OCR AS Philosophy & Ethics: Official Thread for May/June 2016

No worries. And do you think that we could get a question just on Gaunilo's criticisms?

For example: Explain Gaunilo's objections to Anselm's ontological argument. (25)

Hmmmm, I don't see why not but there isn't much to write about. So they'd probably ask a question like: Explain the ontological argument and Gaunilo's objections to it. A question like this wouldn't seem that bad.

If it were just to explain Gaunilo's objections then you would have to expelling the ontological argument anyway. I checked a mark scheme for a question on explaining Hume's criticism of the cosmological argument, and within the mark scheme it showed that the answer must have included an explanation of the Aquinas' argument.

think that Plato's forms, anselm's ontological argument, Explaining hume's criticisms of the cosmological argument and potentially one of the theodicies might come up

That would be a nice selection to choose from. However, isn't it unlikely to get two questions on the existence of God. Then again, wold you say that there is a big difference between explaining an argument for the existence of God; and explaining the criticism towards a specific argument.

If there is a question on explaining the criticisms towards an argument, do you have to also explain the actual argument in depth?

think that Plato's forms, anselm's ontological argument, Explaining hume's criticisms of the cosmological argument and potentially one of the theodicies might come up

It would be amazing if these topics came up. The exam would be soooooo calm.

Ikr! I've done like 0 revision for ethics this entire year. What grade are you hoping to get in RS overall?

That would be a nice selection to choose from. However, isn't it unlikely to get two questions on the existence of God. Then again, wold you say that there is a big difference between explaining an argument for the existence of God; and explaining the criticism towards a specific argument.

If there is a question on explaining the criticisms towards an argument, do you have to also explain the actual argument in depth?

Thank you, I know I never mentioned it but I understand this objection thoroughly. To be honest - i don't really understand how his objection about the 'fool' spreading gossip relates to the argument. Do you now how it applies to it?

No you would just have to briefly explain what the argument is about and then go in to talking about the criticisms with the cosmological it would either be Hume or Mill

In Anselm's version of the Ontological Argument, he states that he agrees that "The fool in his heart says there is no God" (Psalms) and he comes up with an ontological argument as a way of proving this statement true. Therefore, Gaunilo's criticism is "on behalf of the fool" as he is defending the people who Anselm believe to be "fools" (even though Gaunilo did in fact believe in God, he just didn't agree with Anselm's logic).

Okay, thank you. So we really need to be aware of the criticisms then.

I'd really like an A as I've even working at an A in philosophy all year but I've been getting C's in ethics so I'm not sure what about you?

Can someone explain to me how to write a 25 mark question on Augustine's theodicy pure struggling

So basically I would write the essay like this:
Introduction: Give some context about Augustine eg he was a christian philosopher (354-430CE) ect then outline what Augustine said: "either God cannot abolish evil, or he will not: if he cannot then is is not omnipotent; if he will not then he is not omnibenevolent" (other wise known as the inconsistent triad) so this led to Augustine developing his soul deciding theodicy.
Middle:-
P1: Peoples response to evil decides their destiny.
P2: God created everything
P3: Evil is not a substance of God
P4: Evil is a privation of Good
P5: so evil is is not a product of God
Therefore: there is no problem
You can also talk about original sin and the fall from grace (genesis 2) and how it relates to Augustinian theodicy
Conclusion: summarise and address the question again
Hope this helps. Good luck

Posted from TSR Mobile

The Fall is in Genesis 3 not Genesis 2