Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Group for those who do OCR A2 Philosophy & Ethics [Post Exam Discussion] watch

Announcements
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Noodlzzz)
    F. H. Bradley
    He said you could establish 'good' by your place in society, right?

    I am reading: 'Bradley argued that in order to be a good person we must know our own position in society and its duties, and carry out those duties.'

    Which seems like what he was saying was more of an ethical theory... I think it's just that the source I'm reading doesn't explain it properly... He doesn't seem to talk about the authority of the terms 'good' and 'bad'...

    Could you expand on it a bit? Just a sentence or whatevs so I can put it in my notes. Thanksssssss
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by philly.tidd)
    He said you could establish 'good' by your place in society, right?

    I am reading: 'Bradley argued that in order to be a good person we must know our own position in society and its duties, and carry out those duties.'

    Which seems like what he was saying was more of an ethical theory... I think it's just that the source I'm reading doesn't explain it properly... He doesn't seem to talk about the authority of the terms 'good' and 'bad'...

    Could you expand on it a bit? Just a sentence or whatevs so I can put it in my notes. Thanksssssss
    Similar to Aristotle, saw good as culturally relative. We must understand our place in society to know what we should do according to our duty of our roles (nicked of Kant) and culutrally relative virtues through role models (nicked of Aristotle). Once we understand these we have a duty to do so (again, Kant).

    Meta-ethics = a normative ethical theory reworded with a bit of hippie jargon of 'man what does good even mean? Man screw the establishment defining it for us dude' added on and then proposed as something radically new and revolutionary in the field. It's just pot smoking plagiarists :P
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    just wondering what does everyone use to revise ?

    i have the ocr textbooks which i used on their own last year, they seem to cover all the topics thoroughly and in depth !

    but this year i have another textbook i've been using which i think i prefer called, religious studies advanced, second edition, it's by sarah k tyler and gordon reid, and is browny/gold. just wondering will it effect my grade if i kind of abandon the official ocr textbook ? this textbook seems to have the exact same information if not a little more. what do guys think ?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Anna Louise)
    just wondering what does everyone use to revise ?

    i have the ocr textbooks which i used on their own last year, they seem to cover all the topics thoroughly and in depth !

    but this year i have another textbook i've been using which i think i prefer called, religious studies advanced, second edition, it's by sarah k tyler and gordon reid, and is browny/gold. just wondering will it effect my grade if i kind of abandon the official ocr textbook ? this textbook seems to have the exact same information if not a little more. what do guys think ?
    The official OCR textbook sucks. Our teacher strongly encourages everyone going for a B or above to use other materials.

    I use:
    AS/A2 Philosophy of Religion and Religious Ethics for OCR by Robert A. Bowie - gives everything in very concise notes
    and
    An Introduction to Philosophy and Ethics, 2nd ed. by Mel Thompson - excellent for elaboration

    So I can use the first one to give me "categories" for revision, and then if I can't remember a lot of stuff from one particular small area, I'll look in the other book which details each of those areas in two or three paragraphs.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    'For Stevenson, ethical statements are based upon firm, justifiable beliefs about the world and the way in which it should work, and therefore are meaningful.'

    Does this mean that C.L Stevenson's emotivism is actually cognitive?

    PS. thanks noodlzzz
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by KieranJones)
    The official OCR textbook sucks. Our teacher strongly encourages everyone going for a B or above to use other materials.

    I use:
    AS/A2 Philosophy of Religion and Religious Ethics for OCR by Robert A. Bowie - gives everything in very concise notes
    and
    An Introduction to Philosophy and Ethics, 2nd ed. by Mel Thompson - excellent for elaboration

    So I can use the first one to give me "categories" for revision, and then if I can't remember a lot of stuff from one particular small area, I'll look in the other book which details each of those areas in two or three paragraphs.
    really ? are you sure you don't mean that awful blue one by ocr ? i'm meaning the really thick orange and turquoise one for philosophy by matthew taylor and then the ethics is a purpley book, by jill oliphant. was lead to believe they were good so used them both last year and managed to get a high a. which is why i'm so wary of switching to another book.. if that makes sense ! :P

    ahh bowie yeahh i've heard of him ! hmm.. so you don't think it's bad to be solely using this 2nd edition, advanced religious studies ? it's really, really good and seems to have everything in it, + additional quotes to boost your grade.

    ahh yeahh that sounds good damnn literally one and a bit days left and i'm only just questioning what resources to use ! ohh dearr i'm soo not looking forward to monday ! what grade are you hoping of getting by the way ?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    I'm using both the official book and then the really fat books by Matthew Taylor for both Philosphy & Ethics..
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    I just had a revelation, I'm going to need a miracle to pass or my life will end, maybe.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    I have a feeling Verification/Falsification will come up... or is that wishful thinking? :P
    • Community Assistant
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    (Original post by Nayberay)
    I have a feeling Verification/Falsification will come up... or is that wishful thinking? :P
    Both!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Noodlzzz)
    Both!
    Would you get a combined question though?

    Would be good but I'd prefer a separate Q so then I can bring in the other argument, if that made any sense at all. Lol
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Noodlzzz)
    Similar to Aristotle, saw good as culturally relative. We must understand our place in society to know what we should do according to our duty of our roles (nicked of Kant) and culutrally relative virtues through role models (nicked of Aristotle). Once we understand these we have a duty to do so (again, Kant).

    Meta-ethics = a normative ethical theory reworded with a bit of hippie jargon of 'man what does good even mean? Man screw the establishment defining it for us dude' added on and then proposed as something radically new and revolutionary in the field. It's just pot smoking plagiarists :P
    But if it was culturally relative, wouldn't this make it non-cognitive?

    And what about other ethical words, sorry, still not clear on how he is arguing that ethical language as a whole is meaningful.

    EDIT: is it that he is saying we can know it through reason in a similar way to Kant? i.e. our duties are absolute?

    Think I'm pretty much just thinking aloud now lmao.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Can someone explain perscriptivism to me please?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Alright, sorry if this is a long list. Just going through the syllabus and seeing stuff I don't understand. Any help on any of it is very welcome

    • The views of the vienna Circle on religious language - never heard of them
    • The issues the biblical concept of miracle raises about Gods activity in the world
    • The implications of the concept of miracle for the problem of evil
    • Relationship between the afterlife and problem of evil. (I assume this is just it gives reason for evil?)


    Thanks for any help! - Looks liek I'll be struggling on philosophy more than ethics.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by philly.tidd)
    But if it was culturally relative, wouldn't this make it non-cognitive?

    And what about other ethical words, sorry, still not clear on how he is arguing that ethical language as a whole is meaningful.

    EDIT: is it that he is saying we can know it through reason in a similar way to Kant? i.e. our duties are absolute?

    Think I'm pretty much just thinking aloud now lmao.
    No, he thinks it is 'natural' to stick to our duties according to our position in society, he opposed doing duty for itself in a Kantian way. It is cognitive because it is naturalist-he is deriving what we should do (stick to our duties) from (what he thinks is) a natural fact (where we are in society)
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Ineluctable)
    No, he thinks it is 'natural' to stick to our duties according to our position in society, he opposed doing duty for itself in a Kantian way. It is cognitive because it is naturalist-he is deriving what we should do (stick to our duties) from (what he thinks is) a natural fact (where we are in society)
    Thanks..

    Also could you answer my question about C.L Stevenson? i.e. that he said that emotive language is 'meaningful', therefore does this mean that his approach was that ethical language is cognitive?

    'ethical statements are based upon firm, justifiable beliefs about the world and the way in which it should work'
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jbarfie)
    Can someone explain perscriptivism to me please?
    If this is in relation to Rel.Lang, my teacher said...

    Prescriptively: To encourage people to behave in a certain way, for example ‘Honor your father and mother’ or ‘love your neighbour’

    Dunno if that helps? ^^
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    Ugh i'm a mess. I know Rel.Lang ok enough for me.
    I to an extent know Nature of God & Attributes.
    I need to re- revise Miracles but I know its pretty straight forward and I need to re revise completely rel. exp.

    I'm not touching life after death either.

    ...Then theres ethics. Fml.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jbarfie)
    Can someone explain perscriptivism to me please?
    Hare thought ethics was matter of opinion, but ethical statements not only express opinion but prescribe or guide action; moral statements are meant to convince others they are right.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nayberay)
    Ugh i'm a mess. I know Rel.Lang ok enough for me.
    I to an extent know Nature of God & Attributes.
    I need to re- revise Miracles but I know its pretty straight forward and I need to re revise completely rel. exp.

    I'm not touching life after death either.

    ...Then theres ethics. Fml.
    I'm in a similarly dire position. FML
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: May 23, 2012
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

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

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