Talk:Bachelor of Philosophy

Undergraduate B.Phil. at other universities

I changed "At other universities, the term "Bachelor of Philosophy" refers to an undergraduate bachelor's degree in the philosophy of an academic subject" to "At other universities, the term "Bachelor of Philosophy" refers to an undergraduate bachelor's degree". The undergraduate degrees referred to in this section generally aren't philosophy degrees; they're just undergraduate degrees in a particular subject (science, maths, whatever) with a bit of a research focus. 163.1.159.220 14:07, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

I added the information on the Ph.B. given by the College of the University of Chicago based on my having received the degree myself in 1948.Davidbeneli (talk) 21:50, 2 May 2009 (UTC)

Full form, etc.

I've no real objection to any of Jacquerie27's edits, though none of them constitutes an improvement, I think, and the insistence on full-form “it is”, etc., is rather antiquated (the Wikipedia style guide thinks that it's part of formal writing style, but academic books and papers have moved on (perhaps they're emulating legal language; I don't know). I've reverted one, though: philosophy isn't a place, so “nowhere else” is a solecism. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 22:42, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Anne Conway (1631–1679) was an English philosopher in the tradition of the Cambridge Platonists, whose work was an influence on Leibniz. I rest my case. Jacquerie27 23:11, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Er non sequitur, surely. Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 23:20, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Er tu quoque would be closer. But I'm grateful for learning that philosophy has joined the trahison des clercs. From what I've seen of your prose, I'd advise you to read The Guardian (μη γενοιτο!) less and George Orwell more. "Politics and the English Language" would be a good place to start. Jacquerie27 16:40, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I am a student on this course at Oxford and you do not have to have an undergraduate degree to take the course. I received my offer with no academic conditions before I had completed my degree at Cornell University. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 163.1.140.66 (talk • contribs) 21:17, 19 May 2006.

• This is nonsense, I'm afraid. I find it odd (disturbing) that anyone on the course can have misunderstood the situation in this way. Leaving aside the plain fact that the Oxford B.Phil. is (like any other Oxford M.Phil.) a graduate degree, as is stated unequivocally in the documents linked to, you admit that you started the B.Phil. after completing a first degree... Of course you applied and were accepted while still completing your undergraduate degree — that's common if not universal. Your implication – that you would have been allowed on the course even if you'd failed or not completed your first degree – needs evidence (evidence that won't exist, as the implication is false). --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 12:39, 20 May 2006 (UTC)

• No it isn't nonsense, the guy who wrote that is in my college and I have seen his acceptance letter, which has no conditions and he received before he had obtained his undergrad degree. Plus there are a number of students, mainly from Germany, who do not currently hold an undergrad degree but are still on the course. Please see the following image for requested evidence: http://www.b4dn.com/offer.jpg

I don't think there is any need to be so flippant when rebutting the edit either. --Ash Rust 21:25, 08 June 2006 (GMT)

• Well, "academic conditions" in that document is ambiguous. For all we know it could just mean that the applicant isn't required to attain any particular *class* of degree (eg. he/she isn't required to get a first). I did the B.Phil, and I don't know of anyone who is doing, or has completed, the B.Phil without already having a university degree. But if you want to insist, fine. (I don't know what you think "graduate degree" means if not a degree taken by gradautes.) --163.1.159.21 00:41, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

• A.E. Housman famously failed his degree and was appointed Professor of Latin at London on the strength of published articles written in his spare time. Is it possible, however unlikely, that someone might be accepted for the B.Phil on a similar basis? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 194.66.208.235 (talk) 10:24, 4 August 2010 (UTC)

I removed the bit about Northwestern University because (a) Independent Study is not required unless applying for an honors degree. And foreign language proficiency is required for all students in the College of Arts & Science, and is therefore not a requirement specifically for philosophy, but for almost all degrees, required at a school level. --kingabraham3 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kingabraham3 (talk • contribs) 21:47, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

External Links = Redundant Information

Overall, very well-written page! However, the External Links section references information already described and referenced within the article. Therefore I will delete it. However, if anyone believes that a compelling reason exists to re-post it, feel free to do so. 71.234.216.249 20:22, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

I couldn't see the links in the article. The external links section included links that count as sources of what's in the article, though. --Mel Etitis (Μελ Ετητης) 10:49, 28 May 2006 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Bachelor of Philosophy. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160620082052/http://sun025.sun.ac.za/portal/page/portal/Arts/Departemente1/Joernalistiek/Homepage to http://sun025.sun.ac.za/portal/page/portal/Arts/Departemente1/Joernalistiek/Homepage

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:22, 13 July 2017 (UTC)