Edexcel A2 Philosophy and Ethics, UNIT4: Implications Watch

LibbyU
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#61
Report 7 years ago
#61
(Original post by diamonddust)
I pray it doesn't come up! I need Ontological!



The ones you threw away are the ones we've never been taught for exactly the same reason. My Ethics teacher said Justice, Law and Punishment was boring and my Philo teacher couldn't be bothered with Life after Death haha!
I've revised Ethical Language, Ethical theory, Ontological Argument and Religion and Morality. Guess I'd better follow your lead and revise Religious Language and Experience too. *le sigh*
*prays to exam God Ontological comes up and not Atheism*
haha my teachers agree! I haven't revised ontological at all or religion and morality or atheism, life after death.
The thing im really worried about is this...
say if I have to answer ethical theory and the question is about natural moral law.. sometimes they ask you to talk about the theory and then apply it to justice, law and punishment that would be horrible!
0
reply
allyshone
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#62
Report 7 years ago
#62
So to be clear, would this be okay for Ayer.

Question A)
- Summarise passage.
- Identify Key Terms
- Inspirations aka Logical Positivism
- Flew and Falsification (Or does this go in B)

Question B) I disagree ...
- Hick/Eschatalogical Verification
- Ward/Historical Verification
- Hume/His Empiricism
- Implications for Religion if Ayer is right.
- Implications for Humans if Ayer is right.
- Balanced Conclusion

Is this an okay structure?
0
reply
emilyrose018
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#63
Report 7 years ago
#63
Any advice... I am desperate

Does anybody have any tips on how to achieve the top marks because we have spent barely any time on this paper at school so any teacher tips or any general advice would be seriously appreciated

Thank you
0
reply
cearajade
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#64
Report 7 years ago
#64
Hwat questions did everyone do?
And if anyone did the religious language question what did you write for it?
0
reply
sarahlovesleon
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#65
Report 7 years ago
#65
where the hell has all the forums gone for unit 3 developments?
0
reply
diamonddust
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#66
Report 7 years ago
#66
(Original post by sarahlovesleon)
where the hell has all the forums gone for unit 3 developments?
The mods probably removed them because people keep talking about the exam even though you're not supposed to until midnight.
0
reply
Spectrum~
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#67
Report 7 years ago
#67
(Original post by allyshone)
So to be clear, would this be okay for Ayer.

Question A)
- Summarise passage.
- Identify Key Terms
- Inspirations aka Logical Positivism
- Flew and Falsification (Or does this go in B)

Question B) I disagree ...
- Hick/Eschatalogical Verification
- Ward/Historical Verification
- Hume/His Empiricism
- Implications for Religion if Ayer is right.
- Implications for Humans if Ayer is right.
- Balanced Conclusion

Is this an okay structure?
Your plan is similar to mine I think I'm gonna mention Flew and Falsification in part A as it relates to Ayer

(Original post by emilyrose018)
Any advice... I am desperate

Does anybody have any tips on how to achieve the top marks because we have spent barely any time on this paper at school so any teacher tips or any general advice would be seriously appreciated

Thank you
A tip my teacher gave us was to refer to the passage alot, as while talking about other ideas in the article/other related ideas is still good, it is important to focus on the passage they give us
1
reply
Kebabbi
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#68
Report 7 years ago
#68
Has everyone learned essays in preparation?! I haven't really had any teaching on this paper either ughhh I'm so worried.
This might sound stupid but how are you meant to write about the implications anyway?!
0
reply
Emmaharvs
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#69
Report 7 years ago
#69
(Original post by Kebabbi)
Has everyone learned essays in preparation?! I haven't really had any teaching on this paper either ughhh I'm so worried.
This might sound stupid but how are you meant to write about the implications anyway?!
I've written essays for Ayer and Donovan and pretty much learnt them off by heart (well I've learnt part A and Ive just learnt key points for part B)... I know its tomorrow but if you can write a detailed plan for each and try learn it because I think it'll make it easier in the exam

For implications we got told to write it like...
If what they're saying is true, the implications for religion are...
If they're true, the implications for everyday life etc are...
If the opposite is true, the imps for religion are...
If opposite is true, the imps for everyday life etc are...
Conc.

Obviously, each essay is different and this doesnt work as well for Westphal but its a good starting point, and itll help you to know where to go if you get stuck in the exam. Oh and remember to include other people

Hope this helps a bit
0
reply
stacey1612
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#70
Report 7 years ago
#70
Is anyone else looking at Donovan in detail or just vaguely... Do we just need a basic grasp of the essays rather than knowing them in detail? I'm guessing Ayer or Westphal or more likely to come up?
0
reply
Emmaharvs
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#71
Report 7 years ago
#71
(Original post by stacey1612)
Is anyone else looking at Donovan in detail or just vaguely... Do we just need a basic grasp of the essays rather than knowing them in detail? I'm guessing Ayer or Westphal or more likely to come up?
I've learnt Ayer and Donovan in detail but only because I dont really know Westphal that well but I would say still know Donovan well enough write a decent essay because they might do it twice :/ Hopefully, TSR will be right and it'll be Ayer though!!
0
reply
gravitywontgetyouhigh
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#72
Report 7 years ago
#72
(Original post by Emmaharvs)
I've learnt Ayer and Donovan in detail but only because I dont really know Westphal that well but I would say still know Donovan well enough write a decent essay because they might do it twice :/ Hopefully, TSR will be right and it'll be Ayer though!!

praying for ayer
0
reply
lissshannon
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#73
Report 7 years ago
#73
I have no idea for what to write in b for all of them. I was going to kinda write similar stuff to developments, just talking more about the passage etc. in part a, but what goes in b? is it similar to the A02 in developments? or completely different?
0
reply
Kebabbi
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#74
Report 7 years ago
#74
(Original post by Emmaharvs)
I've written essays for Ayer and Donovan and pretty much learnt them off by heart (well I've learnt part A and Ive just learnt key points for part B)... I know its tomorrow but if you can write a detailed plan for each and try learn it because I think it'll make it easier in the exam

For implications we got told to write it like...
If what they're saying is true, the implications for religion are...
If they're true, the implications for everyday life etc are...
If the opposite is true, the imps for religion are...
If opposite is true, the imps for everyday life etc are...
Conc.

Obviously, each essay is different and this doesnt work as well for Westphal but its a good starting point, and itll help you to know where to go if you get stuck in the exam. Oh and remember to include other people

Hope this helps a bit
Ahkay, thank youu

I'm not doing that anthology, we're doing the Wainwright/Preston one, but would you be able to tell me generally what you've written in the part A essays? Is it just a general essay about the whole article? I thought it had to be based on just that passage, so confused ahhh it'll be a late night tonight!
0
reply
Dark lugia 2
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#75
Report 7 years ago
#75
This topic has been really useful! Could anyone share their essay plans for Donovan and Westphal please? Those are the ones I'm not confident with... I found Monday's exam excellent and I knew what I was doing before I even got in but this whole exam is a mess for me.

I'm just revising Religious Language, Experience, a little of the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, I did Life After Death for mondays exam already so its still fresh. I barely know the anthologies though, its terrible.
1
reply
lissshannon
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#76
Report 7 years ago
#76
(Original post by Dark lugia 2)
This topic has been really useful! Could anyone share their essay plans for Donovan and Westphal please? Those are the ones I'm not confident with... I found Monday's exam excellent and I knew what I was doing before I even got in but this whole exam is a mess for me.

I'm just revising Religious Language, Experience, a little of the Cosmological and Teleological arguments, I did Life After Death for mondays exam already so its still fresh. I barely know the anthologies though, its terrible.
im looking over religious experience for donovan, kant and deontology for westphal and religious lang for ayer. i have no clue how to end these though :/
0
reply
JKT
Badges: 0
#77
Report 7 years ago
#77
(Original post by LibbyU)
anyone else doing jamieson, la follette and schneewind? and how are people revising for this exam?
yeah, im planning a opener, and conclusion for each text, and will "go with the flow" for the main portion of the essay
0
reply
Emmaharvs
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#78
Report 7 years ago
#78
(Original post by Kebabbi)
Ahkay, thank youu

I'm not doing that anthology, we're doing the Wainwright/Preston one, but would you be able to tell me generally what you've written in the part A essays? Is it just a general essay about the whole article? I thought it had to be based on just that passage, so confused ahhh it'll be a late night tonight!
Yeahh Im def confused as to whether we're supposed to write about the passage or the whole thing but we've been told to write mainly about the whole think and I dont think I'd have enough to say just on one section :/

So for 2 of them I've sort of split it into key ideas/themes and written it that way for part A, just becasue then I can rearrange it so that the first paragraph fits with the passage and then I can go on to the rest of the article... also it makes it less rambley For the other one though I've just gone through it in order and done it that way, linking it to people etc along the way... but thats because I dont really get it so I'll be able to blag it easier if I stick quite closely to what the text actually says
0
reply
ella_bella
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#79
Report 7 years ago
#79
can someone PLEASE give me breif overview of what each scholar says in their article and key ideas to include!
im so scared and not ready for this exam!
0
reply
lissshannon
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#80
Report 7 years ago
#80
(Original post by miss_boyes)
Westphal isn't too bad and it's all chronological so whatever paragraph you can always put it in context of why the problem emerged that people are talking too much about religion (philosophy of religion) instead of talking about God (philosophical theology) which is why Hegel was complaining. This is the focus of the essay.

I've just written a quick summery which could help, I tried not to go into too much detail:
Pre-Kant
2 strands of religious philosophy
- Scholasticism - aimed to talk about God through both faith and reason (i.e Ansalm's ontological argument or Paley's design argument, they already had faith in God but used reason to back up their faith in God))
- Deism - they only wanted to talk about God through reason (i.e arguments for the existence of God) they thought faith/church authority etc. were irrational. Also religion of the Enlightenment - they wanted moral unity not Holy wars etc.
- Hume and Kant - they disproved the classical arguments for the existence of God. This caused a shift to talking about religion (as there was a lack of rational basis, it also ruined the diestic strand), which is why Hegel was complaining!

Post Kantian
- Kant - the first post-kant to try to rescue the deistic project through Kants moral ethics and pure practical reason (sorry I'm a bit rusty here :P)
- Schleiermacher- has an emphasis on feeling which is similar to panthiesm

Hegel rejects both Kant's ethics (doesn't want religion to be reduced to moraliy) and Scleiermacher's feeling (Kant thinks he's confused).
- He then separates religion (too connected with 'sensory images and historical narratives') and philosophy. He thinks that philosophy has 'the conceptual form adequate to true knowledge' - so Christianity should be more philosophical.

Hume and the hermeneutics of suspicion
this is concerned with what motives underlie religious belief i.e Hume says piety is grounded in selfishness i.e the hope of going to heaven/fear of hell
Marx - Religion is a form of social manipulation an excuse to uphold hierarchy by saying it is God imposed (also justification because the bible says the poor will be rewarded in heaven)
Nietzsche - slaves sought moral superiority over their rulers (as a form of revenge) through religion, also that God will punish the strong/rich
- these criticisms aren't directed at the theology itself but because Christianity uses self interest to make religion serve as a justification for society i.e God wants only for me to be a respectable member of society.

Ok maybe not such a quick summery! Hope I've got the right idea! But try not to get too bogged down by all the different names etc. its the ideas that are important and the focus of 'can we talk about god or should we stick to talking about religion?'
this was from another post i found, but its useful for westphal

for donovan im going to put about religious experience itself, feeling certain/being right, what empiricists/LPs say about it

I havent got to ayer yet, but he seems most straightforward
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

University open days

  • Cranfield University
    Cranfield Forensic MSc Programme Open Day Postgraduate
    Thu, 25 Apr '19
  • University of the Arts London
    Open day: MA Footwear and MA Fashion Artefact Postgraduate
    Thu, 25 Apr '19
  • Cardiff Metropolitan University
    Undergraduate Open Day - Llandaff Campus Undergraduate
    Sat, 27 Apr '19

Have you registered to vote?

Yes! (490)
37.72%
No - but I will (100)
7.7%
No - I don't want to (88)
6.77%
No - I can't vote (<18, not in UK, etc) (621)
47.81%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise