Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jool)
    No problem. Really? I think it is fairly simple, a lot of it ties in with political/moral philosophy at A2 though to be fair so perhaps I just have a deeper understanding of it because of that. I'd really like a social contract theory question though!
    well im not doing moral philosophy at A2 but i do find the political philosophy concepts at A2 much easier to get my head around. for why should i be moral i just find the questions really unpredictable.. sometimes they wont actually ask a question about whether there is any reason to be moral, instead itll be something like 'is morality about following rules'. and i still dont understand how you would explain the view that morality is a contractual agreement for our advantage. i totally understand what a social contract is but i dont understand why one would argue thatorality IS a contract.. rather i thought the idea was that its only worth being moral in a social contract.

    by any chance do you remember what the morality questions in January were?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ronak134)
    well im not doing moral philosophy at A2 but i do find the political philosophy concepts at A2 much easier to get my head around. for why should i be moral i just find the questions really unpredictable.. sometimes they wont actually ask a question about whether there is any reason to be moral, instead itll be something like 'is morality about following rules'. and i still dont understand how you would explain the view that morality is a contractual agreement for our advantage. i totally understand what a social contract is but i dont understand why one would argue thatorality IS a contract.. rather i thought the idea was that its only worth being moral in a social contract.

    by any chance do you remember what the morality questions in January were?
    I do understand what you mean by that, you just have to try to fit it in somehow and hope for the best. :rolleyes: I don't understand how I keep scoring so low in PHIL1, I know it back to front! Also I don't I'm afraid, sorry. I have a bad memory for things like that.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jool)
    I do understand what you mean by that, you just have to try to fit it in somehow and hope for the best. :rolleyes: I don't understand how I keep scoring so low in PHIL1, I know it back to front! Also I don't I'm afraid, sorry. I have a bad memory for things like that.
    yeah im so bad at that. thats so unlucky! but im sure youll be fine third time lucky ^_^ im so nervous though because this is my first and last shot at phil1 (and all the other units) and in philosophy it seems scores can be unpredictable.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hey is anyone doing Political Philosophy here? I'm trying to revise the 'Nation States' topic and have no idea what the actual arguments or real topic is? (apart from a just war but that's unlikely to come up)
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by millie-rose)
    Hey is anyone doing Political Philosophy here? I'm trying to revise the 'Nation States' topic and have no idea what the actual arguments or real topic is? (apart from a just war but that's unlikely to come up)
    You know, you don't actually have to learn Nation States.
    There are 5 sub-topics in Political Philosophy
    - Human Nature and Ideologies
    - Liberty
    - Justice
    - Rights
    - Nation States

    You MUST learn "Human Nature and Ideologies" (I think it's under different phrasing on the sylabus, but you know what I mean: C.liberalism, conservatism, state as an oppressor etc) since it's pretty much the foundation of all other topics, but you could get away without revising Nation States as you have a choice of two questions, and only one of them can possibly be on Nation States, so the other one can't be - the whole point of having a choice :P

    Also, Nation States came up in June 2012, under "Just War Theory" in the exam and was supposedly a "poorly answered question" according to the examiner's report. So the likelihood of it coming up again this year is quite low. Anyway, Nation States is really long and tricky - if you don't know it now, you probably won't get to grips with it in less than a month, therefore not even risk answering an exam question on it anyway, so if I were you, I'd leave it and really focus on the other 4 topics.

    I can't be sure, but I noticed Rights has not come up in ages, neither has a question specifically concerning Liberty, so I'd really pour in a lot of effort to those two. x
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gillymander95)
    You know, you don't actually have to learn Nation States.
    There are 5 sub-topics in Political Philosophy
    - Human Nature and Ideologies
    - Liberty
    - Justice
    - Rights
    - Nation States

    You MUST learn "Human Nature and Ideologies" (I think it's under different phrasing on the sylabus, but you know what I mean: C.liberalism, conservatism, state as an oppressor etc) since it's pretty much the foundation of all other topics, but you could get away without revising Nation States as you have a choice of two questions, and only one of them can possibly be on Nation States, so the other one can't be - the whole point of having a choice :P

    Also, Nation States came up in June 2012, under "Just War Theory" in the exam and was supposedly a "poorly answered question" according to the examiner's report. So the likelihood of it coming up again this year is quite low. Anyway, Nation States is really long and tricky - if you don't know it now, you probably won't get to grips with it in less than a month, therefore not even risk answering an exam question on it anyway, so if I were you, I'd leave it and really focus on the other 4 topics.

    I can't be sure, but I noticed Rights has not come up in ages, neither has a question specifically concerning Liberty, so I'd really pour in a lot of effort to those two. x
    Thanks so much! x
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I'm doing political philosophy and philosophy of religion, which no one here seems to be doing..and mill for unit 4
    political philosophy is such a big unit i'm worrying I wont have enough time to revise Mill..:/
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Dose anyone know where the pre 2010 question are, i know thay are diffrent but i want to look at a wider range, im doing epist. and meta. and a belifes question has never come up so i wnat to see what sort of belife questions used to come up
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ronak134)
    oh yeah. i think its quite flexible in that way, you don't have to talk about everything and the questions are generally broad enough for you to talk about something youre comfortable with, at least some of the time! personally, i find that the texbooks explain some parts really awfully, especially functionalism, and the non reductive theories. some of the theories seem to overlap a huge amount too which can be confusing e.g. identity theory and anomalous monism.




    oh yeah, that would be great, thanks! have you got an reason and experience ones too by any chance? haha so true. i could put you in contact with her if you want an essay marked? feel free to send me a PM. alternatively i could send you a few of my essays that she marked if youre interested.
    Make shore your talking about token identiy theory when it comes to anom. mon. type type reduction is not what it is about and if you dont specify what sort of identiy theory anom mon corelates to you could get miss construed
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiracAtack)
    Make shore your talking about token identiy theory when it comes to anom. mon. type type reduction is not what it is about and if you dont specify what sort of identiy theory anom mon corelates to you could get miss construed
    thank you.. i will do!

    (Original post by DiracAtack)
    Dose anyone know where the pre 2010 question are, i know thay are diffrent but i want to look at a wider range, im doing epist. and meta. and a belifes question has never come up so i wnat to see what sort of belife questions used to come up
    unfortunately the first A2 papers were in 2010.. they had some AS papers in 2009 but the new syllabus only started then so there aren't any more.

    (Original post by CrazyGal95)
    I'm doing political philosophy and philosophy of religion, which no one here seems to be doing..and mill for unit 4
    political philosophy is such a big unit i'm worrying I wont have enough time to revise Mill..:/
    i'm doing Mill and political philosophy.. im self teaching so ive had a hard time finding other people doing the same stuff too. though i think you should be fine with political philosophy and Mill.. the good thing is if youre doing both of them they overlap a lot so revising for one is to an extent revising for the other.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ronak134)
    thank you.. i will do!



    unfortunately the first A2 papers were in 2010.. they had some AS papers in 2009 but the new syllabus only started then so there aren't any more.



    i'm doing Mill and political philosophy.. im self teaching so ive had a hard time finding other people doing the same stuff too. though i think you should be fine with political philosophy and Mill.. the good thing is if youre doing both of them they overlap a lot so revising for one is to an extent revising for the other.
    Thanks for that although not for the bad news its really hard to gage what sort of things they could ask, i cant even find any spec. papers bar one, i think il jsut have to ask my teacher for a big list, if anyone has any for epist. & meta. phil. of mind of descartes would be awsome
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Myself and my class have decided to make some revision videos and since I make youtube videos I upload them onto my channel.

    We're started with Plato The Republic because that's the text we're studying.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaVfEQMtYIg
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    What are the key arguments and critiques to liberty for political philosophy? trying to learn them my teachers are crap..
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CrazyGal95)
    What are the key arguments and critiques to liberty for political philosophy? trying to learn them my teachers are crap..
    My teachers are also crap:

    Critiques of the liberal theory of the state as a neutral umpire:-

    intervention in private life is required
    this goes against Mill's harm principle - sometimes intervention in private life is required to 'force people to be free', e.g. forcing people into education against their will, or forcing them to not smoke drugs

    negative freedom
    also means freedom to starve... is this really a 'liberal' society if people are free to starve? modern liberals do get around this by advocating positive liberty
    secondly, negative freedom only benefits those with resources... e.g. a man who has no money to pay for a bus cannot utilize the right to free movement.

    hypocritical theory
    how can they condemn actions in public but allow them in private? seems illogical

    tyranny
    state becomes vulnerable to the tyranny of the majority via the social contract

    social contract
    may allow for choices reflecting personal advantage rather than what is good for society as a whole - Rawls would argue that people should be put behind a veil of ignorance
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by millie-rose)
    My teachers are also crap:

    Critiques of the liberal theory of the state as a neutral umpire:-

    intervention in private life is required
    this goes against Mill's harm principle - sometimes intervention in private life is required to 'force people to be free', e.g. forcing people into education against their will, or forcing them to not smoke drugs

    negative freedom
    also means freedom to starve... is this really a 'liberal' society if people are free to starve? modern liberals do get around this by advocating positive liberty
    secondly, negative freedom only benefits those with resources... e.g. a man who has no money to pay for a bus cannot utilize the right to free movement.

    hypocritical theory
    how can they condemn actions in public but allow them in private? seems illogical

    tyranny
    state becomes vulnerable to the tyranny of the majority via the social contract

    social contract
    may allow for choices reflecting personal advantage rather than what is good for society as a whole - Rawls would argue that people should be put behind a veil of ignorance
    Thank you! clears a lot of things up, are you doing the exam in June to? If so how confident do you feel about it?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hey everyone, anyone here doing the Epistemology and Metaphysics module in PHIL3? If so, for the universals subtopic, does anyone have a clear distinction between nominalism and conceptualism? Found lots of stuff on ante rem / in re realism, and predicate / resemblance nominalism (mostly from here http://www.iep.utm.edu/universa/#SH3d) but the section on conceptualism is lacking a lot / seems quite vague.

    Would greatly appreciate any clarification or links to further reading
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CrazyGal95)
    Thank you! clears a lot of things up, are you doing the exam in June to? If so how confident do you feel about it?
    Not confident at all, i got a B last year and would be happy to just get a B this year. my teacher is absoloutely awful and I have had to self-teach myself a lot.

    I think I probably enjoy political more but moral is easier to revise.

    you?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by millie-rose)
    Not confident at all, i got a B last year and would be happy to just get a B this year. my teacher is absoloutely awful and I have had to self-teach myself a lot.

    I think I probably enjoy political more but moral is easier to revise.

    you?
    I'm finding it difficult..i'm revising a lot but it doesn't seem to be sticking in my head, do you mind me asking how you revise? I feel like my approach is always wrong because I always forget things..and i'm doing philosophy of religion which is slightly easier than political
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by CrazyGal95)
    I'm finding it difficult..i'm revising a lot but it doesn't seem to be sticking in my head, do you mind me asking how you revise? I feel like my approach is always wrong because I always forget things..and i'm doing philosophy of religion which is slightly easier than political
    Yeah I'm exactly the same! I can read/highlight etc. but I never seem to remember it all!

    I usually draw out easy reading revision sheets, then I give them to my parents to test me on. If I don't remember what's on them we go over and over and over till I do. It's seriously draining but I've found I only remember through constant testing.

    Some people I know debate with others as they find that helpful, but I'd be lucky if we had a turnout of more than three people in my class so that's not really an option haha!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by millie-rose)
    Yeah I'm exactly the same! I can read/highlight etc. but I never seem to remember it all!

    I usually draw out easy reading revision sheets, then I give them to my parents to test me on. If I don't remember what's on them we go over and over and over till I do. It's seriously draining but I've found I only remember through constant testing.

    Some people I know debate with others as they find that helpful, but I'd be lucky if we had a turnout of more than three people in my class so that's not really an option haha!
    yeah..I've been writing out small notes and highlighting them on index cards for each topic..it's very time consuming though..but it's all I have, I doubt my mum and dad would help as they'd have no idea what any of it means and probably make me more confused..haha. It's quite an intimidating subject as well because many of the people in my class are extremely smart and get A's in it..I just don't know how people do it
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Have you ever participated in a Secret Santa?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.