OCR A2 Religious Studies - Thursday 6th June 2013

I'd avoid missing out miracles due to how simple a topic it is -- you literally just have to remember who said what about miracles and how likely it is to come up. But obviously, if you really can't remember it in time you'll have three other questions, or two in the worst case scenario that both come up. It's unlikely it will be on the same unit, the only time they seem to do that is revelation and religious experience. Ethics questions are structured in the same way to philosophy. The best way to structure for me is:

Intro- state argument that you are going to follow in essay.
Key words - define any key words you are going to use and possibly show off any (obviously making sure it's relevant and you're not just listing.)

Point 1: A02 - Starting sentence that links to your argument.
A01- Back this up with some evidence (scholars)
A02- Back to argument, use an example and critique.

More points in the same format.

Conclude: Summarise points and show how argument has worked.

Not sure if I've helped or not... Let me know.

Could you give an example of how you would word the part where you would say which argument you are going to follow, that would be great

Can someone help on the miracles and Wiles? :/


Posted from TSR Mobile

Wiles argues that miracles do not happen. Unlike Hume though he doesn't argue this because of scientific/rational reasons, he argues that it would be possible to break the laws of nature. Instead he argues that miracles do not happen for moral reasons. This is because it suggests an arbitrary or partisan God. Arbitrary meaning random and partisan meaning biased or has favourites. According to Wiles because miracles don't happen all the time ( which he says they couldn't possibly because the world would be a crazy, unpredictable mess and there would be no such things as laws of nature) if miracles were possible this would suggest that God was either dishing out miracles randomly or had favourites. You can use examples of how miracles in the Bible such as Abraham and Sarah being given a child suggests a partisan God considering tragedies happen and are not prevented with miracles. A God who is arbitrary or partisan creates problems for theology because God is described as all-loving (which he couldn't be if he had favourites) and purposeful (which he couldn't be if he handed out miracles randomly. Consequently Wiles concludes that miracles do not happen because they suggest an arbitrary or partisan God, which isn't possible.

You can argue against Wiles by using arguments such as the contingency definition of miracles. Tillich argues that people have got carried away with the miraculous nature of miracles and have forgotten their revelatory purpose. The purpose of miracles is not healing or helping the individual but revealing something about God-- they are 'signs' of God. Take for example, Jesus healing the sick. In Biblical times sickness was thought to be linked to sin. Instead of the miracle being about Jesus healing the sick it is showing Jesus' power over sin. R.F. Holland also argued that miracles don't have to be supernatural and that it is about interpretation. You could also argue that whether Wiles likes it or not in the Bible miracles happen. In a question about Wiles' and miracles you could talk about:

Whether he is defining miracles right (he uses Hume's definition that they must be supernatural if you use the contingency definition it's less likely to show a arbitrary/partisan God.)
Question Wiles' argument that miracles shouldn't be rejected on scientific grounds. Using Hume and Hick's arguments.
Weaknesses of Wiles.

Thank you so much! Very very helpful


Posted from TSR Mobile

so who else has got the worst day of their life thursday, Philosophy Ethics and English Literature?????
I feel so unprepared for both! stressing out!!

On the topic of question spotting, I wouldn't try to pick and choose yourself, because that's always risky.

What i do is pick out the topics I would like to revise, then check all of the past papers to see if i would survive each one on the stuff I've learnt. Then if i couldn't, I add topics until I've learnt a minimum amount but theres pretty much the most minimal chance that i would be stuck in the exam.

That being said, I'm learning Miracles/Religious Language/Life after Death and Determinism/Conscience/Sexual Ethics/Environmental Ethics/Business Ethics (tho I'd still be upset if it came up, hate it)

My method may be wrong, but i should be OK right? This is pretty stressful

Sure. sorry I've taken so long to reply I was offline.

So take the religious experience topic. Say the question is: 'Assess the claim that the argument from religious experience proves the existence of God.'

Whilst religious experiences are possibly the most convincing evidence for the person who witnesses them, they are only really persuasive for the individual and therefore cannot be used as proof of the existence of God.

That would be my line of argument. A good idea in an exam is to draw a line with 'agree' at one end and 'disagree' with another and put a dot on the line and note down why you feel like that. This helps you to keep coming back to your argument.

Hope that helps.

You'll be fine, I'm sure :-) i'm being risky and missing out applied ethics for the most part because I'm so awful at applied questions in the first place I doubt i'd do them in an exam!!
I also finish on the Thursday...worst and best day ever!

Thanks, and wow I really wish I had the guts to do that because applied ethics is so vague, and theres a risk of getting too basic. I have to though because theres no way I'm learning meta ethics, its too hard and sooo boring

And i know what you mean! Loads of people are jealous but i would pay to get my exams spread out a bit, my performance in the afternoon is going to be horrific, going to have to get really drunk afterwards to forget about it

Does anyone here use the ticket system for ethics applied questions ?


Posted from TSR Mobile

I worked really hard on meta ethics over easter, so now I totally get it - definitely a good move haha! But only a max on 2 applied ethics questions will come up, so I'll do the two which aren't.

I would LOVE my exams to be spread out :-( but oh well, looking forward to getting sufficiently inebriated!