"Interperatation of the NEW" PHYSICAL WTF?!?! (2 Viewers)

[Riviet]

Riviet, you took the words right out of my mouth.

I guess we have something in common.

 

[oh2sxc]

yeah i think i did the right thing. meh cheers anyway was a fked up question jus hope mondays isn't as gayyyy

 

[ddn2004]

obviously the safest way was to totally disagre TEH slap your essay in

Winnar.

That's what I did.

 

[clairejw]

I disagreed with the question. I sad more than anything it was about DISCOVERING the new rather than interpreting it. I said there's time after the journey to interpret what you learnt ect...but the actual journey is about the discovery.

 

[wondawoman]

my mate goes to tutor
and he told me afterwards interpretation of the new would mean

--

new understandings of the world, new discoveries and how they'd interpret the world after their journey
and like new inner discoveries i think
erghh .. not too sure

 

[UnIqUe_PrInCeSs]

I hated the question they gave us.

I WTF'd about 40 times in my head during reading time.
lol even though I didn't fully understand the question, I still wrote about 7 pages of crap :S

hoping to get at least 12/15 for that question :mad1:

 

[Norry]

I disagreed with the statement and then said PJ's were more about discovery of yourself. I couldn't see a problem with this as it said:

"Do you Agree?"

"Argue your point of view"

I took this as 'feel free to disagree and then put your own prepared essay in."

What do other people think of this?

 

[oh2sxc]

yeah i'd say you could've done that.. meh i'm sure the markers will get a fkload of different responses its just how well u argued what u argued i spose.

 

[P_Dilemma]

I approached it thus:

By it's very nature, physical journeys CANNOT be about the interpretation of the new, as the journey must occur on a pre-existing foundation, which can hardly be called "new". I believe the statement is ill-worded; it should be - "PJ's are about NEW INTERPRETATIONS."

I totally dissed the question-writer

-P_D

 

[RingerINC]

I approached it thus:

By it's very nature, physical journeys CANNOT be about the interpretation of the new, as the journey must occur on a pre-existing foundation, which can hardly be called "new". I believe the statement is ill-worded; it should be - "PJ's are about NEW INTERPRETATIONS."

I totally dissed the question-writer

-P_D

Prepare to be BAAAAAAAAHHHHHed

According to your "pre existing foundations" you are implying that you physically know everything about everywhere you are going to journey in the future. Hate to tell you, you don't.

When you undertake a journey you are moving into the unknown, hence you are discovering new facts and new events.

When you discover these things you interpret them. Hence, interpreting the new.

New interpretations would imply that you have seen what you are seeing now and are interpreting them in a different and unique way, which is only the case on a journey through familiar ground. And having new interpretations also implys interpreting the new.

Hence, BAAAAAHHHHHHHH.

 

[nadinetannous]

I disagreed with the question. I sad more than anything it was about DISCOVERING the new rather than interpreting it. I said there's time after the journey to interpret what you learnt ect...but the actual journey is about the discovery.

That's what I did. It allowed me to agree with the thesis while adding my own opinion.