3.7
Quality3.1
Difficulty69%
Would Retake87
Reviews69%
Would Retake
87
Reviews
Rating DistributionOfficial
5
36
4
20
3
14
2
10
1
7
What Students Say
“Not a great experience”
361 - 4.0 rating“PHIL 200 is a pretty easy course, especially if you have some background in philosophy”
PHIL200 - 3.0 ratingClass Info
Online Classes
100%
Attendance Mandatory
23%
Textbook Required
15%
Grade Predictor
Your expected effort level
Predicted Grade
A-
Grade Distribution
Common Tags
Rating Trend
Stable
-0.17 avg changeRatings by Course
PHIL21O
5.0
(1)POLI210
5.0
(1)PHIL561
5.0
(1)PHILKANT
5.0
(1)PHIL450
5.0
(1)Difficulty by Course
DL
5.0
PHILOSOPHY
5.0
LOGIC
4.6
18THCENTURY
4.2
361
4.0
Reviews (87)
No Comments
No Comments
No Comments
Class is far from exciting, but she's a darling.
Excellent professor, gives god explanations, and very willing to answer question
Horrible Lecturer
a bit tricky, a bit bumbling...but helpful and damn sexy
the material is horrible and amazingly hard but she's an excellent professor!
Makes a dry subject as interesting as possible
Logic Sux
Whiney and annoying coupled with confusing and unclear lectures. I felt like I was in grade 2 everytime she picked on people who were talking.
This was the course from h*ll and most people I know almost failed -all of whom were taking it b/c it's required. Not sure how she'd be with different material but this class stinks and she didn't help any.
she's a good professor and i found her course challenging but very interesting
anyone who likes teaching deductive logic has mental issues!!
The material is quite difficult but she made it as clear as it could be.
it's hard to teach material when you are constantly stepping back from the board, saying into the mic., "now that's not right..." When you can't fluidly demonstrate your own problems, maybe a C average is a little harsh.
There is no doubt in my mind that my Logic class with Carson in my very first semester at McGill was the primary factor in me obtaining a VERY high grade on the analytical section of the GRE, and subsequently getting a full-ride to grad school. Bravo.
Logic is a very difficult class. Prof is pretty nice, and into what shes teaching, but be prepared for a LOT of work if you want to pass this course.
goes into too much detail with Hume and Kant, easily goes off on tangents on very subtle issues that make the more more general arguments more unclear. But she is very smart.
I think I'm in love with her. Appart from that she is a brilliant professor and puts the right emphasis in understanding the material. Whoever likes understanding without having to memorise stuff would love her as I do, but actually, I don't just love her... I'm in love with her!
A terrible professor. Is completely disorganized, and doesn't seem to understand her own examples -- she often has to ask students (who are equally lost) for help. Even worse, when I asked her for help, she referred me to the textbook. Possibly the worst prof. I've had at McGill.
Emily's an AMAZING prof, and logic is a really fun class. It's like math with words instead of numbers, so i can see how people who mostly take arts might find it challeging. If you like math at all tho, or problem solving, its great, and shes one of the best profs ive had!
good prof, certainly knows her stuff. she's friendly too and i found her to be very clear when explaining things
I'm not really here to comment on Carson. If you are not required to take Logic, DON'T. It is THE most confusing thing i have ever seen. It was recommended as "interesting," and i am regretting i took the advice! Let's hope taking this class is the biggest mistake i ever make in my academic career!
DONT TAKE IT IF U DON'T HAVE TO! It started off easy but here I am, morning of the final and totally screwed. Heard it was good for the GRE/ LSAT but that's TOTAL BS. If u have to take it: Prof is ok, go to class, do the exercises, and GO TO CONFERENCES!! Don't leave 2nd assgnmt til the last minute.
Very clear. Maybe even the clearest. If you don't do well in this class it's not because of the prof it's because logic tends to be more of a thing that you either have or not.
Prof. Carson shows a good understanding of philosophy, but a poor understanding of students. Let's face it, she isn't charismatic, sociable, or pleasant; and isn't making an effort to be. So, avoid Logic, and borrow notes from the 18thCentury class. It'll ease your life, and Prof. Carson's.
This class is not for everyone. If you don't have an analytical/problem-solving brain, try not to take this course. Carson is very organized with her lectures. She does her best with tough material.
Clearly understands the material well. However, NO TEACHING ABILITY. She is uninteresting, falsely presumes knowledge of specific terms, goes off on tangents, does not answer questions well, does not outline grading criteria but is a tough marker... 18th C was the worst philosophy class I've taken.
Brilliant, but NO TEACHING ABILITY. Her lectures made Kant and Hume even more confusing, and she acted as if we were students doing our PhD on Kant, instead of beginners trying to learn the basics. Do not take this class if you are unfamiliar with Kant/Hume, as she will confuse the hell out of you
Prof. Carson is as clear as possible considering the subject. To teach logic, one must be wordy and repetitive. Difficult material, but fair assignments and tests. Conferences help a lot; ask questions (even if/especially if you think you're the only one doesn't get it). Solidly rewarding.
I don't know why so many people hate logic, but it can't be because of the instructor. She's a terrific prof- clear, organized, and eager to answer any and all questions. Great class!
i loved logic! Its kinda like math only with words, so if math isnt ur thing so much, this class isnt for you. im a first year student, and i went to the classes and conferences, and i had no problem with this course. i thought carson was a great prof, plus she loves logic!
I find reading the comments on Carson amusing. People either love or hate her. The overall grading makes me question their usefulness. I've come to the conlusion that mediocre professors are the most likely to get a high overall score (cute, nice, and easy exams). I find Carson phenomenal. She gives the proper importance to UNDERSTANDING.
I'm about to search all the classes she is teaching and see if I can take other classes with her. The subject is not important. Having a REAL philosopher as a professor is a great chance for a closer observation of this much acclaimed "species".
Very clear and helpful. Pays a lot of attention to students' questions and makes sure everyone understands material. Great prof overall. (And great text too)
Carson's a great prof b/c she's the complete package: she's kind, friendly and conducts her authority w/ an unmatched grace. Her respect for students affirms her authority without her having to wield it as such; she commands the respect she gives, and this doesn't go unnoticed by her students.
I feel generally congenial about her - she means well. She has no sense of humor or creativity and all questions get a curt 'I've gone over that already'. If you like math it's a good course - the text is sufficiently thorough. In fairness I never talked to her one on one. She is not that approachable.
Really good class and easy enough if you put in the work. She's a REALLY good teacher, knows her stuff. Very clear and helpful and explains things in a way that makes you go "now why didn't I get that?"
sometimes i don't know what to think about her. generally, she's all right, but kind of irritating sometimes. she doesn't make her expectations very clear, and has a sort of scary argumentative streak, but she's friendly, approachable, and wicked smart.
The worst philo prof I've ever had. She never taught us HOW to answer any problems, but would only ask herself a question, turn her back to the class, and quickly talk herself through it. That is NOT a way to teach something like logic. Carson means well, but is an awful prof for students not familiar with mathematics. Don't take this class.
You don't know what to think of her. The fact is, the material (i.e. solving truth trees) isn't hard to understand but she emphasizes theory so much that even if you understand how to do stuff in the book, you won't understand what SHE is asking of you. The TAs did the best they could to explain things and were helpful. Carson is OK overall.
I don't know what students expect from a logic prof, but Carson is exceedingly clear, very kind, approachable, and insightful. The class may not be for some, as it is very mechanical and somewhat dry, but this is no fault of the prof. She marks very fairly, as well.
She is very clear; spends lots of time answering questions
I agree with the last post. She's very clear and explains everything thoroughly and the exams are not hard (although the assignments are slightly more challenging). If you take this class and don't understand, go to conferences. Her lectures may not be engaging, but this class is worth taking.
Very engaging, clear and tries her best to make the material interesting. Exams are fair and straightforward. Conferences are EXTREMELY helpful even if you think you have a good grasp of the material.
Lots of people I know who took the class didn't like it cuz they thought it was useless. Me, I thought it was interesting, and prof carson is clear in explaining the material. Another plus, she's very approachable.
her class is very interesting!!!!!!!!!
A very difficult course, but a fantastic lecturer. Very approachable person as well
One of the best professors I have ever seen. She is very modest, but knows the material so well. Knows what she is talking about and always has the big picture in mind while being attentive to details.
I love Philo so I got a good grade, but I don't know how clear her lectures were to others. W/out my philo background I might have done a lot worse. She used SWORD, which confused everyone. However notes and lectures were really useful to me for studying for the final. Easy distribution of grades. Forced reading however. She's fairly good.
Extremely clear during lectures, unclear how students are evaluated. Not a great experience.
Very clear lectures, and she is good at explaining philosophical concepts, at least at an introductory level. The grading system is strange and is strongly based on peer review using SWORD.
She's such a darling, reminded me of the typical nice lady from cartoons that invites you over to tea and tells you interesting stories. So enthusiastic about her subject and gets excited when you are too. The readings are not easy at all, but it is phil after all so put some time and effort.
She is very lovely, very intelligent and very thorough! loved her lectures
Phil201 is an awesome class!! If you have any interest in thinking about the makeup of the world, take it. The readings are super interesting (if sometimes long & can be dense) and so applicable to real life!
This was a great class! Dr Carson selected the readings to bring out a really interesting theme in 18th century philosophy. There wasn't a ton of reading but you were rewarded for a thorough understanding. DrCarson's lectures were really interesting and helpful. The gradingwas fair, leaning towards easy. Gives useful feedback onessays and in office
I'm not sure how I will do in this class since it is graded by TA and fellow students for one of the essays but I can say I enjoy Emily Carson's method of teaching. She seems to be really into her subject and not just after tests and exams. My first time taking philosophy and she made me like it. Seems to be a darling & also tries to make it easy.
So can't actually rate Carson because our essays are in fact marked by dumb idiot students. Don't know if she's a good teacher cause she loves peer editing! Students get butthurt if you give them a bad grade on their essay so then they evaluate you very low and you lose marks! This system is CORRUPT
Many reading materials for this courses but they are not too difficult. No midterm, only a final, two essays and a discussion through mycourses. The grades of discussions will be fully given as long as you join in 5 times. She loves to use peer edit so other students may give you grades for you second paper.
Accessible outside of class; Inspiring lectures; very nice person. She definitely inspired me with her lectures to further explore philosophy. BTW, the peer editing is really not a good idea.
Professor Carson often goes on long rambles, but you can generally pick out what her main points will be. PHIL 200 is a pretty easy course, especially if you have some background in philosophy. However, beware of the Peerceptive platform; Carson relies solely on peer edits for the major term paper, and it can lead to very inconsistent grades.
She's a super sweet teacher who has decently interesting lectures. She only assigns one reading per week and they're pretty easy to follow. The assignments aren't difficult either. Would definitely recommend!
I found this class pretty easy as long as you keep up with all of the readings and take good notes during class. That being said, it might be more difficult for someone who has no background in philosophy. The readings themselves are pretty difficult to understand but I found she explains them pretty clearly during class.
It was really difficult taking an intro level course with Emily because she failed to simplify the philosophies being taught so that beginner level philosophy students could understand. If you put in the work and research outside of class you can understand the theories and get an "A" but sad to say the lectures were pointless.
Emily Carson is the best! Her 17th / 18th century philosophy courses are amazing. She is super knowledgeable and helpful. Tough grader but always fair.
She's caring and understanding. Explains fairly well and passionate about her subject. Was my first Phil class and she definitely made me like it even though it was just a random elective of mine. Felt good to have her in the first sem of college since I was so scared- she was so kind.
Sweet, caring, maybe a little lost. For those wondering, PHIL 201 is by far an easier course than this, but this is not difficult. I fell sick and skipped 2 deadlines and she was very considerate and believed me both times. Teaches pretty well if you pay attention. 1 reading a week so not much work. 2 essays,1 peer reviewed,1 TA reviewed.
Amazing prof. Really caring and understanding, amazing lectures and discussions, honestly an overall superb professor for an introductory course to philosophy!
Emily Carson is a great lecturer, and simplifies complex ideas super easily. You'll never leave class confused. Course grading was definitely a little ambiguous but she doesn't mark anything herself so just pray for nice TAs. Overall she provides a really good introduction to philosophy, I highly recommend her.
The weekly readings can be dense and hard to understand on their own, but Prof. Carson clears everything up in lectures. This was my first time learning philosophy and she made it interesting. Don't be afraid to go to office hours if you are confused, though! Wish I went and asked for help earlier on in this course.
Carson's lectures were good, pretty much just picked out key aspects of the readings and elaborated and made them even easier to understand. Few will have trouble getting a really good grade in PHIL200
She is nice and her lectures are clear. However, the papers are graded by one TA which makes your grade even more subjective. I didn't have any prior knowledge of Philosophy and I found it hard to get a good grade. But overall it's a good introductory course.
Amazing lecturer. Could sit there listening to her all day - I actively wanted to go to lectures because of how she presented the information. Really heightened my interest for philosophy.
Course grading was a little ambiguous. , but it's pretty easy to pass. Emily is a good teacher.
If you ask, she posts her notes online, so I didn't go to all of the lectures and didn't fall behind. There are these weekly analysis things for the readings that take up a half hour of your time. I did MAYBE one full reading for these things, but gave up and found summaries online. If you understand the main concept, you get 100% on all of them.
Prof. Carson's lectures are insightful and extremely helpful. 1st Critique is a hard text, but she can always present complicated ideas clearly. Her lectures can always answer the questions I had while reading the text, not to say her office hours which I've constantly found and inspiring. Not really a tough grader. Just go and take her class.
I didn't really like this class very much, but I felt I learned a lot about philosophy. There's a reading every week, and they are often very confusing but Prof. Carson helps clear them up in lectures. Fair warning: there is no clear grading system, and the TAs will give you very different grades and/or a lower grade than you deserve.
I LOVE prof. Carson And hands down Phil 200 is the best class I've taken for my first semester online lol Her lectures are clear and she leaves time for students to ask questions. I feel like I have learnt a lot about philosophy. If you are looking for a philosophy elective, take Phil 200 with Carson! I will definitely take more classes with her!
While readings can be tedious, Professor Carson's lectures are interesting and she is kind and accessible. She doesn't grade her own papers so grading becomes highly subjective. Just hope for a nice TA - this course is honestly just a TA Russian Roulette. Got hardly any feedback on the exam nor on any of my papers, which can be really annoying.
She obviously really cares about her subject, so lectures tend to be pretty interesting and really help clear up anything you don't understand in the weekly readings. Because of class size though, she doesn't grade any of the papers, so it's really a toss-up depending on what TA you get...
The course itself is pretty chill and she is ok in terms of delivering lectures and making relevant clarifications. The problem is her TAs are highly unprofessional, giving random grades and unsophisticated feedback to the paper. Be aware!!!
Very, very nice professor who is more than willing (in fact extremely happy) to take questions. She is encouraging and helpful. She will not hold your hand, but she is fair. Content can be a little tricky at times, especially if there are some words you do not understand.
I take phil 480 with her and I know the lack of TA did not help but she is awful. As of november we are a month behind schedule, her lectures are extremely disorganized and confusing, and she is barely available for office hours We are mostly just left in broad confusion with instructions as clear as "write in perusall about the text"
She is a very knowledgeable professor, but her teaching is utterly unacceptable: she reads her lecture notes sentence by sentence, making it incredibly boring and easy to zone out.
Seems like a caring enough person but don't be fooled. Highly confused lectures make interesting subject matter soporific. Needs constant reminders to do basic things like uploading slide sets (too bad the slides don't help anyway). Seems like the only way to get past a B is to parrot what she says word for word. She won't understand anything else.
She's VERY disorganized. We were literally weeks behind schedule, but she neither made any official changes to the reading schedule, nor did she inform us of where we were in the texts, it was just a new surprise every lecture. Also, you must follow her interpretations verbatim, or else you'll be met with comments like “I don't get what you mean”.
Class Info
Online Classes
100%
Attendance Mandatory
23%
Textbook Required
15%
Grade Predictor
Your expected effort level
Predicted Grade
A-
Grade Distribution
Common Tags
Rating Trend
Stable
-0.17 avg changeRatings by Course
PHIL21O
5.0
(1)POLI210
5.0
(1)PHIL561
5.0
(1)PHILKANT
5.0
(1)PHIL450
5.0
(1)Difficulty by Course
DL
5.0
PHILOSOPHY
5.0
LOGIC
4.6
18THCENTURY
4.2
361
4.0