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

I did God and the World and Free Will/Determinism for my paper today; I think the questions were pretty good!
For the 15 marker on God and the world, i think I talked about Younger Wittgenstein, and then the 30 marker; Paley, criticism of Paley, Behe/Dembski (Intelligent Design) and Darwin. :P

For Free Will and Determinism (I hated this topic so much, I found it so horrible), I talked about how Predestination is free Will, but God determines who goes to heaven/hell? And How Hard determinism involves no free will at all (I think I kinda failed this one?) And for the 30 marker, I fel really confident on - which is surprising. I wrote about Satre and Essenses, Frankfurt and 1st/2nd order desires, then soft determinism and biological/cultural determinism.

I think i did okay overall? I'm hoping the grade boundaries are kinda low, but the questions I did seemed easier than I expected, so I'm not too sure...

PHIL2 questions for knowledge of the external world were nasty! 30 mark wasnt on the spec, naughty AQA 😭


Posted from TSR Mobile

Did anyone else do God and the World and Knowledge of the external world, if so, what were your thoughts on the questions? Also what kind of answers did you give?
I quite liked the paper, they were essays I had done before, so i basically regurgitated them.

Did anyone else do God and the World and Knowledge of the external world, if so, what were your thoughts on the questions? Also what kind of answers did you give?
I quite liked the paper, they were essays I had done before, so i basically regurgitated them.

I think we got off quit easy this year for both of those topics, i was expecting harder/confusing questions.

For God and the world, 15marker, Anthony Flew 'parable of the gardener'. 30marker, general intro on Design argument, paley, then Hume, then Darwin then conclude with IBE.

The 15marker for KNW, one strengths of idealism is how it solves the problems of primary/secondary qualities. and 30marker what sense data is, intro if direct realism and the problems, and how sense data solves them and then conclude with ockam razor.

How did you find the paper?

I didn't think Flew was right because the question was asking for "attitude and commitment." I thought Flew was more of an illustration for a hypothesis questions because of "death by a thousand qualifications."

Posted from TSR Mobile

@noor momo

I didn't use ockham's razor!!! Arrggghhh. Kicking myself. I concluded with dysjunctivism.

Posted from TSR Mobile

But it depends what angle you show it from. i said how the parable shows what ever prof you give a believer you can never change there belief or attitude. The parable is similar to hares which says religious belief is a 'blik' - viewpoint/attitude

Seriously feel like I messed up. Did art and God, but for the art 30 mark I talked about copying reality mostly as a form of representing it truthfully so don't even know if I'm relevant Messed up the God 15 mark by doing Wittgenstein in detail, didn't think I did it right so rushed out a poor answer relating to Wisdom's Gardener in five minutes.

Seriously feel like I messed up. Did art and God, but for the art 30 mark I talked about copying reality mostly as a form of representing it truthfully so don't even know if I'm relevant Messed up the God 15 mark by doing Wittgenstein in detail, didn't think I did it right so rushed out a poor answer relating to Wisdom's Gardener in five minutes.

Wittgenstein sounds good! Different forms of life have different language games and they reflect attitudes and commitments... Don't count your chickens before they are hatched! I thought I really messed up the 30 marker in January but didn't. Don't worry!!!

Posted from TSR Mobile

I'm not sure if what I'm decifering from your message is true, but what I'm getting is you mentioned Plato's theory of how art attempts to immitate reality, but fails in doing so as it is merely copying a copy of the forms in the material world (his cave analogy with the shadows)? Because if that's what you wrote then that's a completely valid point. The 30 marker was pretty much just arguing a view for what we value art for, with the question imposing information as the reason we value it. It sounds like you were on track though

@onoderas
If you scroll up (go back a page or so) I was just talking to noor mono about this question! They used Flew too. It's only 15 marks, so its not the end of the world. How did you do in Phil 1? Do you know how many UMS you need to get a good grade?

Posted from TSR Mobile

Unit 1 - Reason and Experience and Why Should I be Moral
R & E..15m...induction was synthetic, experience, matters of fact, a posteriori and sense of impression - crows seen so far are black so all crows are black...deduction was analytic, reason, true by definition, a priori and sense of reflection - all men are mortals, socrates is a man, socrates is a mortal..30m..lol i think i kind of failed ugh went on to talk about tabula rasa and innate knowlegde..though realised halfway of writing then changed track lol..didn;t cross out the former though as it could still be valid..though what do you think? :/..

WSIbM..15m...forgot the question lol..what was it again?...30m..disagree: morality as sense of duty and constituent of self interest..agree: morality as a social contract/ agreement - won't be able to get things done and plato on virtuous soul...neither agree nor disagree or both: hume on sympathy..

Unit 2 - Knowlegde of the External World and Value of Art
KotEW..15m..weakness of idealism: can't provide simple explanation - what causes or sense experience if there are no physical objects - idealist would say God but the existence of God isn't one to be taken for granted..strength of idealism: provides answers to the objections of representative realism which is real world unknowable as if mental representations are like watching a film we are trapped in a cinema there would be no way to see if they really represent the real/external world outside the cinema - idealist will say there is no external/real world outside the cinema..30m..agree: sense data is subjective, representative realism uses sense data - must be a little person in our head interpreting this and must be a little person in their head interpreting the interpretation and there can't be an infinite number of little people in ones head (lol) and idealism also uses sense data - leads to solipism...disagree: you can't say something resembles something since they aren't exactly alike better to say representation instead of resembles and a criticism of direct realism is the illusion argument - questions the reliability of senses - straight stick looking bent in water, round coin looking oval at different angles, red dress crimson in subdued light, scarlet in sunlight and black in no light which lead to primary qualities (in the object) and secondary qualities (independent of the object)..

VoF..15m..one weakness of expressive (idealist therory of art btw ): too narrow as its categorises great works of art under crafts (crafts meaning created for a purpose as they're planned rather that designed in the process of creation e.g. blueprint for a table) i.e great potraits are created to keep a record of the sitter's appearance and entertainment arts are created to entertain or to provoke emotionssays that art has no function when architecture is one of fine arts and some buildings are made for specific things so are they not art? also..another weakness: says we see traces of the artist's mind and not a physical object, what we see as physical objects are a physical imaginative expression which is modified through the artist's own invovlvement using a particular artistic medium which is strange (lol)..though plausible if there is not a single (physical) object you can call art for example in musical and literary texts..30m..agree: aristole on mimeism (art as representative) - artists won't be succesful if there work didn't accurately represent reality and imitation is natural - what is more natural than for children to pretend?..disagree: art as other things - expressive and formal and Plato on mimeism - art is an imitation of an imitation therefore barely real at all (as a rationalist doesn't believe in gaining knowlegde from experience) and art only concerned with sensual pleasure (also as a rationalist believes our senses are unreliable) and artists aren't really concerned with truths and facts..

Lol what do you think so far and how many marks do you think i would get on each from what you've read so far? :/..

0 #trolled

Your 15 is kinda half wrong... Religious predestination Is the idea that we are determined but it's because god is an omniscient being, he knows what we're going to so and decides our fate.