AQA AS Philosophy (new 2014 onwards spec) Thread!

Announcements
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    So many people didn't know Descartes' one, dw about it. It's such an odd one in contrast to all the other Ontological arguments too. If you're still curious about it, it's:

    - God is a supremely perfect being
    - A supremely perfect being would have all supreme perfections
    - Existence is a supreme perfection
    - God must possess existence (ergo he exists).

    I said to someone before I went into the exam "If Descartes comes up I am so screwed" and just GOd that fricking evil demon question eughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
    --
    Also @other person how the hell did you use SEVEN extra pages omg. I write lots in exams but I found the paper provided to be just enough for my work.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    So many people didn't know Descartes' one, dw about it. It's such an odd one in contrast to all the other Ontological arguments too. If you're still curious about it, it's:

    - God is a supremely perfect being
    - A supremely perfect being would have all supreme perfections
    - Existence is a supreme perfection
    - God must possess existence (ergo he exists).

    I said to someone before I went into the exam "If Descartes comes up I am so screwed" and just GOd that fricking evil demon question eughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
    --
    Also @other person how the hell did you use SEVEN extra pages omg. I write lots in exams but I found the paper provided to be just enough for my work.
    I also said that for Descartes' OA. I used the example of a triangle to explain how existence is the essence (essential requirement of God). Without a triangle having 3 sides, it wouldn't be a triangle. Similarly, if God didnt exist, he wouldn't be a God
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    was the last question on religion only about the logical problem of evil?
    the 15 marker for epistemology I wrote about direct realism and hallucination and how we see things which aren't real so objects can't be mind independent
    then indirect realism, so objects could be mind independent then scepticism, so objects may not be real at all so they can't be mind independent
    then idealism so they wouldn't be because objects are ideas!!!!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    So many people didn't know Descartes' one, dw about it. It's such an odd one in contrast to all the other Ontological arguments too. If you're still curious about it, it's:

    - God is a supremely perfect being
    - A supremely perfect being would have all supreme perfections
    - Existence is a supreme perfection
    - God must possess existence (ergo he exists).

    I said to someone before I went into the exam "If Descartes comes up I am so screwed" and just GOd that fricking evil demon question eughhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh hhhhhhhhhhhhhhh.
    --
    Also @other person how the hell did you use SEVEN extra pages omg. I write lots in exams but I found the paper provided to be just enough for my work.
    I am guessing I am @other person. My writing is quite big, so don't worry too much about that, and I did cross out quite a few things along the way. I just write loads. I am sure my teacher has nearly killed me a few times, as I often hand in essays which are 8 pages. I just can't condense things. It's either all in, or nothing with me.

    Also, I always outline the overall theory before answering the question specifically. Like with the ontological argument, I outlined what it was, and the general argument structure. Then I described Descartes argument.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloefairbre)
    was the last question on religion only about the logical problem of evil?
    the 15 marker for epistemology I wrote about direct realism and hallucination and how we see things which aren't real so objects can't be mind independent
    then indirect realism, so objects could be mind independent then scepticism, so objects may not be real at all so they can't be mind independent
    then idealism so they wouldn't be because objects are ideas!!!!
    Wait... What?!

    I just wrote an essay on Direct Realism. I was sure that was all they were asking for?
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Wait... What?!

    I just wrote an essay on Direct Realism. I was sure that was all they were asking for?
    I think the question was "Are Direct Realists right to claim ... are mind independent objects?"

    You could have addressed the question however you want. I criticised direct realism and then I said why Kant's approach to realism better explained how all objects are in fact mind dependent.
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chloefairbre)
    was the last question on religion only about the logical problem of evil?
    the 15 marker for epistemology I wrote about direct realism and hallucination and how we see things which aren't real so objects can't be mind independent
    then indirect realism, so objects could be mind independent then scepticism, so objects may not be real at all so they can't be mind independent
    then idealism so they wouldn't be because objects are ideas!!!!
    It only referenced the problem of evil - could choose logica or evidential

    Right?? omg someone confirm as i wrote entirely about evidential
    omg
    now
    im
    worried
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    It only referenced the problem of evil - could choose logica or evidential

    Right?? omg someone confirm as i wrote entirely about evidential
    omg
    now
    im
    worried
    It basically said is evil inconsistent with God. So you should, as it is an essay and one should make their points as strong as possible, mention both the logical and evidential problem of evil. And then on the other hand of the argument, talk about both Theodicies
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DeclanC97)
    It basically said is evil inconsistent with God. So you should, as it is an essay and one should make their points as strong as possible, mention both the logical and evidential problem of evil. And then on the other hand of the argument, talk about both Theodicies
    In essays you are allowed to address the point however you wish, providing you argue ''correctly'' - so you could just adress logical and ignore evidential and so on. which would be fine.

    Omg "inconsistent" with God well God (literally) help me I cannot remember how I wrote my introduction, so I can't recall if I've actually addressed the question or not.

    WELL I'LL FIND OUT IN AUGUST
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I think the question was "Are Direct Realists right to claim ... are mind independent objects?"

    You could have addressed the question however you want. I criticised direct realism and then I said why Kant's approach to realism better explained how all objects are in fact mind dependent.
    Ohhh, ****. I just went for a general essay on direct realism:

    1. Intro
    2. Problem: Illusions
    3. Illusions response
    4. Problem: Hallucinations
    5. Hallucinations response
    6. Intermediate conclusion
    7. Problem: perceptual variation
    8. Perceptual variation response
    9. Problem: Time-lag
    10. Time-lag response
    11. Conclusion
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Ohhh, ****. I just went for a general essay on direct realism:

    1. Intro
    2. Problem: Illusions
    3. Illusions response
    4. Problem: Hallucinations
    5. Hallucinations response
    6. Intermediate conclusion
    7. Problem: perceptual variation
    8. Perceptual variation response
    9. Problem: Time-lag
    10. Time-lag response
    11. Conclusion
    I prettyy much did the same thing (though I lumped illusions and hallucinations together) and then after time-lag response introduced Kant.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I prettyy much did the same thing (though I lumped illusions and hallucinations together) and then after time-lag response introduced Kant.
    Oh right! that's good. I was starting to wonder if I had done it all wrong, haha.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    How's everyone feeling about results day? I am really freaking out, and dreading it!
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    How's everyone feeling about results day? I am really freaking out, and dreading it!
    I'm worried about my other subjects but kinda calm for philosophy; I think I'll probably get a B cause I don't think my non-essay questions were detailed enough (lmao especially Descartes' evil demon like God end me)
    to get an A but who know

    Last year you could drop 20 something marks and still get an A though so
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I'm worried about my other subjects but kinda calm for philosophy; I think I'll probably get a B cause I don't think my non-essay questions were detailed enough (lmao especially Descartes' evil demon like God end me)
    to get an A but who know

    Last year you could drop 20 something marks and still get an A though so
    Aw, good luck! I know what you mean - philosophy was definitely my easiest exam. However, I did mess up on that last 15 marker, so I have to pray that it isn't as bad as I think it is. Oh well, if it all goes wrong, I don't really mind re-taking the exam, as the 15 marker will probably be on the design argument, which I really love talking about!
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    Aw, good luck! I know what you mean - philosophy was definitely my easiest exam. However, I did mess up on that last 15 marker, so I have to pray that it isn't as bad as I think it is. Oh well, if it all goes wrong, I don't really mind re-taking the exam, as the 15 marker will probably be on the design argument, which I really love talking about!
    I thought my 15mks were okay then I read through some of my old posts on here where I was worried about misunderstanding the question and writing about logical instead of evidential problem WOOPS! lmaoo. I can't retake cause it'll cost me another £600 (old ) so ah I hope I did okay.

    Iv'e been trying to find some example A2 essays online for the current spec and im reallllllllllllllllyyyy struggling, theres nothing on AQA or anywhere - do you know of any places?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I thought my 15mks were okay then I read through some of my old posts on here where I was worried about misunderstanding the question and writing about logical instead of evidential problem WOOPS! lmaoo. I can't retake cause it'll cost me another £600 (old ) so ah I hope I did okay.

    Iv'e been trying to find some example A2 essays online for the current spec and im reallllllllllllllllyyyy struggling, theres nothing on AQA or anywhere - do you know of any places?
    Yeah, that's understandable. As long as you tailored it to the question, writing about either, or both should be fine! Yeah, I have to pay to re-sit, but it's no way near that cost - wow! I have seen some essays about for A2 somewhere, and will try and find the link for you, but if you are only in AS at the moment, I wouldn't worry about A2 too much yet.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    I thought my 15mks were okay then I read through some of my old posts on here where I was worried about misunderstanding the question and writing about logical instead of evidential problem WOOPS! lmaoo. I can't retake cause it'll cost me another £600 (old ) so ah I hope I did okay.

    Iv'e been trying to find some example A2 essays online for the current spec and im reallllllllllllllllyyyy struggling, theres nothing on AQA or anywhere - do you know of any places?
    There are some specimen and example essays on the AQA website: http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/philo...d-mark-schemes
    Online

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by clucky_chick)
    There are some specimen and example essays on the AQA website: http://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/philo...d-mark-schemes
    Those essays are for AS though
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Inexorably)
    Those essays are for AS though
    The specimen papers for ethics and philosophy of mind are for A2.
 
 
 
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
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.