This discussion is now closed.

Check out other Related discussions

OCR Philosophy and ethics AS

Just thought I'd sign up to comment on this exam today.

I got an 88 A in January so assumed I'd be fine to revise more heavily for the other subjects in the summer.

Sadly, the Philosophy questions really caught me out.

Firstly there was a mix-up with the timing which meant I began after most people, putting me off immediately. Then, I noticed the questions.

My mind went totally blank after I opted for Aquinas, so I switched to Coplestone & Russell. I think I did OK on this.

However, the next section was completely unexpected.

Our teacher told us she'd eat the bible if pyschology came up (it did in the first section, so we'll check out seasoning varieties) and she also said sociology was unlikely. Well two of the three questions were sociological!

I went for Irenaeus and Augustine in the end, but I just couldn't think of their exact ideas and ended up listing a load of generic points about evil on earth.

Disaster was partially overted by the ethics questions, but I feel as though I've let myself down here.

What are everyone else's opinions on it?

Reply 121

adarklingplain

13

I did the Aquinas question, which I thought was okay, and the Irenaeus and Augustine one, but half way through I forgot what they said and made a lot of it up!

I had to do Philosophy of Religion 2 as well, and that was a bitch :frown:

it asked us to Define a Prepositional Revalation, and I'd vaguley heard of it (I couldn't do the other 2 questions) and I only wrote 7 lines... it was a 33 mark question. eek.

At least I've finished all my A.S.'s now and don't have to worry about them till August!

Reply 122

srwences

12

Didn't see anything about Prepositional Revalation, luckily I reckon!

Yes I had the same problem with Irenaeus and Augustine. I just couldn't remember exactly what they said, 'cos I hadn't revised that particular part of the course.

I put about preparation for heaven, free will and suchlike but wasn't specific to either of them.

Looks like I'll have to be re-taking that one in January then...!

But as you say, at least that's them all over with for now. Thing is, Philosophy was meant to be the easiest paper...or so I thought!

Reply 123

Mutinta

I hated the first part of the philosophy paper. I went with the Freud question but I was just trying to pad it because there wasn't a huge amount to say. I hadn't revised sociology so I was so glad to see Augustine and Irenaeus come up.
Ethics - I loved the first part. I did the question about explaining on relativist theory. I just wrote everything I knew about Utilitarianism. Second part I did Kant but I'm worried I messed up that question. I think my strengths were weak as was my part b.
Oh well we'll see in August. At least I'm done with exams now.

Reply 124

jgupta

10

Not a bad set of papers..my hand hurts like hell though (20 sides!):

Foundation: Quite good...did the body & soul question
Would have preferred a different set of questions for part two though...i.e. on Natural Law or V.Ethics..but the relativism question was okay

Philosophy: Did the Russell question, plenty to write about and in the B) too because of the chessboard, etc
Thank god for the prob of evil question! I think they're catching on with people sacking off sociology

Ethics: Decent...I did the question on utilitarianism...could have gone on for longer lol...and the question on Kant..got so frustrated cos forgot the second cat imp but then remembered it again just at the end!

Reply 125

elwoodc

7

magicbuspass

Kant and Utilitarianism I think I can write essays about, so is the medical ethics.

On the Buddhism paper I have a wierd feeling that the 4 noble truths will come up, I hope it won't be background to the Buddha again, although yesterday at history I was wrong when I thought that Long Parliament wouldn't come up.

sam jones??
heya!!! :biggrin:

haha i got excited when I thought another school was doing buddhism, but just our school :P

Mutinta

Ethics - I loved the first part. I did the question about explaining on relativist theory. I just wrote everything I knew about Utilitarianism. Second part I did Kant but I'm worried I messed up that question. I think my strengths were weak as was my part b.
Oh well we'll see in August. At least I'm done with exams now.

But ethics, I did the Kant and Utilitarianism as well :smile:

I thought they were okay, except I'd have preferred to talk about the weaknesses of Kant :P and my B part was awful :tongue:

Once again was rushing and ran out of time, ahh my hand hurt so much by the end!!!

Reply 126

SarahhhD

8

I cab soeakk
3.5 hours of hell :frown:

Reply 127

jim_is_alive702

Philosophy:
The questions were so odd I mean Aquinas' teleological argument?!? My teacher never mentioned him and I only knew what I'd revised from the school textbook (About four lines dedicated to it :rolleyes:

) I had to do cosmological and one of my points was of but overall I think it went ok as did the b part I think...the second part was horrific...I mean two sociology? I'd revised every single topic bar this one because my teacher said we could get away with it...In the end done the evil question which went well except for missing out about privatio boni

Ethics:
I think went well...This was a nice paper compared to philosophy :p:

Reply 128

User188463

17

i found philosophy so much easier than ethics. But the foundation paper with the plato's body/soul distinction question was horrible. I was straining to write more than a side for part A on that and most of it was just rubbish. The moral relativism question seemed easy but again for A) there just was so little to writer about. Oh well.. they say no point in worrying about it but i just cant help myself

Reply 129

zb896

I found the 2nd part to ethics hard! i knew all of kant's theory but didn't revise the strengths! so i had to end up doing the religious ethics question, which went ok...(i hope)!

Reply 130

srwences

12

jim_is_alive702

Philosophy:
The questions were so odd I mean Aquinas' teleological argument?!? My teacher never mentioned him and I only knew what I'd revised from the school textbook (About four lines dedicated to it :rolleyes:

) I had to do cosmological and one of my points was of but overall I think it went ok as did the b part I think...the second part was horrific...I mean two sociology? I'd revised every single topic bar this one because my teacher said we could get away with it...In the end done the evil question which went well except for missing out about privatio boni

Ethics:
I think went well...This was a nice paper compared to philosophy :p:

Agree totally. The second part was nothing short of a farce. Looks like I'll be re-taking the philosophy.

Reply 131

sazza101

was it just me who thought the philosophy paper was all really hard? the choice of questions was so bad, i mean 2 sociology questions on one section?
i did the teleological argument one, think i did okay on that but completely blagged one of the sociology questions because i couldnt remember any problem of evil!
ethics was okay though i did the utilitarianism essay on the first section and then kant on the second one.
do not feel confident about it at all :frown:

Reply 132

dlg3579

1

Foundation was ok as plato body and soul and relativism didnt demand that much but the pure philsophy paper had two sociology questions which lacked any form of revision so origin of evil it was. Ethics was all waffle and literally quoted the bible for the relgious ethics part, then applying "You shall not murder" to euthanasia. Overall, not bad

Reply 133

SarahhhD

8

dlg3579

Foundation was ok as plato body and soul and relativism didnt demand that much but the pure philsophy paper had two sociology questions which lacked any form of revision so origin of evil it was. Ethics was all waffle and literally quoted the bible for the relgious ethics part, then applying "You shall not murder" to euthanasia. Overall, not bad

F:Plato and relativism.
P :colone:

vil and teleological
E:Bentham and Kant

Reply 134

Sports Racer

14

I only did the ethics. It was, as someone said above, decent. Not entirely straightforward, but not awkward either.

Part 1 I did Utilitarianism. I think I did well.
Part 2 I did the euthanasia/religious ethics and talked about Natural Law and Situation Ethics (Christianity) and their take on euthanasia. Bit of a debate on paper going on there.

Reply 135

s+lky

jim_is_alive702

Philosophy:
The questions were so odd I mean Aquinas' teleological argument?!? My teacher never mentioned him and I only knew what I'd revised from the school textbook (About four lines dedicated to it :rolleyes:

) I had to do cosmological and one of my points was of but overall I think it went ok as did the b part I think...the second part was horrific...I mean two sociology? I'd revised every single topic bar this one because my teacher said we could get away with it...In the end done the evil question which went well except for missing out about privatio boni

Ethics:
I think went well...This was a nice paper compared to philosophy :p:

Same.. i wanted to do the Teleological question but when i saw it focused on Aquinas i was rather cunfused as the only information on him is from his 4th way and thats it.. I wouldn't have took up anymore than a small paragraph and that waan't nearly enough for 33 marks! I thought Paley was definatly the main dude for the design argument!? Ermm.. i did the Cosmological one! Rather liked that one and managed to squeeze in Aquinas ans Hume on B. I saw Part 2 and my face dropped, literally dropped! We'd never been taught psychology/sociology and she said we'd know need it and totally skipped that topic and find that there was TWO questions on sociology my heart cracked! Then came the problem of evil question.. We weren't taught that either! I knew nothing! Seriously NOTHING! My heart then broke once a saw it.. And i was soo looking forward to the philosophy paper! I attempted a sociology one from glimpsing something i saw last night then embellishing it!

Ethics now i was fairly pleased with that! I did Benthams' version of Utilitarianism and i think that was alright..? I did Religious Ethics on Part 2 has i went blank about the strengths of Kantain ethics which pissed me of as i know his ethics inside out but the evaluation i'm too shakey on to attempt to answer a question on it!..

We shall see come August.. :s-smilie:

Reply 136

Banality

From my revision I thought the only real teleological point for the 5 ways was the 5th one... Man I did not enjoy foundation :P...
Well looks like a ****ed that philosophy up a lil...
Ethics I was more happy with Utilitarianism although couldn't see how people could write ridiculous amounts about it...
Hope I got a B overall or else I'm gonna be pissed >.<
On a side note my hand hurts like **** >.< not picking up a pen tomorrow.

Reply 137

user_01332

6

I think I did quite well in the end overall. I will be extremely scared if I don’t get at least 2’s and a B in one of the 3 units because if I don’t the amount of revision I will be doing next year will be…too much for me to consider doing like this year!

There really is a huge amount to cover in the course and I am sure many teachers would advocate it as safe not to learn sociological challenges or the theodicy’s for religious belief...obviously if you know nothing about these subjects you were ****** today.