they are now (mostly) cured of these "idées de grandeur" - for various reasons...

DOT,

It is nice from you to defend me against this tricky bandit of Azloon :). However, I think he tried to congratulate me because I didn't get the "blue ribbon" for the bac philo - would I have got the blue ribbon, it would have been a catastrophe for me, in his valued opinion:).

Dot, since you are not an ancient mariner, contrary to Azloon, you may possibly ignore that "le ruban bleu" was a distinction won by the passenger ship which crossed the North Atlantic Ocean at the highest speed or minimum of time. Several big passenger ships won the blue ribbon in turn (Normandie, France, one or two Queens, may be also an American passenger ship - I can't remember exactly). The competition ended when aviation took over on the ocean crossing routes.

AZLOON,

I didn't compete at all for the blue ribbon. I put my tranquillity well ahead of my ambition :). Neverthelsess, I managed to get the bac philo, but without any "mention" or blue ribbon :).

At first, on the papers with the exam's results clipped in the Lycée Bartholdi, my name was credited with "mention assez bien". Later, the results were published in the local paper - I had lost my "mention" - it was not written either on the official diploma. Either it was an error, or one of my teachers was of the (valued :) opinion that a lazy dog like me didn't deserve a "mention"...

[Lex Stevens]

D. Strohl --

The variety in reasons seems to me quite limited, however I am more concerned with the methods with which the more popular cures have been administered.

Peter Athey --

Thanks for filling in a couple of holes for me.

Derivatives with me are rather like reading Noam Chomsky, aka the most dangerous man in America. I think, well that was all very interesting out there on the edge of understanding, but I'm going to go read some BHL now and hope my hair stops falling out. With derivatives I think, okay I do kinda see where you're going with that, but I won't be buying any, thanks. What's IBM up to these days...

[Rick]

SEBASTIEN, we have ‘en désordre’ and off the top of his head: Amritsar massacre 1920? – that sadistic major who ran an internment camp near Hamburg in the late 1940s – bombings: Hamburg, Dresden, Normandy – Aden – Kenya, 1950s - repeated incursions into Afghanistan, where we always got ‘whupped’ as the Yanks say – Highland ‘clearances’ – Glencoe – Culloden – Protestant settlements in Ireland – Cromwell’s depredations in Ireland – the Corn Laws – the Great Potato Famine – Peterloo – the Tolpuddle martyrs - post-Indian ‘Mutiny’ reprisals – Boer War 1900-ish, taking it out on the wives and kids, before getting ‘whupped’ – Opium trade with China – forced adoptions of illegitimate children - near-extermination of Aboriginals in Australia...

Okay, let’s call it a draw on disgraceful episodes. But your examples cover such a span... I’d think it unlikely that Brit school-kids come anywhere near your tally in what their syllabus covers. I suspect also that much of the syllabus is dreadfully Anglo-centric (which doesn’t HAVE to be a bad thing: a ‘national story’ has to be told, fanciful or not). The syllabi are probably partial though, in both senses of the term. Worse still, very little history may be being taught – it’s too ‘elitist’, too difficult...

Fifteen years ago, I did have a look at some of your French text books for history (‘classe de seconde’, Year 11, would that be? The year in which the ‘Occupation’, 1940-44 is covered...). I wasn’t very impressed at the time. Probably things have changed a lot. A thought occurs: are the students in France taken through History at a cracking pace? And are they consequently mainly to retain key factual items? (No bad thing at all, mind you!)

And how can anyone disagree with your conclusion: ‘I'm not sure that there's much less sweeping under the carpet elsewhere than here’? Thank you for your civilised words.

[Rick]

DOM2, you wrote: ‘RICK you admit you quoted a sentence by Napoleon without having the least notion of its meaning, yet with a clear visualisation of the "cockerel" uttering it...’ [Pt 2]

Have your hastily penned words bitten you in the bottom yet? As usual, you went for the hapless target all guns blazing (‘admit’, ‘least’, ‘yet with a clear visualisation’) Indeed, so excited did you get that you lost sight of the reason why Ms Wadham quoted Bonaparte in the first place: to offer a practical demonstration of how the French language can be misused to produce a message about as meaningful as a blast from a hot oven. In other words, first you made my point for me. Then, second, you went chasing around proclaiming ‘Victory is mine!’

[Rick]

DOM2, you wrote: ‘While I'll concede that what I don't understand can include a lot of tripe, I am gracious enough to admit that it may have a meaning I'm not up to grasping.’

This one sentence is convoluted to the point of incomprehensibility. I suspect you want to say is: “I don’t claim to understand everything. Some of the meaning may escape me; if so, I admit it.”

You’re still missing the point, though: I was NOT complaining that Napoleon’s words were too complicated; rather that they were too empty.

You continued: ‘Try that approach, it saves a lot of ill will and could even lead to some enlightening.’

Your characteristic hectoring manner grates: the reader is likely to stop.

As for ‘that approach’..., ah! Got it! Finally! You mean: the reader should be humble enough to admit he’s not clever enough to understand everything? Quite so!

However, Napoleon’s words were platitudinous to yawning-point, so your advice doesn't apply here, does it?

[dot king]

"Neverthelsess, I managed to get the bac philo, but without any "mention" or blue ribbon :)."

DANIEL STROHL

I must have missed something - I didn't know where all that "blue ribbon" stuff was coming from - and what's more you don't strike me as someone who might have flunked his Bac Philo.
Azloon (The old Man of the Sea-he-he) instead of being happy you didn't get your Bac Philo, should rather be worried that you did and consequently are armed with all the argumentative skills to keep his ankles nipped. :)

[Anne]

Ahaha! the Philo test. I love it! I passed it about 20 years ago, and didn't do well. Incidentally, I had have a great average mark all year, but was rubbish on the day. The questions just didn't inspire me at all. I don't remember what they were but...here's what really made me laugh:

at the top of the philo exam paper, it says "the use of a calculator is strictly forbiden"

:)

[dot king]

at the top of the philo exam paper, it says "the use of a calculator is strictly forbiden"

ANNE

Sooooo??
;D

[Daniel Strohl]

Peter Athey,

I heard on TV a few months ago that the "chaire" of Nicole el Karoui got closed, due to lack of students; banks and financial institutions are possibly reluctant to hire new batches of math geniuses, at least for the moment :).

PS: "Stochastic Differential Equations and Probabilities" - brr - seems to be quite complicated !

[Anth.Sun]

I have been going through the various blogs and came across this one; it is rather long for which I apologize, but I think (although I am not certain) that Bremner Junior, if I may name him thus, chose the more difficult question in his philosophy examination, unless he had certain writers or philosophers in mind, with whose works he was more familiar, and to whose writings he could refer when writing about the idea of gain by exchange. If the way one is able to introduce the writers to whom one can refer determines the subject of ones discourse, it is clearly the more sensible route to follow. I merely mention this in case that reasoning applied to his choice. To me, and one ignorant of the writers and philosophers who have addressed the topic, the concept of gain by exchange is extremely wide, and susceptible to so many ideas, and interpretations; financiers of yesteryear talked about “critical mass” to back up their financial mergers and adventures, but I better not go there; not today. To me, the avoided question attracts a sort of pragmatism, a philosophical pragmatism, a hybridism or plurality of approach, and one easier to get to grips with, and to pursue a path towards and thus more susceptible to a planned and manifest structure and method, the criteria which I understand are the guiding principles in awarding scores to the examinees. So I am going with the second question, and here’s my ”take” on technology and its transformation of mankind – yes “take” is used to deliberately flummox the Examiner – I can hear him crying out “sacre-bleu (or its modern day equivalent) you cannot be serious!” not to mention the split infinitive, but that’s de rigueur nowadays; and tennis “memorabilia” cannot be out of place as one heard McEnroe in his near to twilight years using the controlled, authoritative and measured tones of the seasoned commentator in Wimbledon’s fortnight. Curious how the aging process has the emollient effect on the tennis aspirant, and achiever! But leaving Wimbledon’s elder statesman of commentary, or “moving on” as one hears nowadays…

If, as an “ancien élève” of the Alliance Française in the Boulevard Raspail, followed by the then usual stint in Florence in the early 60s, and staying at the pensione where E M Forster is regarded as having written Room with a View (and what a wonderful view it was!) before going up to you know where, and having been pilloried by exams more or less annually from the age of eleven (so similar to élève!) to twenty four - I won’t ask “was it worth it?”, although I just have - and in retrospect, I would say , “No” including in my exams the CCF exam – yes I could have been quite a good signalman lying around with my walky talky, and the driving test – fortunately, I missed being called up by about three years.), if then I may now proceed, with the bac that never was for me (fortunately) although I do recall dictées at the Allliance (and those curious sounding interjections “virgule” and “point d‘exclamation”, much mocked and mimicked by the English-speaking contingent), I shall now try to confront and master this behemoth of a question, in the hope of achieving a score in, let’s say, lower double digits. Or to transpose the process to home grown Anglo-Saxon custom (that was) I am not expecting a congratulatory first but, rather, a derisory fourth, when, in my worst imaginings, you attend for a viva, expecting to be applauded, but instead face a board of howling and grimacing Examiners (the “nightmare” scenario).

So, to turn to technology and transformation, I would say that “mankind” meaning the bundle of human’s instincts and recognised virtues and vices is not transformed by technology . To expand this part of the discourse on Man’s character, I would suggest that (1) man is by nature acquisitive, creative and competitive, (no, this is not the sequel to “bewitched, bothered and bewildered”, although one wonders sometimes) these virtues being generally referred to as greed in the spiritual (or religious) context, but entrepreneurial in the secular one. So, however one labels it, man is a creature that wants to use his mind, and think, and to see thoughts translated into acts, and those acts inevitably involve one or other, and possibly all of the qualities or vices I have mentioned above. Another aspect of man’s motivation - call it the human spirit, is that in most cases (2) man wants to be associated with a group, being shepherded into the group from birth and through his earliest years by religious or social connection, sensibility and persuasion. He wants to feel that he is part of society, whether by membership of a school, social or family unit or trade and all this in general underscored by a probably continuing adherence to a religious or political belief and allegiance. The third premise or aspect is more difficult to determine involving (3) consideration of how (1) interacts with (2), for man is unable to display the virtues or vices in (1) without being part of (2), and it is how (1) and (2) interact that governs man, as such a consideration is a prerequisite in deciding whether a transformation of mankind has occurred. These I would submit are the premises upon which I would base my definition of man, and his role and behaviour in society. (I don’t capitalize “man”, here, because my plan for my discourse eschews “gravitas” at least at the start, until I really get into the topic - I am sure the Examiner will appreciate that). Now, although it is a premise, premise (3) can be regarded as optional. Interaction of (1) and (2) could be an appendix, or immodestly on my part the icing on the cake. Simple culinary allusions are there to appeal to the Examiner, although we are still on the hors d’oeuvre. But, at the back of my mind there lurks this interest in the way that (1) and (2) interact, and whether at times of technological change such as might be (or have been) said amount(ed) to the transformation of man (1) and (2) will interact differently. But for the moment I will regard that as an optional add-on or additional and alternative path to discovery.

Then, in my essay, I would turn to technology. My knowledge of history, although I was never that good at history - I am not sure why but I was not, perhaps I could not see the wood for the trees, (by denting self-esteem, one captures interest and releases forgiveness from the liberal lobby (just in case my Examiner hails from those quarters or pretends to their values) ) – does at least permit me to recall my teacher’s excitement as one described the agricultural and industrial revolutions, and my own excitement as I began to read and probe the onset of the technological revolution which is ongoing, each of the three in its own way without doubt presenting and highlighting periods of change, two in the past and the last continuing to the present and beyond, before assuming a different incarnation, to which I refer below. Did or do any of those periods of technological change (using “technological” in its wider sense) change and transform man? At this point, I would clarify or remind the Examiner about what I was referring to and understand by change and suggest that it meant changing man’s outlook on life and his character. I would point out or venture further by suggesting that while some changes may result in transformation, not all changes will, because to me transformation connotes a change to a degree or extent that mankind undergoes some form of change that is so radical and fundamental that it can be said to amount to a transformation, the result being that man’s character as I defined it at the outset is altered for and during the period of transformation. Now that alteration need not be permanent or indefinite, but sufficient to warrant me and others of a similar view and attitude (my peers) concluding that man’s instincts and bundle of recognised virtues and vices as listed in (1) has been transformed, in such a way that people or contemporary society, whose constituent parts and processes were listed in (2) can no longer be defined in that way. (my mythical Examiner would perhaps at this point begin to scratch his head, and forget about my earlier grammatical solecisms; alternatively, his mien would be steeped in disdain, and regard it as an attempt at a clumsy and failed comeback, my aim now being, I have decided, to interweave Sarko’s plain speaking with a sliver of a dumbed down Sartre for beginners (Sartre for Dummies); not that this should be taken to undermine my structure and method, the self-evidence and continuance of which I am hoping can sustain the occasional peripheral comment and observation, as it perhaps may have done already.

So, I would mark and observe that during the agricultural revolution, man learnt new farming skills, but still remained at heart acquisitive creative and competitive – his core values. I could mention his perfecting new farming skills and so forth, the better ways of growing crops, and of producing cotton and wool etc. Did that change the outlook of man? He felt he was being more efficient, the population started to grow in the UK (quick peak at google hopefully permitted or overlooked) and with it that feeling of self esteem and achievement led him to explore new pastures of creativity and invention and to assist in the growth of the industrial revolution, and to a revolution perhaps more influential and catalytic than the one before it; to factories, machinery, railways, cars, ships and planes, transport, urbanization, steam and water power, and electricity and the usual waltz scenario of two steps forward and one step to the side or (arguably) back. It led to war for sure, for with seemingly ever-growing and unstoppable confidence comes political ambition and territorial expansion or the embedded thought of territorial expansion. So, as the economic pendulum now swings from west to east, one really does have to be alive to the problems that are in store for us as we begin to lose our economic and inevitably political influence and dominance (I would include that, knowing that the Examiner might strike it out as being off topic, but with the benefit of hind-sight I do sometimes think that being off-topic only serves poignantly to emphasise the sense of what one is saying when one is on topic. But of course I can then see my score dip to below double digits, but then I want to give the impression of being a bit of a rebel, yes even when “taking my bac”). “Going forward”, I would ask how the industrial revolution changed society; as it certainly signalled and coincided with a hitherto unparalleled period of economic expansion in Britain and most of the world, certainly the West. Did people benefit from the expansion? Was it done out of self interest? Many lives were lost by our soldiers and those of other countries, but much was gained. Territories were won, military skills advanced as the power and strength of mostly Western nations increased economically. Was, and if so, how was this new wealth distributed among the people? Not particularly well, or fairly, although as the richer classes increased in size, the middle class started; so all in all more people began to prosper but there was certainly poverty and of course steps were taken to reduce some of the inhuman practices that were so much a part of society during the period of change. With this new found wealth, people dressed in a new fashion, beginnning to take more pride in their appearance, a pride perhaps limited to the upper classes in centuries past More discoveries were made in the scientific, medical and engineering fields, and at universities more inventiveness abounded amidst the rush to academia and of course even more books were written. The arts did not flourish particularly but generally improved because of a more aware public and more advances in every area of society with women working and finding emancipation or wanting emancipation and eventually winning it, which just about preceded the onset of the technological revolution, which probably began in the early part of the 20th century, and never really looked back. One thing is clear, man can never sit still, and change is always in the air. So change did not stop there, but as the technological revolution started with even better weapon systems, improved transport, steam and then oil powered ships, continued creation of wealth and expansion occurring through oil and its use and exploitation as a source of energy in transport factories and industry generally, without forgetting the importance of the introduction of nuclear energy as an additional source of power, for an ever increasing consumerist middle class, the TV, telecommunication and computer industries took hold, so that man could know in the second half of the 20 the century within seconds what was happening all over the world, and the next revolution (the Green Media revolution?) an ever more significant off shoot of the technological revolution it seems is now upon us. It is to do with and includes a) the media and the communication of information reflecting man’s apparent desire or need for information on all matters, and b) arresting the planetary dangers of climate change and concentrating and developing newer and safer sources of energy. The second limb of this revolution threatens whether rightly or wrongly to be the most important of all, because we are told that unless we get to grips with it, in effect by halting if not reversing the accumulated impact of the three revolutions that preceded it, the destruction of large swathes of the globe which will be under water will occur because of the forces of industrialization. How China and India regarded as the current and future engines of economic growth globally will cope with the strictures of the new Revolution remains to be seen. For the energy that powers the second New World will or is intended to be an energy that is kinder to the atmosphere, and less damaging to the planet. Now whether the media has honed on to this, as a way of sustaining interesting in the media, or whether the reverse is true, as the only way of progressing this change is through the media as a conduit for distilling information about the Green Media revolution is a matter upon which I will not dissert further for the time being. I will leave that for a “rainy” day.

Did or do any or the sum total of these changes in technology transform man? The changes in technology have only been briefly touched on, but was man or may he be transformed by them? His core values as listed in 1) remained the same, and the processes of the human spirit did not alter really. Man was or is still acquisitive creative and competitive, and still desires for the reasons and in the manner stated in 2) do be a part of a group or society. So, one is very tempted to think that man has not been transformed. But here’s where the optional premise 3) comes into play. I have decided to consider and include it. Has the way in which man as an individual operates within and interacts with Society because of or following technological change(s) transformed man? As is always the case, one can find examples both for and against; that is why recourse to example is so self limiting. It proves nothing or rather only what others understand or wish to understand and endorse, so that they are then or subsequently classed as pioneers whether by design or otherwise of a new age of thought and concept; it could be a dark age, it could be one of enlightenment or a renaissance. Turning to the present and the sharing of one’s thoughts about all and any thing is certainly a new and popular phenomenon made possible by incredible strides and advances in the telecommunication industries. If this interest in self advertisement, the sharing of one’s thoughts and ideas and obsession with information and its communication continues with the zeal that it has attracted to date, and becomes a normal and accepted way of living, and of showing that one belongs to society, in such a manner that one would not be regarded as belonging to society, unless one participated in this apparent need to share inform and communicate, then one might be on the threshold of a transformation of man, but so far whatever the changes, the incipient and growing desire to express and shares ones feelings and thoughts does not amount to a fundamental change in the way that man’s core virtues or vices are expressed or interact within society, so that .the connectivity between the individual and Society has changed but not transformed mankind. No man is an island. (The awareness of ills in other parts of the world does not connote or presage an immediate and physical response, although it may. The Spanish civil war, it will be recalled, attracted the interest of writers and volunteers from many foreign countries, and although the spontaneity with which the incidence of such or similar conflicts is communicated today is impressive, I can recall it being said that their immediacy or spontaneity sometimes acts negatively really masking a transience now bordering on immunity of interest precisely because of their spontaneity and now frequency, however embellished and enhanced by ad hoc punditry, but thereafter, after they have run their course, soon to sink into oblivion as the next “story” disturbs the radio waves, providing further fodder for the chattering classes (and really for mankind in most parts of the globe) to interact over). So, the saying remains as true today as always. Because people do like to connect famous and well known sayings to what they think and have said. They acknowledge the primacy and predominance of those that have gone before, by giving their sayings or thoughts an imprimatur, which they are hoping will give their own utterances a degree of comfort and truth – the great minds think alike syndrome! The generations of the future create the great minds of the past. I will leave it there, and await the results with impatience and nervous expectation, hoping that I have not let the “side” down, so that my belonging to my group has only reinforced the way the group will use or exploit my core qualities hereafter. Oh, as this post probably exceeded the time limit for the essay of 4 hours by two weeks, and has been written and rewritten, I may have inadvertently disqualified myself, but nowadays, as the Fourth Plinth (or what I call “Speaker’s Corner without words”) demonstrates interaction and democratization rules. And my Bac Examiner will take that into account and will hopefully overlook the length of my essay, but I got carried away, and do hope that it was not a complete debacle, concluding with an Anglo-Saxon pun which I hope will appeal in these Europhile times.

Lastly, and before I forget, I trust that the above does not apply to CB Junior’s Bac results which were or will be no doubt “formidable”!