Religious studies eduqas A-level A02 30 marker structure help

Hi everyone, I have been struggling for a while on how to write a A02 religious studies eduqas questions that are 30 marks. For instance, in a question like whether utilitarianism is relevant in contemporary society, in the intro are you supposed to explain what utilitarianism is. Wouldn't that be A01 knowledge? I'm also very confused on how to structure 30 marker questions. In general i'm just very confused on how to answer A02 questions so any information on how to do that will be greatly appreciated lol

Reply 1

Alethia DaisyRue

Hi! I'm currently fast-tracking, so I'm perhaps not the best person to answer this question, but I am predicted an A, and have been getting band fives almost - but not quite - consistently.

The way I go about structuring essays for Philosophy and Ethics is essentially the same - I will set up three criteria in my introduction and define any key terms. So to take your example of whether Utilitarianism is relevant in contemporary society. I would briefly define Utilitarianism (ethical theory based around principle of utility - greatest happiness for greatest number = good). I would then set out three criteria - one for each main body paragraph (here I would probably do if it is universally applicable, if it is practical and if it is compatible with contemporary western values (I only say western as that's the society in which I live, it could be switched out for something more broad such as general moral value)).

From there I simple go through the criteria and evaluate the theory. I would come to the conclusion in my first mbp (main body paragraph) that it isn't universally applicable, due to the highly secular nature of the theory and the specificity found in (at least Bentham's) act utilitarianism and most of rule utilitarianism. I would come to the conclusion in my mbp2 that it isn't practical, due to the extreme difficulties in using the hedonic calculus in a split second decision, and the rules of rule utilitarianism requiring too much consideration constantly. Here I would likely contrast the theory with something such as Aristotle's Virtue Ethics which instils morality into the character, as to not necessitate a long thought process to make any moral decision. And finally I would conclude that the theory is not compatible with contemporary western values, due to the disregard for any minority groups within the theory.

Throughout each main body paragraph I would weave in counter arguments - generally following a sort of abcbcbcd (argument, back it up, counter, back it up, counter, back it up, counter, decide) structure. That ensures there is plenty of evaluation throughout. I would also generally try to incorporate other scholars for synoptic links throughout the paragraph - such as the Aristotle one in mbp2.

Sorry if this is long and confusing - I have tried my best to distil my thought process into something which makes sense, but I'm not sure how successful it's been!!!