AQA AS Philosophy (new 2014 onwards spec) Thread!

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    I remember doing this last year and my whole class getting D-U grades, despite being predicted A/Bs- It was so hard.

    But the most important thing is to get your structure right for your answers and know everything!!!

    Good luck
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by brobs123)
    I literally can't get past a D, revising isn't working I don't really know what to do. How do you revise this subject? You can't be brief about anything so revision notes/flashcards/mindmaps aren't helpful
    (Original post by 221Breezeblocks)
    I know what you mean, you really need to know everything to do well... I have found however that flashcards are good for me if you basically make a tonne so that you include all the specifics and details that you need to know. Flashcards are good because they're small bits of important information that you can test yourself on quickly, so you basically learn all the wording you need. HOWEVER, actually making all these flashcards is what is getting me down because it takes quite a while and the exam is literally in a week
    If it's really last minute then I suggest just sitting down and learning all the premises and conclusion arguments that you need.
    Flashcards are fab. I use www.brainscape.com to revise all of my notes. The only other thing which is really boring, but really does help is by doing practice questions.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Flashcards are fab. I use www.brainscape.com to revise all of my notes. The only other thing which is really boring, but really does help is by doing practice questions.
    You have just saved my life.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 221Breezeblocks)
    You have just saved my life.
    Aw, haha. I am glad to help!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Specification paper. This should help rule out a few questions. However, there is a lot of parallelism between the specification paper and the 2015 paper: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects...5-AS-W-SQP.PDF
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Hi everybody!
    I am retaking this exam after ending up with a D grade last year (was predicted a B) because of redundancy!

    I was wondering if anyone had their take on:
    "Outline Plantinga's Ontological Argument"; as we have been given many different versions in class!

    If anyone has any questions for me, I can see if I can help!

    Good luck! <3
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Platopus)
    I got 94% UMS
    Hi Platopus (amazing name btw!)
    I am also taking the A2 exam this year, and i'm resitting the AS.

    I was wondering if you have any killer AS and A2 advice, on how you've revised, or anything helpful that your teacher may have got you to note down?

    Thank you, I really appreciate it,
    Let me know if you have any A2 questions!

    Martha xx
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MarthaMae19)
    Hi everybody!
    I am retaking this exam after ending up with a D grade last year (was predicted a B) because of redundancy!

    I was wondering if anyone had their take on:
    "Outline Plantinga's Ontological Argument"; as we have been given many different versions in class!

    If anyone has any questions for me, I can see if I can help!

    Good luck! <3

    Hey,

    Ah redundancy sucks! I always lose some marks for it too. Being so concise can be very difficult. Plantinga's argument is split into two parts: The notion of possible worlds and necessary being. These are my revision notes on it:

    Part One:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Developed Malcolm's argument using the notion of possible worlds. A possible world is a way that the world could be - the world we live in (the actual world) is one possible world, and there are an infinite number of alternative ways that the world could have been.
    (i) there is a possible world in which a being with maximal greatness exists.
    (ii) a being can only be maxim great if it exists in every possible world.
    (iii) therefore, a being with maximal greatness exists in every possible world.
    (IV) the actual world is just one possible world.
    (V) therefore, god exists in the actual world.

    Part 2:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    (I) maximal greatness (necessary existence) entails maximal excellence (the perfections of omniscience, omnipotence, and moral perfection).
    (ii) since a being with maximal greatness exists in the actual world, a being with maximal excellence exists in the actual world.

    (I'm sure you already know this, but remember in 5 / 9 mark questions to always give an overview of the ontological argument before explaining Plantinga's argument and try and integrate them well.

    Hope this helps, and if it needs any clarification, let me know.
    Good luck!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Hey,

    Ah redundancy sucks! I always lose some marks for it too. Being so concise can be very difficult. Plantinga's argument is split into two parts: The notion of possible worlds and necessary being. These are my revision notes on it:

    Part One:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Developed Malcolm's argument using the notion of possible worlds. A possible world is a way that the world could be - the world we live in (the actual world) is one possible world, and there are an infinite number of alternative ways that the world could have been.
    (i) there is a possible world in which a being with maximal greatness exists.
    (ii) a being can only be maxim great if it exists in every possible world.
    (iii) therefore, a being with maximal greatness exists in every possible world.
    (IV) the actual world is just one possible world.
    (V) therefore, god exists in the actual world.
    Part 2:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    (I) maximal greatness (necessary existence) entails maximal excellence (the perfections of omniscience, omnipotence, and moral perfection).
    (ii) since a being with maximal greatness exists in the actual world, a being with maximal excellence exists in the actual world.
    (I'm sure you already know this, but remember in 5 / 9 mark questions to always give an overview of the ontological argument before explaining Plantinga's argument and try and integrate them well.

    Hope this helps, and if it needs any clarification, let me know.
    Good luck!
    Thank you! This is really helpful!
    Let me know if I can return the favor in any way x
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MarthaMae19)
    Hi Platopus (amazing name btw!)
    I am also taking the A2 exam this year, and i'm resitting the AS.

    I was wondering if you have any killer AS and A2 advice, on how you've revised, or anything helpful that your teacher may have got you to note down?

    Thank you, I really appreciate it,
    Let me know if you have any A2 questions!

    Martha xx
    Good luck! My main pointer would be to know the primary texts on the anthology inside out. My teachers aren't very good so my work has all been pretty much independent study. If you're finding anything difficult to understand, the Hodder textbook is amazing
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Flashcards are fab. I use www.brainscape.com to revise all of my notes. The only other thing which is really boring, but really does help is by doing practice questions.

    Thank you so much!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by MarthaMae19)
    Thank you! This is really helpful!
    Let me know if I can return the favor in any way x
    Aw, you're very welcome. I'm glad it helped. Let me know if you need any more notes. Aw, thanks. I think I am okay at the moment. Just doing my best to cram all these notes!


    (Original post by brobs123)
    Thank you so much!!
    You're very welcome. I hope it helps.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Hey,

    Ah redundancy sucks! I always lose some marks for it too. Being so concise can be very difficult. Plantinga's argument is split into two parts: The notion of possible worlds and necessary being. These are my revision notes on it:

    Part One:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    Developed Malcolm's argument using the notion of possible worlds. A possible world is a way that the world could be - the world we live in (the actual world) is one possible world, and there are an infinite number of alternative ways that the world could have been.
    (i) there is a possible world in which a being with maximal greatness exists.
    (ii) a being can only be maxim great if it exists in every possible world.
    (iii) therefore, a being with maximal greatness exists in every possible world.
    (IV) the actual world is just one possible world.
    (V) therefore, god exists in the actual world.
    Part 2:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    (I) maximal greatness (necessary existence) entails maximal excellence (the perfections of omniscience, omnipotence, and moral perfection).
    (ii) since a being with maximal greatness exists in the actual world, a being with maximal excellence exists in the actual world.
    (I'm sure you already know this, but remember in 5 / 9 mark questions to always give an overview of the ontological argument before explaining Plantinga's argument and try and integrate them well.

    Hope this helps, and if it needs any clarification, let me know.
    Good luck!
    Hey!! Really helpful but what do you mean about an overview/intergrate? xx
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    how would you write a "what do we perceive essay"?? Does anyone have one say arguing for indirect realism? im trying to write one now and i know what arguments to use but i'm a bit lost on the explanation section, e.g why the argument from illusion works. Also do you write objections to each individual argument or for indirect realism as a whole? x
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pollyycatherine)
    Hey!! Really helpful but what do you mean about an overview/intergrate? xx
    Hey, glad to know that it helps.

    Apologies in advance if I use wrong terminology, I'm currently in the psychology mind-frame at the moment.

    Okay for 5 / 9 mark questions, doing a quick overview of the theory is a really good idea. In 15 mark questions, its just an expectation.

    5 Markers:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    For example:
    Why is illusion a problem for direct realism? (5)

    Firstly, it would be a good idea to give an overview of what Direct Realism is about to really show the examiner you know what you are talking about. For five mark questions this only needs to be a sentence or two.

    Direct realism is the view that all immediate objects of perception are mind-independent, and their properties.

    Then outline what illusions are and then, you would go into explaining why this a problem.

    For example:

    Illusions are when one's perceptions of events misrepresentations of reality, and affects only one sense. For example: a stick in a glass of water may appear bent, when in fact, it is actually straight. This is problematic for direct realism as it shows that there is a radical difference between appearance (i.e. what I perceive - the bent stick) and reality (i.e. the true nature of the objects - straight stick). Thus leading to the conclusion that I do not actually have direct access, and in fact suggests that I have indirect access to the external world.

    You could also talk about J.L. Mackie's 'camouflaged church', etc. It is not an exhaustive answer.
    For a 9 mark question, you would structure it similarly, yet with a bit more explanation.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    For example:

    Explain why illusions and hallucinations are problematic for direct realists (9)

    - Firstly outline Direct Realism
    - Define Illusions
    - Explain Illusions
    - Define Hallucination
    - Explain Hallucination
    - Link

    (There are other ways you could structure this answer, this is just what came to mind when I first thought of the question.)

    Direct realism is the 'common sense' view of perception which claims that: all immediate objects of perception are mind-independent, and their properties. In other words, direct realists believe that what we perceive is the reality. (i.e. objects and their properties exist independent of the mind and have properties such as shape, texture, smell, taste, and colour.) These objects continue to exist and obey the laws of nature whether or not there is anyone around to perceive them. For example: I have direct access to an apple: it's round shape; red glossy colour; sweet taste, etc., and it does not dependent on my perception for these qualities and indeed, the object to exist.

    (Again, this answer is a little muddled, and I could have structured it better, but I hope it works as an example for how much information you require. You would then include illusions / hallucinations).
    Integration / links is probably one of the worst parts of answering the questions. It is basically making sure that your answers flow, and that you understand how they link between them. Examples include:

    - This is problematic for ... because ...
    - In other words
    - Moreover
    - Thus suggesting

    Any connectives or short phrases which make your answer flow better.

    Hope this helps. Let me know if it requires any more clarification or any other questions.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pollyycatherine)
    how would you write a "what do we perceive essay"?? Does anyone have one say arguing for indirect realism? im trying to write one now and i know what arguments to use but i'm a bit lost on the explanation section, e.g why the argument from illusion works. Also do you write objections to each individual argument or for indirect realism as a whole? x
    Okay. Firstly you need to decide your line of argument. Are you in favour or indirect realism or not? Then you base your whole essay on that. If you are arguing in favour, you would be required to respond to all the problems that you include in your essay, as you are basically trying to convince the examiner that your point of view is right. If you are arguing against, then it may be best to leave one of the strongest problems without a response, or use a weaker response, and show how it still does not undermine the problem.

    For explanation, that is just simply knowing your notes inside and out, and just making sure that you keep clear and concise about it. Illusions works for indirect realism as illusions are when one's perception of events misrepresents reality, suggesting that we do not have direct access to the external world, and in fact, that we have indirect access. Since indirect realists believe that we perceive things through a 'veil of perception', and mind-dependently, then this would support the idea that our mind could misrepresent the reality. (e.g. stick submerged in water which is straight (in reality / external world) but in fact appearing bent (in the mind).

    It's best to talk about the theory generally, and then look at the supporting evidence, and then look at problems, and responses evaluatively. When writing about problems / responses, you would explain these, and then link them back to indirect realism.

    For example:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    The problem of the existence of the external world:

    (General) The problem states that claims are unjustifiable, as they just assume that sense-data is caused by an external world. (Link) This is problematic, as indirect realists have no neutral / mind-independent access of the external world which would conclude that one does not exist.

    Hope this helps.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Hi guys,

    (Trying not to think about the impending doom that is Thursday)
    Anyway, I'd like to ask for people's opinion on something.

    On the AQA website there are several documents for sample answers and comments for the various types of questions that we might get.

    Is it me or do the sample answers that seem to get full marks seem rather underdeveloped, or rather, just not very, well, long?
    For example the given answer to the nine marker is two very short paragraphs - but still apparently would score full marks.
    As with the 15 marker. We (at least) have been taught that you'd need to write at least double what the example answer has written to get top band results... Is this likely to just be a case of a rubbish representation of the marking standard?
    Seeing those answers makes me feel much better but I'm fairly sure that's not what one would get in reality . . .

    The marker has also written a pretty weird comment at the end of the 15 marker sample.

    Here are these sample answers:
    2/5 marker: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-W-2175-SAMS-2-5M.PDF
    9 marker: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-W-2175-SAMS-9M.PDF
    15 marker: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects...2175-CEX-N.PDF

    Thankssss x
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 221Breezeblocks)
    Hi guys,

    (Trying not to think about the impending doom that is Thursday)
    Anyway, I'd like to ask for people's opinion on something.

    On the AQA website there are several documents for sample answers and comments for the various types of questions that we might get.

    Is it me or do the sample answers that seem to get full marks seem rather underdeveloped, or rather, just not very, well, long?
    For example the given answer to the nine marker is two very short paragraphs - but still apparently would score full marks.
    As with the 15 marker. We (at least) have been taught that you'd need to write at least double what the example answer has written to get top band results... Is this likely to just be a case of a rubbish representation of the marking standard?
    Seeing those answers makes me feel much better but I'm fairly sure that's not what one would get in reality . . .

    The marker has also written a pretty weird comment at the end of the 15 marker sample.

    Here are these sample answers:
    2/5 marker: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-W-2175-SAMS-2-5M.PDF
    9 marker: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects/AQA-W-2175-SAMS-9M.PDF
    15 marker: http://filestore.aqa.org.uk/subjects...2175-CEX-N.PDF

    Thankssss x
    Hey,

    I discussed this with my English teacher as well, as we were looking at AQA essays, which were definitely not worth what they were awarded. Basically, they are probably quite crap examples, and should only be used as a guideline to build on. Just follow the structures which you have learnt, and probably ignore those structures. It's not very fair, but when applied to a real mark scheme, like you said, it probably won't be worth as much.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hey. How would you guys answer these questions?

    Explain why Hume’s fork attacks knowledge innatism. (9 marks)
    Explain the empiricist arguments against intuition and deduction (see Hume's fork question) (9 marks)
    I wrote an answer for the first question but I wrote a whole packed paragraph explaining knowledge innatism/rationalism after explaining Hume's fork.

    Got an E last year, which I think is due to redundancy. I remember my teacher banging on about how I'm not concise in my answers and how I'm not making all the right links to the question.
    I'm struggling with empiricism and rationalism. I haven't got a textbook with me atm so if anyone has any notes on this topic, would be extremely grateful. Trying to do some last minute revision now.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Hello philosophers ☺️

    I'm someone else resitting AS. Slightly worried I'll actually do worse than last year... Anyways, I'm not going to post again before the exam, but I'll be back afterwards to see how everyone found the paper!

    Good luck x
    PS fun fact... 36/80 marks are for 9 mark questions
 
 
 
Write a reply… Reply
Submit reply

Register

Thanks for posting! You just need to create an account in order to submit the post
  1. this can't be left blank
    that username has been taken, please choose another Forgotten your password?
  2. this can't be left blank
    this email is already registered. Forgotten your password?
  3. this can't be left blank

    6 characters or longer with both numbers and letters is safer

  4. this can't be left empty
    your full birthday is required
  1. Oops, you need to agree to our Ts&Cs to register
  2. Slide to join now Processing…

Updated: December 1, 2016
TSR Support Team
Today on TSR
Poll
Would you prefer to be told about sex by your:
Useful resources

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.