OCR RS Philosophy and Ethics A2

Reply 580

CakeIsthebest

1

Original post by JonnyD

Born Haber and random physics question in section c?

Physics? Thought it was random moles questions. Edexcel A2 paper yeah?

Reply 581

RosyStormborn

Empiricism is factual evidence which James believes is through case studies of religious experience, pluralism is that all RE's are similar/the Same but due to ethnocentrism they are interpreted differently because the experience is ineffable! And pragmatism is there is no fixed truths :smile:

Reply 582

The Empire Odyssey

21

Has anyone actually even done a practice question?? I haven't done one since like January............ ****ed it haven't I?

Reply 583

CakeIsthebest

1

Original post by Liam Daly

'If the soul is not distinct from the body there can be no life after death' discuss

I think they could ask a twofold question like this

Posted from TSR Mobilehh

I agree. They could either do that or just make it a really simple title. That's basically wanting monism vs dualism but asking indirectly

Reply 584

NerdFighteria

Original post by RosyStormborn

Empiricism is factual evidence which James believes is through case studies of religious experience, pluralism is that all RE's are similar/the Same but due to ethnocentrism they are interpreted differently because the experience is ineffable! And pragmatism is there is no fixed truths :smile:

thank you so much! the person in that video vastly over complicated it and made it sound like they weren't even related back to RE. Your explanation is helpful!

Reply 585

Clytemnestra

7

Original post by NerdFighteria

can someone explain empiricism, pragmatism and pluralism in Religious Experiences
watching this video about James' theory and it's really confusing me,
just basically what are they/how do they apply?

Empiricism: We interpret all our situations and the same way we interpret religious experiences. The noetic quality and transient nature provides us with hints that there is a reality beyond this world.
Pluralism: Although, religious experiences in different religious are distinctly different, they all experience the ultimate reality and interpreted as proof for God.
Pragmatism: James was a pragmatist and believed the truth was not fixed, it changes as the things which are valuable to us change. Observing the effects of religious experience show us there is truth to be found in religion.
- he said this was paramount for judging the RE

He's saying that whatever effect the experience has upn a person is much more important than whether it actually even occured

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 586

CurlyC

7

Does anyone have any last minute exam technique tips/tips for planning writing ?

Reply 587

annmcc

If we got a question like the predicted one on Ayer would it be ok to talk about Flew and Via Negativa as well?

Reply 588

weirdnessandcoffee

15

Original post by CakeIsthebest

Is this the religious experience topic?

Yep

Reply 589

Anny Smiles

2

How do you choose which question to do?

There are some topics I'll avoid, but I don't know how to choose between specific questions?

Reply 590

CakeIsthebest

1

Original post by annmcc

If we got a question like the predicted one on Ayer would it be ok to talk about Flew and Via Negativa as well?

I'm wondering the same thing.. I'm confused :frown:

Reply 591

The Empire Odyssey

21

I'm stuck on the Strong Verification Principle. Swineburne criticises it as saying you can't make universal statements such as 'all humans are immortal'. This however, might be meaningful but according to the Verification Principle, this is meaningless as you can't justify this through your senses because you can't see them... However we already know that we die.... so how does that make sense!

Also, can you use this example: "we could make universal statements that "all Ravens can fly" or "all Ravens are black"... However the Strong Verification Principle would deny this as you can't see it through your senses? But, all ravens are black - it's true by definition....? Is this correct?

Reply 592

The Empire Odyssey

21

Original post by CakeIsthebest

I'm wondering the same thing.. I'm confused :frown:

You can do as I asked this before... However I've had people saying I should use Analogy with the predicted question rather than Via Negativa

Reply 593

appleduck

June 2008:

1) 'Hick's views on the body/soul distinction are more coherent than those of Dawkins.' Discuss.

4) 'There is no philosophical justification for a belief in resurrection'. Discuss.

Reply 594

IHateRevisionOK?

Original post by appleduck

June 2008:

1) 'Hick's views on the body/soul distinction are more coherent than those of Dawkins.' Discuss.

4) 'There is no philosophical justification for a belief in resurrection'. Discuss.

That's the old spec!

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 595

The Empire Odyssey

21

Original post by Anny Smiles

How do you choose which question to do?

There are some topics I'll avoid, but I don't know how to choose between specific questions?

Usually I know which ones to avoid just by looking at them. If I look at a question and I hear alarm bells then I stay well clear!

However if I am stuck on 3 questions, I'd normally see how many points I can say about them like do an arrow and have some philosophers name or point etc... See how much I have per question and do it like that really..

Reply 596

CurlyC

7

Original post by Cool_JordH

Usually I know which ones to avoid just by looking at them. If I look at a question and I hear alarm bells then I stay well clear!

However if I am stuck on 3 questions, I'd normally see how many points I can say about them like do an arrow and have some philosophers name or point etc... See how much I have per question and do it like that really..

Approximately how many points/paragraphs per question should we be looking at trying to achieve & what is a rough number of philosophers to include?

Reply 597

Steph_EmmaH

2

Original post by Cool_JordH

I'm stuck on the Strong Verification Principle. Swineburne criticises it as saying you can't make universal statements such as 'all humans are immortal'. This however, might be meaningful but according to the Verification Principle, this is meaningless as you can't justify this through your senses because you can't see them... However we already know that we die.... so how does that make sense!

Also, can you use this example: "we could make universal statements that "all Ravens can fly" or "all Ravens are black"... However the Strong Verification Principle would deny this as you can't see it through your senses? But, all ravens are black - it's true by definition....? Is this correct?

The criticism works because you can't test every single human. You can't go around and see every raven to check.

I like to think of the example of water. You can't say "all water boils at 100 degrees" because you can't go and test ALL the water in the world.

That's why Ayer says that it's important to only be able to say something is probable rather than 100% tested.

Reply 598

Steph_EmmaH

2

Can someone clarify for me who I'd put if a monism vs dualism essay came up.

I get that Descartes and Plato are Dualists.

For monism do I mention Aristotle, Hick and Dawkins?

I thought Hick and Dawkins were materialists...

Basically whats the difference between monism and materialism? No where seems to be able to give me a clear answer!

Reply 599

The Empire Odyssey

21

Original post by CurlyC

Approximately how many points/paragraphs per question should we be looking at trying to achieve & what is a rough number of philosophers to include?

My teacher always said go with 3-4 paragraphs. You shouldn't be looking for huge philosophers. You have two options: 1) either revise key philosophers in great depth or 2) revise lots of philosophers in little depth.

OCR RS Philosophy and Ethics A2

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you