Join TSR now and get all your revision questions answeredSign up now
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ItsJustMeAgain.x)
    I'm scared of it too, I can't remember quotes to save my life D:


    Posted from TSR Mobile

    we don't need to quote do we? i know the quote of 'humans are not like sheep' (or something to that effect), which you can use to support his argument about free actions benefiting everybody, but then to criticise him when he speaks of following genius' and strong characters, but that's about it!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    to be fair, i feel like unit 4 is slightly more relaxing than unit 3, because it's all on the same philosopher and so you can practically logically guess what their opinion is on certain things, if you get stuck in the exam!

    i'm doing the mill topic, and it really helped that i did political and moral philosophy for unit 3 because it links heavily to the liberal ideology and the liberty sections of political, and it helps that i know a fair bit about utilitarianism from moral, in order to criticise him!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kkkassikassi)
    to be fair, i feel like unit 4 is slightly more relaxing than unit 3, because it's all on the same philosopher and so you can practically logically guess what their opinion is on certain things, if you get stuck in the exam!

    i'm doing the mill topic, and it really helped that i did political and moral philosophy for unit 3 because it links heavily to the liberal ideology and the liberty sections of political, and it helps that i know a fair bit about utilitarianism from moral, in order to criticise him!
    I agree! You're entirely focusing on one philosopher so it's all good. My biggest worry is that I'm getting to complacent about this exam and because I do know everything about Plato, I feel like I'm missing something out. The good thing about doing Plato is he fits neatly into Metaphysics and Epistemology and Political Philosophy.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bobbieare)
    I agree! You're entirely focusing on one philosopher so it's all good. My biggest worry is that I'm getting to complacent about this exam and because I do know everything about Plato, I feel like I'm missing something out. The good thing about doing Plato is he fits neatly into Metaphysics and Epistemology and Political Philosophy.



    Posted from TSR Mobile
    mm i agree, that's my biggest worry! i don't have any more exams apart for unit 4, which is on thursday, and i feel like i don't actually need to do that much revision for it but at the same time, i feel bad if i'm not doing something in case i miss something really important!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kkkassikassi)
    mm i agree, that's my biggest worry! i don't have any more exams apart for unit 4, which is on thursday, and i feel like i don't actually need to do that much revision for it but at the same time, i feel bad if i'm not doing something in case i miss something really important!
    Me too, i tell myself every morning that if I revise all day everyday until the exam I'll be fine then the next thing I know it's 10pm and I hate myself. Is this exam easy or am I just getting cocky though?




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bobbieare)
    Me too, i tell myself every morning that if I revise all day everyday until the exam I'll be fine then the next thing I know it's 10pm and I hate myself. Is this exam easy or am I just getting cocky though?




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    i would never call it easy, but as long as you know the key ideas for things they could ask you about for the 15 marker, and all the criticisms you could include for the 45 marker, there's not a lot more you need to know!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Please somebody help me on the faculties argument and the argument from opposites really have a bad feeling we will have this as fifteen markers. This is plato btw thank you xx


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hk17)
    Please somebody help me on the faculties argument and the argument from opposites really have a bad feeling we will have this as fifteen markers. This is plato btw thank you xx


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    All you really need to know about the Faculties argument is that "faculties" are powers that we hold in order to apprehend "objects/fields" and are distinguished by their "effects".

    Faculties are said to be the same if they deal with the same objects and have the same effects.
    Faculties are said to be different if they deal with different objects and have different effects.

    An example:
    FACULTY: Sight
    OBJECT/FIELD: Colours
    EFFECT: The ability to see

    FACULTY: Hearing
    OBJECT/FIELD: Sounds
    EFFECT: The ability to hear

    As these two faculties deal with different objects and have different effects, they are said to be different.

    Plato applies this line of reasoning to his distinction between knowledge and belief.

    FACULTY: Knowledge (accessed through intellect and reason, a product of the mind)
    OBJECT/FIELD: What is (Being, reality)
    EFFECT: To know things infallibly

    FACULTY: Belief (accessed through sense perceptions, a product of the sense)
    OBJECT/FIELD: What is and What is Not (Darker than knowledge, but clearer than ignorance)
    EFFECT: To know things fallibly (as opinion/belief is not the same as true justified knowledge)

    Also, I do think you're right in suggesting that this may come up as a 15 marker, so thanks for suggesting it! It'd odd how there's quite a lot to the area of "Appearance and Reality", yet there's been no 15 markers on it. They won't ask "political rule" again, I don't think, nor "Knowledge and Virtue" since there's not a whole lot to ask, and they plunged in with Thrasymachus in 2010...

    I hope this helped! If you're still unsure/want criticisms, ask me bro! x

    Ah, I love Philosophy, but it's almost over guys, we're so close to liberation
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by millie-rose)
    When talking about justice for Plato, would we have to go through the whole Socrates, Thrasymachus, Polemarchus, Cephalus discussion then onto the just individual and just state?
    It would really depend on the question. If you were doing one like the past paper that was about Socrates' refutes to Thrasymachus then you focus on that but if it was a 45 marker about Plato's view of justice you would use the other points of view to either back-up or critique your argument.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kkkassikassi)
    we don't need to quote do we? i know the quote of 'humans are not like sheep' (or something to that effect), which you can use to support his argument about free actions benefiting everybody, but then to criticise him when he speaks of following genius' and strong characters, but that's about it!
    You don't have to quote but it can really show a good understanding of the text, and it's looked well upon by examiners in the examiners reports.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Descartes predictions anyone?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    ^second that question.. Anyone?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bobbieare)
    Me too, i tell myself every morning that if I revise all day everyday until the exam I'll be fine then the next thing I know it's 10pm and I hate myself. Is this exam easy or am I just getting cocky though?




    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Haha! Thank God someone else feels like this! I feel really slack this year. I got 4 As last year from consistent hard work - yet in manageable chunks. But this year I've given myself so much to do and not really done anything just from looking at it and being overwhelmed...I fear results day.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    For anyone doing Mill, if you haven't seen this yet, it may come of use to you: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/onliberty/

    Also, this might seem like a bit of a silly question but have people actually read On Liberty? I personally have, but my teacher said it's surprising how many centres don't actually read the essay itself, simply provide resources on it, just wondering if he's right.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kkkassikassi)
    we don't need to quote do we? i know the quote of 'humans are not like sheep' (or something to that effect), which you can use to support his argument about free actions benefiting everybody, but then to criticise him when he speaks of following genius' and strong characters, but that's about it!

    (Original post by cmargerison)
    You don't have to quote but it can really show a good understanding of the text, and it's looked well upon by examiners in the examiners reports.
    As cmargerison said, I think sometimes it looks good to include a couple of quotes, if they're appropriate and help further your argument I don't think they necessarily have to be that long though! It might be sufficient just to try and use some of the phrasing used by Mill in 'On Liberty' (or whoever you're studying), like 'infallibility', 'dead dogma', 'heretical opinion', 'warranted', etc. That might be easier than trying to memorise whole sections!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jool)
    For anyone doing Mill, if you haven't seen this yet, it may come of use to you: http://www.sparknotes.com/philosophy/onliberty/

    Also, this might seem like a bit of a silly question but have people actually read On Liberty? I personally have, but my teacher said it's surprising how many centres don't actually read the essay itself, simply provide resources on it, just wondering if he's right.
    It doesn't seem completely ridiculous not to read the text. I mean, I read The Republic, but I have a friend doing Plato in the exam who hasn't, and he's been getting solid B grades all year, just from learning from Secondary resources such as SparkNotes and textbooks....I don't feel as if I've necessarily benefited, not been hindered in anyway by reading the text.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gillymander95)
    It doesn't seem completely ridiculous not to read the text. I mean, I read The Republic, but I have a friend doing Plato in the exam who hasn't, and he's been getting solid B grades all year, just from learning from Secondary resources such as SparkNotes and textbooks....I don't feel as if I've necessarily benefited, not been hindered in anyway by reading the text.
    That makes sense, I think I've benefited a fair bit from reading the text for context and examples not covered in secondary resources but I suppose it differs depending on what text you read, also how is The Republic? I plan on reading it for fun over summer, surprisingly I do quite enjoy philosophy, just less so when I know I'll be doing an exam on it.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gillymander95)
    All you really need to know about the Faculties argument is that "faculties" are powers that we hold in order to apprehend "objects/fields" and are distinguished by their "effects".

    Faculties are said to be the same if they deal with the same objects and have the same effects.
    Faculties are said to be different if they deal with different objects and have different effects.

    An example:
    FACULTY: Sight
    OBJECT/FIELD: Colours
    EFFECT: The ability to see

    FACULTY: Hearing
    OBJECT/FIELD: Sounds
    EFFECT: The ability to hear

    As these two faculties deal with different objects and have different effects, they are said to be different.

    Plato applies this line of reasoning to his distinction between knowledge and belief.

    FACULTY: Knowledge (accessed through intellect and reason, a product of the mind)
    OBJECT/FIELD: What is (Being, reality)
    EFFECT: To know things infallibly

    FACULTY: Belief (accessed through sense perceptions, a product of the sense)
    OBJECT/FIELD: What is and What is Not (Darker than knowledge, but clearer than ignorance)
    EFFECT: To know things fallibly (as opinion/belief is not the same as true justified knowledge)

    Also, I do think you're right in suggesting that this may come up as a 15 marker, so thanks for suggesting it! It'd odd how there's quite a lot to the area of "Appearance and Reality", yet there's been no 15 markers on it. They won't ask "political rule" again, I don't think, nor "Knowledge and Virtue" since there's not a whole lot to ask, and they plunged in with Thrasymachus in 2010...

    I hope this helped! If you're still unsure/want criticisms, ask me bro! x

    Ah, I love Philosophy, but it's almost over guys, we're so close to liberation
    Hey THANKYOUUU so much it actually made sense is the arguments from the opposite the same thing? For a 15 marker do you think criticisms are going to come up? I really hope we get a 50 marker on political rule but I find 'philosopher kings and their education pretty difficult' Xx


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by jool)
    That makes sense, I think I've benefited a fair bit from reading the text for context and examples not covered in secondary resources but I suppose it differs depending on what text you read, also how is The Republic? I plan on reading it for fun over summer, surprisingly I do quite enjoy philosophy, just less so when I know I'll be doing an exam on it.

    Yeah, you're right I suppose.
    The Republic is actually a pretty good read. It's really interesting how it's set out as a dialogue between fictional characters (which represent someone or other than Plato knew in real life) rather than an essay (like Mill, Descartes etc) and in Book 1 of the Republic, you get a bit of context, so it reads like a fictional story. The analogies in the book, such as "The Simile of the Ship" are quite fun to read to, and Socrates' arguments for justice against various characters. Aha, yeah, exactly! Philosophy is a lot more pleasurable when you know you're not gonna have to figure out to write down all your ideas and arguments in about an hour and a half :P
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hk17)
    Hey THANKYOUUU so much it actually made sense is the arguments from the opposite the same thing? For a 15 marker do you think criticisms are going to come up? I really hope we get a 50 marker on political rule but I find 'philosopher kings and their education pretty difficult' Xx


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yeah argument for opposites is the same thing, apart from you'd just have to explain that all 'particulars' have opposites, which contrast with the Forms which are universal and unqualified bearers of predicates, thus have no opposites.

    Erm, I think criticisms are a possibility since the 15 markers in previous years haven't touched on them yet.

    Yeah a 45 marker (not 50, that was unit 3 ) is possible for political rule, since they didn't have one last year, and the Forms are looking unlikely to come up again!

    Don't worry about the education stuff! All you basically need to know is that it is essential they have an education in the Form of the Good.
 
 
 
Poll
If you won £30,000, which of these would you spend it on?

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.