I'm honestly not sure if it's the subject or the professor. I do think Rescorla could be a lot better though. I came into this class thinking I would be thinking abstractly, getting philosophical and existential. This was not the case: we were taught theories and often just reworded them for essays which in principle seemed easy but proved hard. Grades weren't put in until the end of the quarter...the only grades we really knew were essay grades, after about a week or two. However, the final essay, a third paper, wasn't graded or at least the grades weren't released until after the final and very late in the quarter. If we had any issues with our grades there was little to no time to actually address them. Essays were graded VERY tough, but eventually I got the hang of it: my grades went from C to B to A. The most annoying part of this class was probably the fact that we didn't even get grades for the final. We just got the final grade. The class was boring, and DO NOT buy that $50 course reader, you can find pdfs online. Rescorla's lectures weren't half bad and based on the fact that we're remote right now, he was pretty good about that. He had "group office hours" rather than live lectures and recorded his lectures and uploaded them to CCLE so we could watch them asynchronously. He also did different topics in every video so there were multiple 10-30 minute videos per week, which I found helpful for going back to study/review if I was confused. My TA really wasn't the best and I think he graded harder than others might have. He often had no answers for my questions during discussions because philosophy can be complex. When essay topics were posted, it was hard to actually get information about what to write from him. He was vague about things, which I guess had a purpose so we can produce original thought but it was horrible for my grade. Essay prompts were vague, except for the last one. But the final was great, it was literally just exactly the questions he gave us on the study guide. Overall, I would give this class a D, maybe a low C. It was a difficult GE and a lot of people were struggling more than me.

I did not really like anything about this class, but honestly I'm not too big of a fan of philosophy of mind (maybe I just need better experiences with it). I never showed up to lectures or discussions (we're in the middle of a pandemic) but i managed to get a B, which depended mostly on my TA. The amount of reading is pretty heavy but I didn't do any of it after Week 4 and I realized it wasn't even necessary. The quizzes, papers, and exams all really were based on the videos that Prof. Rescorla would post every week. So, really my grade was based off my understand of the videos and I did alright, I could've done better if I had tried but yeah. ALSO, the book is also a waste of money don't buy it!!! i promise

I took this class fall 2020 as a freshman, so it had not occurred to me to read the reviews beforehand. I really, really wish I had. There is absolutely no clarity in the way this class is graded, and it seems as if that is intentional. I ended up checking my final grade on the last day that we had to contest it, and there was only an overall letter grade, nothing about the quizzes, final, or the three papers we are assigned. I had to literally email the professor for a grade breakdown, and he only gave me more obscure letters on each paper and the final but had never given a rubric that told us how grades were assessed (if you ask for one, the TAs say they can't give you one). The professor also doesn't like to answer questions, the TAs were the most helpful resource in this class. Finally, don't bother with the purchase of the course reader; it's useless.

I chose this class very initially very interested in the content. However, going into the class my TA was not helpful or clear at all (Jacob) and the professor either. The prompts were not clear and I don’t think their aim was to make sure all their students can get an A because I did try to and I do think this was one of the worst classes because of how they handles the grading and prompts. The content of the class was very interesting to learn but the grading was not fair considering the lack of clarity.

At the time I'm writing this, I am a graduating senior. I took this class winter of my sophomore year and it was by far not only the worst GE, but the worst class I've taken at UCLA. My TA was a firm believer of "you can't get an A on a philosophy paper" so really I was doomed from the start. No one I knew in my section got As on the papers regardless of how often they went to office hours or how early they started their papers.
The professor is sarcastic, which I would normally enjoy, except he came off as arrogant and uncaring for students. He did not even show up for the final, which was a very long written exam that was extremely harshly graded. I spent a lot of time studying for it and did not receive the grade I hoped for, and when I asked the TA and the professor to show me my final they were very unaccommodating. My advice is if you want to take a GE you enjoy, don't take one with bad reviews.

This is actually for 170 but it wasn't an option and I thought it was important for me to balance out some of the reviews here. I thoroughly enjoyed this class and the professor. I didn't think I would be interested in the subject, but the professor and the required text made it easy to understand. The course reader was not "necessary" but some things can be useful without being necessary, and the course reader is a great example of that. The workload was hard, but doable in a full course load. He can seem snarky, but, ultimately, extremely knowledgable. He was my first prof at UCLA and an great one at that. If you want to understand the subject your assigned to learn take professor Rescorla, read the primary text(the Kim text), and go to lecture. You'll do great.

Out of the 9 quarters I've been at UCLA, this has been without a doubt the worse class I've ever taken here. And its not even close. The papers are so incredibly specific, with about 3 sentences of explanation followed by TAs trying to clarify what the hell the assignment was for the next 3 weeks. I've never seen a professor been so rude. Which would be one thing if he was good, but he wasted so much time covering the most inane details. I also feel as though I've learned absolutely nothing, besides a few basic facts of philosophical history. Avoid at all costs. If you have to take it, don't bother with the course reader.

Hands down the worst professor I've ever had at UCLA. First day of class, he came off as arrogant, sarcastic, and as someone who did not care for his students' learning. The TA's were kept in the dark for the majority of the course. They were clueless as to what to do during the review sessions for the final. Nothing is posted on ccle, as to "encourage" students to come to lecture. There were 3 essays, weekly in class quizzes which weren't hard, participation for discussion, and the final which consisted of 10 mini essays. There was also a course reader which we never used (waste of $50), despite him insisting we buy it (again completely unconcerned for his students). I'm still upset about my overall grade, but in general I just regret taking the class in the first place.

hated this class. lecture was so boring. never did the readings but had to spend $50 on a course reader (even though all materials were find-able online). TA was weird and only semi helpful. Easy enough, but boring. Rescora was confusing and patronizing. Always talked about Trump. Don't recommend

I had a blast this quarter in Phil 7 with Professor Rescorla! Never taken a philosophy class in my life until then, and I came into class every time looking forward to his lectures (which I will say, he's one of the best lecturers I've had at UCLA). Topics and questions for the final came directly from the study guide, and you probably didn't need to study much if you paid attention in class.
However, I do agree with the reviews below in that there's definitely room for improvement for this course (the 2 areas being integration (or omission) of the course reader as well as a concrete rubric made publicly available to students for each essay assignment).
So I'm left feeling ambivalent. The course needs some work, but I thought Professor Rescorla was amazing!