Andrew Hsu
Department of Philosophy
AD
3.3
Overall Rating
Based on 7 Users
Easiness 2.0 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 3.7 / 5 How clear the class is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 1.5 / 5 How much workload the class is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 3.5 / 5 How helpful the class is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

GRADE DISTRIBUTIONS
33.3%
27.8%
22.2%
16.7%
11.1%
5.6%
0.0%
A+
A
A-
B+
B
B-
C+
C
C-
D+
D
D-
F

Grade distributions are collected using data from the UCLA Registrar’s Office.

ENROLLMENT DISTRIBUTIONS
Clear marks

Sorry, no enrollment data is available.

AD

Reviews (1)

1 of 1
1 of 1
Add your review...
Quarter: N/A
Grade: N/A
June 27, 2013

Probably the worst philosophy professor at UCLA (up there with Carriero). Another commented claimed that his classes are "intellectual tyranny" -- I could not agree more.

Anyone that thinks this man is brilliant needs to take a class with Gavin Lawrence or Sam Cumming. Hsu's points are tangentially connected, he _never_ answers questions in a straightforward manner, his lectures are mishmash of loosely-related claims (note-taking is nigh impossible), and he purposefully chooses the most difficult texts -- in 191, for example, we had to read Strawson's Persons the first week. His deconstruction of philosophical arguments is also abhorrent -- as in, you might as well Google or JSTOR a better explanation.

When asked about specific advice on papers, he avoids any sort of direct critique. Once you do get your paper back (with the inevitable B+/A-), his comments are mostly platitudes.

I would avoid him. His soft-spoken nature is a facade for intellectual pretentiousness.

Helpful?

0 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
Quarter: N/A
Grade: N/A
June 27, 2013

Probably the worst philosophy professor at UCLA (up there with Carriero). Another commented claimed that his classes are "intellectual tyranny" -- I could not agree more.

Anyone that thinks this man is brilliant needs to take a class with Gavin Lawrence or Sam Cumming. Hsu's points are tangentially connected, he _never_ answers questions in a straightforward manner, his lectures are mishmash of loosely-related claims (note-taking is nigh impossible), and he purposefully chooses the most difficult texts -- in 191, for example, we had to read Strawson's Persons the first week. His deconstruction of philosophical arguments is also abhorrent -- as in, you might as well Google or JSTOR a better explanation.

When asked about specific advice on papers, he avoids any sort of direct critique. Once you do get your paper back (with the inevitable B+/A-), his comments are mostly platitudes.

I would avoid him. His soft-spoken nature is a facade for intellectual pretentiousness.

Helpful?

0 0 Please log in to provide feedback.
1 of 1
3.3
Overall Rating
Based on 7 Users
Easiness 2.0 / 5 How easy the class is, 1 being extremely difficult and 5 being easy peasy.
Clarity 3.7 / 5 How clear the class is, 1 being extremely unclear and 5 being very clear.
Workload 1.5 / 5 How much workload the class is, 1 being extremely heavy and 5 being extremely light.
Helpfulness 3.5 / 5 How helpful the class is, 1 being not helpful at all and 5 being extremely helpful.

TOP TAGS

There are no relevant tags for this professor yet.

ADS

Adblock Detected

Bruinwalk is an entirely Daily Bruin-run service brought to you for free. We hate annoying ads just as much as you do, but they help keep our lights on. We promise to keep our ads as relevant for you as possible, so please consider disabling your ad-blocking software while using this site.

Thank you for supporting us!