The Student Room Group

RE and Ethics - OCR

Hiya

Is anyone else struggling with the time limits for the OCR paper? I mean 20 mins to write a longer response and 10 minutes to write a shorter response - it's ridiculous.

Can anyone give me some help?

I know all my material and stuff - we've just had our mocks and for the foundation paper I got a D :frown: because I answered the question "explain what moral relativism is"...and I apparently got a D because I didn't mention Utilitarianism.. yes I know this is relativist theory ... but I thought that wasn't part of the foundation paper. Opinion, please?
Reply 1
I think the best thing to do is just practise timed essays really. I struggled with the time last year too - i do think it's pretty ridiculous lol.

And i don't understand why you'd get a D for not mentioning Utilitarianism. That isn't even on the syllabus for the exam? We didn't even mention it until after the January module. Could you ask for your paper back?
Yeah, it was just a mock so I have the paper - that's what I thought too - Util. is not on the Foundation Syllabus. Yes, I can see where the teacher is coming from - it is a relativist theory.

My part ii) is so crap because I simply just ran out of time
What did you get btw?
Reply 4
In what sense is utilitarianism relativist?
because it's not absolutist; you make a decision judged on that particular situation/circumstance (I'd say it was teleological and relative)
Reply 6
Ah. Well its certainly consequentialist/teleological. Likewise it is not absolutist, but I'm surprised you were asked to classify it as relativist when it is only situationist (judgements are determined 'relative' to the act in question).

While I certainly accept what you are saying in that respect, I'm shocked you were given a D for not mentioning utilitarianism as an example of moral relativism, which would preclude the universal (and absolute) prescription to maximise happiness/preferences etc- no doubt why it isn't on the syllabus.
I know I think it's stupid - I explained what moral relativism was and talked about situation ethics. I too agree with you - it's more teleological than relative!\
I know I think it's stupid - I explained what moral relativism was and talked about situation ethics. I too agree with you - it's more teleological than relative!\
That's so stupid! All I talked about was situation ethics and I got 31/33. For the second part too, I talked about SE in one paragraph and still got good marks. Your teacher is an idiot.

You need to just not waffle, forget all the fancy introductions and long winded senteces. Just write what it necessary - it is better to expand on a few points than to write point after point after point etc. In the latter, all you are doing is listing things which won't gain you marks.

Surprisingly, I didn't feel constrained by the time limits. I was rather relaxed which was a bit of a shock! I spent 15 mins on part A and 15 mins of part b.

Which question did you choose for the philosophy mock? I did the plato/aristitle/soul one - we'd already answered a question very similar to that for homework!
Hmm....maybe I waffle; I don't know. I think I do elaborate on the points, I'm not sure. Maybe I'll scan in one of my essays sometime.

We don't do philosophy - we do:

Foundation [New Testament B and Ethics 2]
Religious Ethics 2
New Testament 1 B


Oh and our teacher just got the resit marks in - they got mostly As and she was only giving them Bs/Cs/Ds .......
Reply 11
Urgh, stupid time limits. ¬¬

As already stated, the best thing is practise - I also suggest making a list in about a minute before you write the essay of things you HAVE to include. Even though you may have wasted a minute, at least you've fitted in all the important stuff you needed to in.

Latest

Trending

Trending