Explaining St Augustine’s theory of time and defending Socrates from accusations of sophistry can be tricky at the best of times.
It becomes especially difficult when you are asked to do so under examination conditions and without having studied either of them.
This was the situation A level philosophy students faced on Monday when an examination mix-up meant one section of their papers referred to topics students had never studied.
“My first reaction was: Oh my god, I’ve studied the entirely wrong thing,” said Luke Mercieca, 18. His worries were compounded by the fact that the culpable section of the exam paper was meant to be his forte.
“It was the section I thought I knew best. But instead of the modern philosophy I had studied, all the questions were about old philosophers.”
When contacted, Matsec executive director Martin Musumeci said the erroneous questions were based on last year’s syllabus rather than this year’s. He said the Matsec Support Unit was taking all necessary measures to mitigate the situation.
Mr Mercieca added: “Others around me began to panic too and I realised I wasn’t alone. That gave me some relief, though it was still a shock.”
As student complaints began to reverberate across exam halls, invigilators had little idea of what to do, fellow student Julian Farrugia, 17, said.
“It was a total mix-up. I could hear yelling in other rooms and, for a while, nobody was quite sure what to do.”
Invigilators eventually restored order and instructed students to work on the first two sections of the exam paper while confusion over section C was ironed out.
Just over 90 minutes into the exam, students were handed a sheet with fresh questions for section C and told they were being given an extra 75 minutes to make up for the time lost.
This time, there were no murmurs of discontent, Mr Farrugia said. “The questions they handed us were very straightforward and easy to understand. And the extra time given to us was very generous. In fact, it was probably more than was needed.”
Armed with questions about René Descartes’ shift from doubt to certainty and requests to explain the philosophies of David Hume or John Locke, students soon put Socratic and Augustinian concerns at the back of their minds.
“I think I did quite well,” Mr Mercieca said, while Mr Farrugia also felt confident of his performance.
When The Times spoke to the two students, both were preparing for the second exam paper of their philosophy A level.
“We’ll see how it goes, logic’s never been my strong point,” one of them said. “I think it’ll be OK,” said the other, “as long as there aren’t any other slip-ups!”