FMR
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#1
Reaching out to those doing this on Wednesday 11th June. Use this space to talk about it before and after!
0
reply
callum_r
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#2
Report 7 years ago
#2
(Original post by FMR)
Reaching out to those doing this on Wednesday 11th June. Use this space to talk about it before and after!
How're you feeling for it?
0
reply
aspelzini1
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#3
Report 7 years ago
#3
Am I the only one whose nervous?
Good Luck everyone!
does everyone know what topics they are answering I'm Answering questions on Religion and Film and Religion in the individual, what questions is everyone hoping for?

Amy
0
reply
FMR
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#4
I'm not sure what to expect for the exam.. I'm doing Virtue Ethics and Ethics of War and just hoping for a question on pacifism or holy war!
0
reply
LoggyLad
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#5
Report 7 years ago
#5
Did anyone do the Medical Ethics question? I was fine with the ressucitation of premature babies, which was Part B... but the Part A completely threw me. I was confused by the fact they wanted us to discuss "medical dilemmas", when all I had mainly learnt were non-religious and religious arguments for and against. I think I've managed a B overall, but my structure was a mess. Anyone care to tell me how they answered Part A Medical Ethics?
0
reply
Rhian94
Badges: 4
Rep:
?
#6
Report 7 years ago
#6
(Original post by LoggyLad)
Did anyone do the Medical Ethics question? I was fine with the ressucitation of premature babies, which was Part B... but the Part A completely threw me. I was confused by the fact they wanted us to discuss "medical dilemmas", when all I had mainly learnt were non-religious and religious arguments for and against. I think I've managed a B overall, but my structure was a mess. Anyone care to tell me how they answered Part A Medical Ethics?
Same! I just made stuff up about whether abortion is murder because non religious people may think life begins at conception for humanitarian reasons and then said Christians could also agree with this to get some religious quotes and views in! For the premature babies I did examples like Charlotte Wyatt, saying who decides doctors or parents and should the parents ability to cope factor in, and could the money be spent in a better area e.g cancer rather than on a baby who's possibly suffering and has a short life expectancy!
0
reply
franvb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#7
Report 7 years ago
#7
Definitely did not expect the whole pre-mature baby topic to come up, had me baffled for a second. Thank the lord for the Pacifism question in war.
0
reply
FMR
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 7 years ago
#8
Virtue Ethics question threw me off but the pacifism one sort of put me at ease!
0
reply
jessjamesx
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#9
Report 7 years ago
#9
I decided to do Kant and Virtue, completely threw me off! Never seen questions worded so strangely! Does anyone agree? :|
0
reply
callum_r
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#10
Report 7 years ago
#10
(Original post by jessjamesx)
I decided to do Kant and Virtue, completely threw me off! Never seen questions worded so strangely! Does anyone agree? :|
I did both of them too. They were worded very weirdly but when I came down from my moment of panic I was able to make sense of them! (Or so I hope I did)
0
reply
jessjamesx
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#11
Report 7 years ago
#11
(Original post by callum_r)
I did both of them too. They were worded very weirdly but when I came down from my moment of panic I was able to make sense of them! (Or so I hope I did)
What did you do for them? The Deontological part for Virtue threw me off! Also kants was worded so oddly,I just decided to outline the theory!:confused:
0
reply
callum_r
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#12
Report 7 years ago
#12
(Original post by jessjamesx)
What did you do for them? The Deontological part for Virtue threw me off! Also kants was worded so oddly,I just decided to outline the theory!:confused:
Sorry for the late reply! For the deontological aspects of his theory I said we have a goal is to achieve eudomonia (which is teleological) and if we applied the virtues dutifully we would successfully achieve it. So I basically said the virtues are deontological to an extent and they are used to achieve our teleological ending. I have no idea if that's what they were looking for but I assumed it was something like that!

Yeah, Kant was worded really oddly. I went through his theory and related it back to how he avoided religion in each part and how he did so because he thought religion was followed for immoral reasons. So when I mentioned the Categorical Imperative being autonomous and not hypothetical, i would say that religion would be following rules for the sake of God or getting to heaven, and this is immoral because it is not done for duty etc. And then I did the same for each of his principles and how they have no reference to God!
0
reply
H_Wilson78
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#13
Report 7 years ago
#13
I had no idea if the Kant question meant that Kant's theory tried to develop ethics without God (which it doesn't, surely, because he postulates that god exists and so these good, dutiful actions will be rewarded in heaven - in fact i read somewhere that his entire theory collapses if God doesn't exist) or whether we were not supposed to make reference to God when writing the answers - you know how sometimes the questions are like "Explain … with reference to …, …." etc, I wondered if this was the same but "without reference to". Anyway the part b on that was horrific (a priori statements) so i just left it and opted for the pacifism and abortion, although I was really prepped to answer Kant… just not that question!
0
reply
besteed34
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#14
Report 7 years ago
#14
(Original post by H_Wilson78)
I had no idea if the Kant question meant that Kant's theory tried to develop ethics without God (which it doesn't, surely, because he postulates that god exists and so these good, dutiful actions will be rewarded in heaven - in fact i read somewhere that his entire theory collapses if God doesn't exist) or whether we were not supposed to make reference to God when writing the answers - you know how sometimes the questions are like "Explain … with reference to …, …." etc, I wondered if this was the same but "without reference to". Anyway the part b on that was horrific (a priori statements) so i just left it and opted for the pacifism and abortion, although I was really prepped to answer Kant… just not that question!
I had exactly the same problem!! but I did Virtue and pacifism in the end, although I was confused because i always thought that virtue ethics was not deontological… I sort of thought that was the whole point about virtue ethics was that there were no duties to perform certain actions. I just said some random stuff about having a duty to develop ourselves into better persons and to always follow the golden mean and stuff! I don't think I did that well in retrospect
0
reply
callum_r
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#15
Report 7 years ago
#15
(Original post by besteed34)
I had exactly the same problem!! but I did Virtue and pacifism in the end, although I was confused because i always thought that virtue ethics was not deontological… I sort of thought that was the whole point about virtue ethics was that there were no duties to perform certain actions. I just said some random stuff about having a duty to develop ourselves into better persons and to always follow the golden mean and stuff! I don't think I did that well in retrospect
Well I thought that too, so I said how his theory was normative as it has aspects of both, but it wasn't driven by duty like Kant was. So when I did mention it I tried to make it that it is a duty to stay within the golden mean, like you said, so that we are able to flourish as human beings. I'm sure you did fine!
0
reply
jessjamesx
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#16
Report 7 years ago
#16
(Original post by callum_r)
Sorry for the late reply! For the deontological aspects of his theory I said we have a goal is to achieve eudomonia (which is teleological) and if we applied the virtues dutifully we would successfully achieve it. So I basically said the virtues are deontological to an extent and they are used to achieve our teleological ending. I have no idea if that's what they were looking for but I assumed it was something like that!

Yeah, Kant was worded really oddly. I went through his theory and related it back to how he avoided religion in each part and how he did so because he thought religion was followed for immoral reasons. So when I mentioned the Categorical Imperative being autonomous and not hypothetical, i would say that religion would be following rules for the sake of God or getting to heaven, and this is immoral because it is not done for duty etc. And then I did the same for each of his principles and how they have no reference to God!
It seems like you did the same as me!! I was so prepared to answer any question, except them ones lol I was thinking it would have thrown a lot of people off, so maybe the grade boundaries will be lowered? (Atleast we can hope)
0
reply
callum_r
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#17
Report 7 years ago
#17
(Original post by jessjamesx)
It seems like you did the same as me!! I was so prepared to answer any question, except them ones lol I was thinking it would have thrown a lot of people off, so maybe the grade boundaries will be lowered? (Atleast we can hope)
Glad someone else approached it like I did! Well I've thought and there isn't really much else the deontology could be interpreted as? Do you know what else it might mean? So hopefully, if our writing was coherent and there were examples we should be okay!
0
reply
dontsmackthejack
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#18
Report 6 years ago
#18
(Original post by FMR)
Virtue Ethics question threw me off but the pacifism one sort of put me at ease!
I did the pacifism question aswell do you remember the question though? I've completely forgot it and now im nervous i put the wrong points in. i put the main points in like jesus and turning the other cheek and ghanddi, the 3 types of pacifism and how they relate to religion and sancity of life stuff. I was also going to do vitrue ethics but the question threw me off and ended up doing abortion/premature babies (which i screwed up)
0
reply
FMR
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#19
Report Thread starter 6 years ago
#19
(Original post by dontsmackthejack)
I did the pacifism question aswell do you remember the question though? I've completely forgot it and now im nervous i put the wrong points in. i put the main points in like jesus and turning the other cheek and ghanddi, the 3 types of pacifism and how they relate to religion and sancity of life stuff. I was also going to do vitrue ethics but the question threw me off and ended up doing abortion/premature babies (which i screwed up)
Part A was about pacifism and one major religion and Part B was about how useful it is in modern warfare, or something along the lines of that. Your points are much the same as might so hopefully we haven't slipped up there!
0
reply
franvb
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#20
Report 6 years ago
#20
(Original post by dontsmackthejack)
I did the pacifism question aswell do you remember the question though? I've completely forgot it and now im nervous i put the wrong points in. i put the main points in like jesus and turning the other cheek and ghanddi, the 3 types of pacifism and how they relate to religion and sancity of life stuff. I was also going to do vitrue ethics but the question threw me off and ended up doing abortion/premature babies (which i screwed up)
I think Part B of the pacifism question was something like 'Pacifism will not work in modern society'
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
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

Who is winning Euro 2020

France (103)
27.39%
England (126)
33.51%
Belgium (30)
7.98%
Germany (40)
10.64%
Spain (8)
2.13%
Italy (33)
8.78%
Netherlands (13)
3.46%
Other (Tell us who) (23)
6.12%

Watched Threads

View All