Group for those who do OCR A2 Philosophy &amp; Ethics [Post Exam Discussion]

Original post by Ineluctable

I would present one view, put down an opposite view or criticism, and make a judgement on how effective that opposite view/criticism is.

Sorry, but could you give me a for instance? In my notes I basically have the view, then criticisms, I didn't realise we then have to evaluate the criticism....
So for instance if there were a question on...the verification principle, and then you stated that a weakness is that historical statements would not be verifiable, how would you then "make a judgement on how effective that opposite view/criticism is"?

Reply 502

emilylikeeee

11

Original post by Wanttobeasucess

Does anybody know anything about the Problem of Evil with life after death ??!
Its not the text book! I'm baffed!
Any help much appreciated !!

Would be the theodicies surely? Augustinian, Iranean, Swinburnes? And could bring in Summum Bonum too :smile:

Reply 503

Noodlzzz

21

Original post by skygirl999

Sorry, but could you give me a for instance? In my notes I basically have the view, then criticisms, I didn't realise we then have to evaluate the criticism....
So for instance if there were a question on...the verification principle, and then you stated that a weakness is that historical statements would not be verifiable, how would you then "make a judgement on how effective that opposite view/criticism is"?

So it would be:

Verification is x
Verification fails because y
Falsification offers an alternative of z to make up for verifications downfall
However, falsification still relies on x assumption, therefore both fail/another alternative is required

Reply 504

Ineluctable

3

Original post by emilylikeeee

Need help from you lovely's!
Anyone got any notes on to criticise Aristotle's view on the soul? My notes are really weak on it

Life after death is quite a frustrating topic, it is so big and some areas are hard to criticise. But you could argue that Aristotle is a dualist (although body and soul die together they are still separate), criticising the fact that he is not a materialist but still maintains the separation, and use general criticisms of dualism, and then criticise the idea of an 'animating principle', and Aristotle's approach to the soul with his hierarchy. You could also point out that Aristotle's view is shaped around his idea of form (AS synoptic link), because the soul is the form/animating principle and the body is the substance and criticise that. Sorry I haven't been specific but the ideas are quite hard to criticise, the best you could do is question whether his view is coherent.

Reply 505

Original post by emilylikeeee

Would be the theodicies surely? Augustinian, Iranean, Swinburnes? And could bring in Summum Bonum too :smile:

How do you know that?
What is Iranean?? What does Swinburne say?
Summun Bonum with Kant ??
AH :frown:

Do you know any wesbites or have any notes?
Would be soooo helpful! Thankyou!

Reply 506

Original post by Noodlzzz

So it would be:

Verification is x
Verification fails because y
Falsification offers an alternative of z to make up for verifications downfall
However, falsification still relies on x assumption, therefore both fail/another alternative is required

Oh I understand what you mean now! Thanks :biggrin:

I didn't realise you meant you could bring in another view! Oh dear...the stress is obviously messing with my head!

Reply 507

Ineluctable

3

Original post by GetCrunkedUp

That's what I was thinking, if i just learn a model essay of the different approaches =)) hopefully that will be the question.

Also, is anyone revising resurrection and reincarnation it came up in the previous paper along with disembodied existence....?

I would advise against learning model essays because the questions will always be subtly different. Just note the basic approaches and think about how reliable they are when applied.

Reply 508

phiddy23

11

Original post by ajenkins

Same! i've got Biology monday afternoon as well, just had a major breakdown/panic. I'm seriously not going to sleep until monday is over! And then I have geography the next day. LOVE MY LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!

in the same boat - latin then politics next morning :frown:

theres no way of comforting yourself just gotta stick through it.

Reply 509

Original post by emilylikeeee

Need help from you lovely's!
Anyone got any notes on to criticise Aristotle's view on the soul? My notes are really weak on it

Aristotle's writings about the intellectual faculty of the soul are described as 'inconsitent' by Kenny because they are unclear and conflict with his ideas

Also Descartes view on the soul opposes Aristotle's. Basically, Aristotle said you need a soul to digest or percieve, the soul is the form of the body. but Descartes said we can explain digestion, reproduction in a physical way. What is left is the conscious mind, perception of our own ideas.
(when Aristotle talks about the soul, he is actually talking about the principle of life but Descartes soul is a substance completely distinct from the body)

It's not notes but hope that helps a bit to expand upon.

Reply 510

xbabycakes

Original post by ajenkins

Same! i've got Biology monday afternoon as well, just had a major breakdown/panic. I'm seriously not going to sleep until monday is over! And then I have geography the next day. LOVE MY LIFE!!!!!!!!!!!

Snap with Biology! Is it resit AQA biol 4? I got a D in January and I need an A.. pressure :frown:

Reply 511

xbabycakes

Does Satre have anything else to say apart from because we have free will we are 100% morally responsible? The mark scheme says for a question 'they may assess the implications of Sartre’s ideas, for example that it is only in acting freely that gives authentic meaning to our lives' but I have no idea what that means, and it's not in the text book!

Reply 512

Original post by xbabycakes

Snap with Biology! Is it resit AQA biol 4? I got a D in January and I need an A.. pressure :frown:

That must mean you have the biol 5 on the 22nd too....have you started revising for that yet? I have just been concentrating on philosophy and ethics and now I am a little bit worried because it is such a big topic with the synoptic essay as well :/
(Sorry for going off the philosophy and ethics topic a little bit everyone!)

Reply 513

Oh no! I just realised that both religious experience and miracles were on the paper last time (scripture and Hume) Does this mean they are both as likely to come up? Or would you guys think that religious experience is more likely because they only focused on a small section of it in january?

Reply 514

phiddy23

11

Original post by Forever a Gnome

I really hope this exact question comes up now. :rolleyes:

I hate to say this, but it probably won't because that exact question was asked in June 2010... but lets all hope that I'm wrong.

Reply 515

Noodlzzz

21

Original post by xbabycakes

Does Satre have anything else to say apart from because we have free will we are 100% morally responsible? The mark scheme says for a question 'they may assess the implications of Sartre’s ideas, for example that it is only in acting freely that gives authentic meaning to our lives' but I have no idea what that means, and it's not in the text book!

Sartre was an atheist, there is no God therefore there is no intrinsic plan or purpose to our lives. For example, a pen knife is designed and therefore has a function. We were not designed and therefore have no function but to create our own.

We are therefore completely free of any purpose or determinism as we shape are own lives, moral responsibility is the consequence (or what he described as burden) of this. However, we are shaped by the first mans decision to be what we see as human now. He chose to be a civilized, talking person (when I say man I don't mean one man but the process of evolution and societal developments etc.)

To sum up his theory, he says 'existence precedes essence'

Reply 516

Original post by xbabycakes

Does Satre have anything else to say apart from because we have free will we are 100% morally responsible? The mark scheme says for a question 'they may assess the implications of Sartre’s ideas, for example that it is only in acting freely that gives authentic meaning to our lives' but I have no idea what that means, and it's not in the text book!

I read Satre's book :smile:

And from what I remember he says that
man is 'condemned to be free' , condemned because did not create himself but free because 'existence preecedes essence' meaning man defines himself and has the ability to make himself through 'making his actions'

Reply 517

goofy-blues

Original post by Wanttobeasucess

I read Satre's book :smile:

And from what I remember he says that
man is 'condemned to be free' , condemned because did not create himself but free because 'existence preecedes essence' meaning man defines himself and has the ability to make himself through 'making his actions'

Is Satre on the syllabus??

Reply 518