[RonHolzwarth]

I took a course in Philosophy in college.

Although the class only met for the normal number of hours for three credit hours, we were given four credit hours for it, due to the large amount of reading expected of us.

Being a lazy bum, and not interested, I quickly learned that since the tests were all announced and multiple choice, all I had to do was read the first paragraph or so of writings by Ree, Buckle, James, Lewis, Mill, Schlick, Campbell, Hospers, Benn & Peters, Descartes, Hume, Russell, Will, Black, Hume, Reid, Broad, Tyndall, Huxley, Samuel & Ayer & Ryle, Smart, Holmes, Darrow, Reid, Russell, Ewing, Moore, Ayer, Blanshard, Mackie, Hare, Anselm, Aquinas, Copleston, Paley, Trueblood, Darrow, Dostoevsky, Hick, Russell & Copleston, Kierkegaard, Edwards, Fackenheim, Williams & Robinson, Flew, Locke, Berkeley, Stace, Russell, Nagel, Russell, Whiteley, Sinclair, Plato, Leibniz, Kant, Mill, Russell Ayer, Ewing, Hume, Ayer, Ewing, Warnock, Schlick, and Edwards, and then determine the stance of each.

The above authors were sorted by topic:
Determinism,
Scepticism,
Body, Mind and Death,
Moral Judgements,
The Existence of G-d,
Perception and the Physical World,
A Priori Knowledge
Meaning, Verification and Metaphysics.

The class was boring, I cut it all the time. In fact, I cut it twice for a month straight. Basically, about all I did was show up for the tests.

So, with just about no reading and very little work, I got a B in Philosophy. I was rather proud of myself.

Years later, I read the book.

It was incredibly interesting.

[Hibernius Druid]

Maybe you know that the concept of multiple-choice tests in a Philosophy course is absurd. That's how I and most other Philosophy instructors view multiple-choice tests in our discipline, which demands rigorous reasoning demonstrated in cogent, tightly argued essays. I've taught Philosophy more than a quarter century, never once having used multiple-choice tests.