How to Beat the System

The Harvard examination system is designed, according to its promulgators, to test two specific things: knowledge of trends and knowledge of detail. People approaching the examination problem have three choices: 1) flunking out, 2) doing work, or 3) working out some system of fooling the grader. The first choice of solution is too permanent and the second takes too long.

This article designed to explain how to achieve the third answer to this perplexing problem through the use of the Vague Generality, the Artful Equivocation and the Overpowering Assumption.

It seems pretty obvious that in any discussion of the various methods whereby the crafty student tries to show the grader that he knows a lot more than he actually does, the Vague Generality is the key device.

A Generality is a vague statement that means nothing be itself, but when placed in an essay on a specific subject might very well mean something to the grader. The true master of the Generality is the person who can write as 10-page essay, which means nothing at all to that person, and have it mean a great deal to anyone who reads it. The Generality banks on the knowledge possessed by the grader, hoping the marker will read things into the essay.

Every non-mathematical field in the University has its own set of Vague Generalities. For instance:

"Hume brought empiricism to its logical extreme." (Philosophy)

"The whole thing boils down to government versus property rights." (Government)

"Moby Dick is written on three levels." (English)

"The Holy Roman Empire was neither holy, nor Roman, nor an empire." (History)

"Locke is a transitional figure." (Philosophy)

"Marx turned Hegel upside down." (General Education)

"Any theory of underconsumption and purchasing power must be grounded in the psychology of the people." (Economics)

"Berlioz is the founder of modern orchestration." (Music)

"Shaw's heroes are men of moral passion." (English)

"Differentiation and integration are fundamental to the dynamic maturation of the human organism." (Social Relations)

To check the operation of a Vague Generality, take the typical example of "Hume brought empiricism to its logical extreme." The question is asked, "Did the philosophical beliefs of Hume represent with the sprit of the age in which he lived?" Our hero replies with by opening his essay with "David Hume, the great Scottish philosopher, brought empiricism to its logical extreme. If this be the spirit of the age in which he lived, then he was representative of it." This Generality expert has already taken his position for the essay. Actually he has not the vaguest idea of what Hume really said, or in fact what he said it in, or in fact if he ever said anything. But by never bothering to define empiricism, he may write indefinitely on the issue, virtually without contradiction.

Of course, some people are naturally conservative; they avoid taking a position whenever possible. They just don't want to go out on a limb when they don't know the genus of the tree. For these people, the Vague Generality must be partially junked and replaced by the Artful Equivocation, or the art of talking around the point.

The Artful Equivocation is an almost impossible concept to explain, but it is easy to demonstrate. Let us take our earlier typical examination question, "Did the philosophical beliefs of Hume represent the spirit of the age in which he lived?" The equivocate would answer it in this way: "Some people believe that David Hume was not necessarily a great philosopher because his thought was merely a reflection of conditions around him, colored by his own personality.

Others, however, strongly support Hume's greatness on the ground that the force of his personality definitely affected the age in which he lived. It is not a question of the cart before the horse in either case, merely the old problem of which came first, the chicken or the egg. In any case, there is much to be said on both sides."

Just exactly what our equivocator's answer has to do with the original question is hard to say. The equivocator writes an essay about the point, but never on it. Consequently, the grader often mentally assumes that the right answer is known by the equivocator and marks the essay as an extension of the point rather than a complete irrelevance. The Artful Equivocation must imply the writer knows the right answer, but it must never get definite enough to eliminate any possibilities.

There is a third method of dealing with examination questions--that is by the use of the Overpowering Assumption, an assumption so cosmic that it is sometimes accepted. For example, we wrote that it was pretty obvious that the Vague Generality was the key device in any discussion of examination writing. Why is it obvious? As a matter of fact it wasn't obvious at all, but just an arbitrary point from which to start. That is an example of an unwarranted assumption.

In the long run the expert in the use of unwarranted assumptions comes off better than the equivocator. He would deal with our question on Hume not by baffling the grader or by fencing with him but like this. "It is absurd to discuss whether Hume is representative of the age in which he lived unless we note the progress of that age on all intellectual fronts. After all, Hume did not live in a vacuum."

At this point our assumption expert proceeds to discuss anything which strikes his fancy at the moment. If he can sneak the first assumption post the grader, then the rest is clear sailing. If he fails, he still gets a fair amount of credit for his irrelevant but fact-filled discussion of scientific progress in the 18th century. And it is amazing what some graders will swallow in the name of intellectual freedom.

It's late August, and your Harvard Summer Experience is almost complete You've seen the Square, shopped HMV Records and the Body Shop and done your time in the hallowed halls of higher learning. You've nursed cups of exotic coffee in the beatnik cafes which hide on dimly-lit side streets. You've danced at the clubs around Kenmore Square and you've dined in the North End.

You've nearly done it all. But you haven't. There's one thing more, Harvard's own Back-to-School special Exams. You hate them and so do we.

Crimson editors over the decades have made some memorable attempts to capture exam period in newsprint. The top article, "Beating the System, won the Dana Reed Prize for undergraduate writing in 1951. The Crimson proudly ran it every reading period until 1962, when it irked one maligned and anonymous grader enough to reply.

Think of it as the collective wisdom of the 357 classes to pass through Johnston Gate before you. And remember--Albert Einstein flunked out, and he didn't even go to Harvard.