The Student Room Group
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>
Uni students - Complete our survey >>

The OFFICIAL AQA AS Philosophy May 2013 Exams Thread. (Units 1&2)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 100
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
OMG, this thread has reached the popular threads list!!
Original post by the A* guy
Chomsky argument is: that because children pick up language and use grammar correctly so fast from very limited experience, it makes sense that we have an innate capacity to use correct grammar, it is a bit like have a basic language conceptual scheme (don't say this part in exams), Chomsky says it is an innate capacity for Grammar not one for a language because different children learn different languages as their first language.


Hmm, interesting. So Chomsky thinks that because young children pick up language so quickly that it must be an innate capacity we have to pick up on language so quickly? So we have a conceptual scheme relating to language and once we gain experience of language our conceptual schemes helps us to decipher the information quickly?
Original post by the A* guy
OMG, this thread has reached the popular threads list!!


Great! :biggrin: This should mean more people will start commenting on this thread! :biggrin:
Reply 103
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
Hmm, interesting. So Chomsky thinks that because young children pick up language so quickly that it must be an innate capacity we have to pick up on language so quickly? So we have a conceptual scheme relating to language and once we gain experience of language our conceptual schemes helps us to decipher the information quickly?


Yes that is it, but don't mention the conceptual scheme part in the exam, I just said that to add clarity to Chomsky's argument. :smile:
Original post by the A* guy
Yes that is it, but don't mention the conceptual scheme part in the exam, I just said that to add clarity to Chomsky's argument. :smile:


Very well. :smile: So is Chomsky a Rationalist or Conceptual Schemist?
Reply 105
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
Very well. :smile: So is Chomsky a Rationalist or Conceptual Schemist?


Rationalist, DO NOT refer to him when talking about conceptual schemes, as the examiner will think that you are confused.
Original post by the A* guy
Rationalist, DO NOT refer to him when talking about conceptual schemes, as the examiner will think that you are confused.


Very well, I won't! D: What questions do you think will come up for the exam in relation to R+E?
Reply 107
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
Very well, I won't! D: What questions do you think will come up for the exam in relation to R+E?


Innate knowledge or Conceptual Schemes - As 30 mark questions
Reply 108
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Not sure about the 15 mark Questions, maybe on the distinction between induction and deduction
Reply 109
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
Very well, I won't! D: What questions do you think will come up for the exam in relation to R+E?


Did you learn about introspection and the tautological?
Original post by the A* guy
Not sure about the 15 mark Questions, maybe on the distinction between induction and deduction


That's what my Philosophy teacher says both 15 and 30 mark questions might be on... Explain the distinction between induction and deduction! :biggrin:
Original post by the A* guy
Did you learn about introspection and the tautological?


Nope. :frown:
Original post by RunningInHeels
Ahhhh no I haven't learnt/ been taught that one! Yes I think that's an argument from design. The philosophy syllabus is so wide, many students study completely different modern philosophers and still get brilliant grades.

I don't know anyone else doing 'Knowledge of the external world.' :frown:

Posted from TSR Mobile


Am doing Knowledge of the external world. I hope a question on direct realism or idealism to come up rather than one on representative realism or realism in general.
Reply 113
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
That's what my Philosophy teacher says both 15 and 30 mark questions might be on... Explain the distinction between induction and deduction! :biggrin:


I hope I and your philosophy teacher are right as that would be a pretty easy 15 mark question.
Reply 114
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
Nope. :frown:


You should try to learn about it from somewhere, maybe online, or from your teacher as it came up in jan 2012.
Reply 115
Avatar for the A* guy
the A* guy
OP
2
Original post by PaulyRivs
Nope. :frown:


Or read about it in This document:

http://cw.routledge.com/textbooks/alevelphilosophy/data/AS/ReasonandExperience/Certainty.pdf
Hi all

Am doing Reason and experience and the idea of God for Phil1 and Knowledge of the external world and god and the world for Phil2. If any one who's doing these topics can you ask me questions on it? :biggrin:
Original post by the A* guy
You should try to learn about it from somewhere, maybe online, or from your teacher as it came up in jan 2012.


I'll give it a try, but I don't think it's coming up in the exam, since we've hardly done anything on it and the teacher rarely mentions it. I got 31/45 marks in a mock exam we did on it last week. 11/15 marks and 20/30 marks. I would have got more on the 30 mark question if I had finished the question by making a summary and analysis, but I was low on time so I couldn't. :frown:
Original post by noor momo
Hi all

Am doing Reason and experience and the idea of God for Phil1 and Knowledge of the external world and god and the world for Phil2. If any one who's doing these topics can you ask me questions on it? :biggrin:


Haha, we were just doing some questions on Reason and Experience earlier. :P Explain the difference between inductive and deductive. :smile:
Original post by PaulyRivs
Haha, we were just doing some questions on Reason and Experience earlier. :P Explain the difference between inductive and deductive. :smile:


Deductive arguments refer to a type of reasoning where if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. For example: all men are mortal, socrates is a man. therefore Socrates is mortal. you cannot accept the two premises but deny the conclusion. Hume categorises deductive arguments as relation of ideas.

inductive arguments, however, refers to a type of reasoning that is based on the idea that things we have not yet experienced will resemble what we have experienced. we generalise from many instances to make conclusions about instances we have not experienced. to illustrate, if every time you have boiled water, it has boiled at 100 degrees, then inductively you would conclude that all water boils at 100 degree. Hume categorises inductive arguments as matters of facts.

I don't think that everything :/

outline and illustrate one argument in support of Innate Knowledge. (15marks)

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you