This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

OCR Philosophy and Ethics Study Group (AS & A2)

Reply 3600

2062629

5

any topic for a philosophy project?? something not on the syllabus as its for the EPQ.

Reply 3601

HenryBray1998

1

Just need help clarifying this, my teacher said it was fine but im not quite sure...For the virtue ethics question, as a way of arguing the golden mean was irrelevant is it fine to argue it is invalid both in practise and logically and then demonstrate that is why it is an unimportant aspect?

Reply 3602

HenryBray1998

1

Original post by paula2578

any topic for a philosophy project?? something not on the syllabus as its for the EPQ.

The problem of induction is an interesting and largely terrifying concept, definitely would intrigue you if you looked into it

Reply 3603

BenLeake98

Hey everyone, I'm sure most of you will agree the ethics paper yesterday was really harsh!
Give this petition a sign and hopefully OCR will lower the grade boundaries 😂

https://www.change.org/p/ocr-lower-grade-boundaries-on-a2-ocr-ethics-exam-paper-june-2016

Reply 3604

Helena1008

Original post by BenLeake98

Hey everyone, I'm sure most of you will agree the ethics paper yesterday was really harsh!
Give this petition a sign and hopefully OCR will lower the grade boundaries 😂

https://www.change.org/p/ocr-lower-grade-boundaries-on-a2-ocr-ethics-exam-paper-june-2016

How many supporters do you think it needs for OCR to think about it? Have these petitions even ever worked before do you know for exams?

Reply 3605

bs15x_esther

Original post by kitttsy

This just seems redundant to me. I accept the questions were oddly phrased making it difficult to decipher what knowledge was needed but that was about it.

I think most people relied too much on predictions and only revised what was expected to come up, but arguing that a lot it was applied ethics when it shouldn't have been is silly because that's what ethics is all about!!

I'm sure everyone did better than they think and when ever the grade boundaries will always reflect how everyone did overall anyway, so if we all flopped they should be generous with the marks

I completely agree, I do believe that people relied too much on the predicted questions. I always told my friends that revise the exam like its the first time its ever being done. You never know what could come up.

However I also believe that the questions were hard to wrap your head around; particularly question 3. Nonetheless I did question 1 and 3. It was all a matter of elimination tbh. Cause I'm not good at virtue ethics and sexual ethics is my weakest topic.

For meta ethics I discussed:
- what it is
- how it differs from normative ethics - Kant, Utilitarianism and Natural Law
- branches of meta ethics in terms of cognitive and non cognitivism
- intuitionism and emotivism + strengths and weaknesses
- how normative ethics are better in terms of providing a guideline for moral behaviour that is more applicable and realistic and in tune with our nature e..g Synderesis rule, ends in themselves, desire for happiness
- meta ethics helps us understand terms used in ethics; without the understanding we cannot move forward to apply it action

For environmental ethics
- what it is
- source of christian ethics e.g. bible
- dominion, stewardship and rapture + strengths and weaknesses
- chucked in bible quotes
- repeatedly discussed the inconsistency in Christian views on the environment
- applied it to environmental issues e.g. deforestation, destruction of habitats etc
- included utilitarianism...just cause

Reply 3606

HenryBray1998

1

Original post by YorksKillerby

Yeah.... That was a hard one. The one on metaethics was pretty cheap - no textbooks I have read have anything on that question. Considering the situation I feel quite sure I got a B (atleast), I feel pretty confident I got a A on Philosophy, and I was A last year, so I'm hoping I got a A overall.

What do people think the grade boundaries will be like? Low, surely.

Here's an outline of what I wrote for qs 2 and 4.

Golden Mean most important aspect of Virtue Ethics
- introduced Aristotle's theory
-explained Golden Mean, how it is relativistic, gave an example of that (courage)
- the importance of Phroenisis (practical wisdom)
- applied the Golden Mean to homosexuality - how it can apply differently depending on the situation

Then I looked at other important parts of VE:
- what distinguishes VE from other theories it it emphasises cultivation of character - Aristotle, like learning a musical instrument
- The importance of emulating virtuous people (used Foot to criticise this)
- linking to Foot, explained Slote's view of empathy being important

I wrote 5 pages in all.

Kant and sexual ethics
- Intro - said Kant isn't useful here
- Explained duty, Categorial Imperative
- CI 1 - universalisation of maxims
- CI 2 - treat others as a means in themselves
- applied these to homosexuality, mentioning Kant's disapproval of homosexuality and his duty-based view of marriage (thus ruling out any extramarital sex)
- criticised Kant on homosexuality, for example, gays can in many places get married these days
- Kant on extramartial sex - duty, using people as a means to an end
- Supported Kant on this, saying it recognises the importance of duty, which Utilitarianism does not
- Kant on contraception. CI 1 would prohibit it
- pointed out problems with Kant's view here, eg, it can be universalised to use contraception if you have an STI - Kant doesn't deal well with contradictions in CIs

What'd other people do?

My kant was a bit of a shambles but i wrote it in four paragraphs

First noting that Kant's strict view that we cannot act on our natural tendency to try achieving the end of sex is unrealistic and used Dan Ariely to demonstrate how taking a realistic view prevents adverse effects.

Secondly, i countered this by arguing Kant would want us to treat sex as a means to the ends of others, stopping sex from being a purely selfish act but rather to tend to other people's needs. (a know its a bit of an odd idea but i panicked haha)

I then demonstrated that Kantian ethics have the advantage of not being bogged down in religious dogma using a guy called Thomas Nagel to show Thomas Aquinas' view on the purpose of the body was factually inaccurate, meaning Kant avoids an illogical conclusion and limitation.

Lastly, i brought in Kant's four natural depositions of the mind, particularly the love of neighbours saying that Kant stresses amongst humans that respect in marriage is important. I used J S Mill to support this with a quote on marriage, which i think worked as it had little to nothing to do with utilitarianism.

My better essay was defo Virtue ethics

Firstly i argued the Rosalind Hursthouse's idea of following the 'virtue, not vice' rule gives enough to follow but allows enough ambiguity to avoid giving up our human integrity. Brought bernard williams in on that bit and demonstrated the ability to act for the sake of the virtue is the most important aspect of virtue ethics.

Then i argued the golden mean was irrelevant and unimportant as philosophers such as Machievelli and Cicero demonstrated we are able to pick and choose which virtues should remain in the golden mean demonstrating it not necessarily valid.

The crux of my argument lay in hume's three way formulation to demonstrate reason cannot be what motivates our emotional dispositions. This was used to demonstrate Aristotle's view that we arrive at a golden mean through reason is invalid and that instead we should view morality as relative to the individual with virtues different form person to person depending on the emotional response. I then used Nietzsche's 'beyond good and evil' to exemplify this in slave-master morality.

Finshed by summarising how we cant view the golden mean as an important aspect as it makes assumptions about how we conclude what the virtues are and instead we should pursue virtue ethics for its method of following personal virtues.

Reply 3607

Jwarren15

1

Does anyone remember the exact questions for this year's A2 Ethics exam?

Reply 3608

YorksKillerby

1

Original post by Jwarren15

Does anyone remember the exact questions for this year's A2 Ethics exam?

May not be precise wording but here's best I can do:

1. Meta ethics is more important than normative ethics Discuss

2. The Golden Mean is the most important aspect of Virtue Ethics Discuss

3. To what extent does the religion you studied adequately insist humans humans should protect the environment?

4. Kant is of little use in approaching sexual ethics Discuss

Reply 3609

ajaxkiller

7

Did anyone else just completely bs their essay with 0 knowlege?
i just relied on predicted questions and im *****ing it

Reply 3610

emilyhaighjacobs

2

PHILOSOPHY! (sorry It's late can't stop stressing!)I did the religious language (I just did verification in lots of detail- went really well) & miracles- Miracles is my concern...'philosophical problems with miracles'- I defined miracles, went on to Hume's arguments and then I did flews criticism of Hume , then briefly Swinburne's response classification and his ideas about Quantum theory, and that the problems of science can be compatible with religion... I'm worried because I didn't have much time for reference to WILES- literally about 2 lines. I put him in the conclusion; saying something about his view being good for retaining theological thought but retaining Hume's thought regarding a miracle- and concluded that contingency def was best as to avoid criticism. Is this ok? I think I really messed up not mentioning Wiles more, BUT I really developed my argument well (SO many quotes etc- lengthy ones too) and the people I included were really developed so I think it should be ok? Just need a second opinion if anyone can help. x I did this last year, really stressed as I made a massive mistake (can't remember what) and I ended up with a really good grade so idk if I'm just overthinking it? Is it not about quantity but quality in development etc?

Reply 3611

ItsKiara

13

Original post by Helena1008

How many supporters do you think it needs for OCR to think about it? Have these petitions even ever worked before do you know for exams?

None, because grade boundaries depend on how people do. They won't change them depending on people's requests. They'll only adjust it to maintain a certain proportions of A*s, As, Bs, Cs etc.
these petitions are a waste of time lol don't bother.
Just pray that the rest of the uk did rly shet compared to you :wink:

Reply 3612

Vanessaxx98

2

Hello all. I have made a new blog hoping it will inspire or empower someone. It will contain some philosophical topics in due course. Feel free to have a look and share the contents if you like it. Happy reading.

https://philachange.wordpress.com/

Reply 3613

Titi98

1

Original post by emilyhaighjacobs

PHILOSOPHY! (sorry It's late can't stop stressing!)I did the religious language (I just did verification in lots of detail- went really well) & miracles- Miracles is my concern...'philosophical problems with miracles'- I defined miracles, went on to Hume's arguments and then I did flews criticism of Hume , then briefly Swinburne's response classification and his ideas about Quantum theory, and that the problems of science can be compatible with religion... I'm worried because I didn't have much time for reference to WILES- literally about 2 lines. I put him in the conclusion; saying something about his view being good for retaining theological thought but retaining Hume's thought regarding a miracle- and concluded that contingency def was best as to avoid criticism. Is this ok? I think I really messed up not mentioning Wiles more, BUT I really developed my argument well (SO many quotes etc- lengthy ones too) and the people I included were really developed so I think it should be ok? Just need a second opinion if anyone can help. x I did this last year, really stressed as I made a massive mistake (can't remember what) and I ended up with a really good grade so idk if I'm just overthinking it? Is it not about quantity but quality in development etc?

Hiya
I did the same thing,I basically explained Hume and aquinas, with criticisms e.g Swinburne and then criticisms of aquinas, and I assessed the problems raised by miracles by looking at the definitions, as the question asked , my teacher said there is no standard answer, but as long as you either explain Hume with criticism or aquinas with criticism, or wiles responding to bothcriticismcriticism

Reply 3614

emilyhaighjacobs

2

Anyone know when the grade boundaries are released?

Reply 3615

Amy A x

2

Original post by emilyhaighjacobs

Anyone know when the grade boundaries are released?

They are released the day before results so the 17th. I'm not sure exactly what time though, sorry.

Reply 3616

samrosenwalker

5

How did everyone do?!

Reply 3617

ItsKiara

13

Original post by samrosenwalker

How did everyone do?!

I got an A! Wbu?

Reply 3618

YorksKillerby

1

Got an A in Philosophy, only a C in Ethics. I don't know the mark scheme but my Ethics mark looks low (only 60 UMS, barely a C), lower than any other RS work I've ever produced. I'm going to ask for a remark.

Reply 3619

Amy A x

2

Original post by samrosenwalker

How did everyone do?!

I got an A overall ☺ I did much better in philosophy though with 97 UMS and only 77 in Ethics which I was a bit suprised at. Hope you are happy with your result!

(edited 7 years ago)

OCR Philosophy and Ethics Study Group (AS & A2)

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you