My prelim’s general paper is in 11 days time.
I’ve always thought that blogging is good practice for GP. And I still think that way. Thus, I’m going to blog about something today- Regarding GP.
I’ve always hated GP.
It’s subject thats neither here nor there. Neither detailed nor abstract, empirical nor rational, factual nor expressive.
You see, to me, all subjects or mind-ly pursuits are tripolar. Art, science, and philosophy.
Art governs all forms expression of senses/emotions/ideas. Wiki-Art is the product or process of deliberately arranging items (often with symbolic significance) in a way that influences and affects one or more of the senses, emotions, and intellect.
Science for all factual statements regarding natural phenomena.
And philosophy is the logical critique and analysis of the assumptions/ basis of everything.
These three can sort of form the corners of a triangle. Therefore it such that a subject can be two of the three at the same time, but not all three at once.
Art and philosphy is the most common blend- Nausea by Satre
Philosophy and science- Quantum metaphysics
Art and science are rather rare, but they’re still there- Dali’s clocks
Of course there are stupid attempts to mix all three together, example – back to topic- GP.
GP requires you to express your ideas clearly, effectively, and flair-fully (art), and also to support your arguments with empirical facts and details (science). Moreover, to question and critique the basis,motive,assumptions of current affairs/ideologies.
And since GP requires you to master the impossible trinity of knowledge, it is impossible to present a perfect GP essay.
Just imagine- an essay filled with brilliant literary devices, metaphors etc. Backed with accurate facts and reasoning (perhaps math too), yet questioning every bit of information to the scrutiny of epistemology.
It would be so long, not to mention confusing too, that it’ll be longer and more confusing (IMO) than the bible!
And certainly it’ll be longer than the bible, since it would encompass every single issue raised in the bible! (origin of life, problem of suffering, morality etc etc)
Of course, you can argue its alright to compromise abit of the three, Dali’s painting don’t have relativity equations fancifully painted on them, But look-
Compromising linguistic flair is perfectly alright- so long you get the message across its fine.
Compromising scientific knowledge is still OK- you don’t have to present the equations of malthusian theory in your argument.
Compromising philosophical reasoning is an ABSOLUTE no NO!
You never question and evaluate something halfway. You don’t think about morality and ethics and say ‘Alright. It’s too deep already. I guess and should stop now.’
But GP requires you to do that. Example? ‘Should genetic testing be legalised in the future?’
This is a question on bioethics. Bioethics -> ethics, purpose of humanity, civilisation and life. People have written BOOKS over ethics, so I’m supposed to wrap a book into one paragraph?
You may say I’m being too extreme, but look! If you don’t go to such extremes, you’ll have to assume. Assume that this is true, utilitarianism is good blah blah, and this isn’t good logic.
But of course, being a JC student in SG, I’ll have no choice but to write a essay of compromising logic. Studying various examples of ‘good’ essays, I’ve condensed all you need to do in GP into one short list.
THE FOUR COMMANDMENTS OF WRITING GOOD GP
1) THE PEACOCK TRUMPS THE SWAN
Use attention seeking, cheem words like realpolitik, lackadaisical, to impress your examiners. The less known the word is, the better it is. Best is to use some foreign language to add depth to your essay. (WordPress doesn’t even recognise realpolitik as a legitimate english word) Your language should not be like a graceful dancer weaving through the melodies of rhetoric. It should be a freaking rich tai tai showing off the number of sparkling diamonds on her feet.
2) GIVE THE READER MOUTH CRAMPS
Similar to commandment no. 1, you should use cheem words that are really a mouthful. They exude an aura of intelligence around your essay. You can even use difficult pronouncing names and terms, like ‘Clausewitzian’, ‘surreptitiously’, ‘Ubermensch’ to tell your examiner you’re smarter than him/her.
3) APPEAL TO THE HEART, NOT THE MIND
It is pointless in GP to argue why racism is logically inconsistent. You should just argue with things like ‘Hitler commisioned the Holocaust out of racist motivation…’ without arguing why killing six million Jews is wrong. Use stuff that involve lots of people dying, handicapped, or children getting raped to invoke the examiner’s sympathy, thus giving you more marks.
4) HITCH HIKE ON OTHERS’
Unless you’ve obeyed commandments 1 and 2 religiously for the whole of your essay, AVOID coming up with novel arguments. Examiners would normal credit you with more marks for your novelties, but the problem is they hardly recognise your novelties. And even if they do, they’ll think you aren’t smart enough to come up with such stuff and dismiss it as stuff taken from someone else.
I once came up with an entirely new point in my GP essay. The stupid marker only commented ‘Did you take this from an online essay?’
So, always use arguments from others. Best if they’re from your teacher. Also, you can add in cheem quotes and ghostwrite the argument, attributing them to the author of the quote.
All these I have kept since the youth of my essay. What do I still lack to enter the Kingdom of As?
As the Son of your Teacher’s father says, ‘Go sell away all your belongings and wealth. Then follow me and complete 1000 essays, memorise 1000000 vocab words, then you’ll enter the Kingdom of As.‘