Turn on thread page Beta

Edexcel 6RS03 - Developments - philosophy and ethics/ religious studies exam watch

    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Just wondering how everyone found the exam (11th June 2014)? I didn't have a clue with religious experience 😂


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tillyls)
    Just wondering how everyone found the exam (11th June 2014)? I didn't have a clue with religious experience


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The religious experience one was hideous! So annoyed, as only half way through I realised that I could have done the easier Virtue Ethics question!

    How did you approach the religious experience question? I tried to link it to key features and I tried to compare and contrast simply using the wording of the statement.

    Other questions were good imo though!
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Tillyls;48117878]Just wondering how everyone found the exam (11th June 2014)? I didn't have a clue with religious experience 😂

    It was the hardest rs exam I swear they have ever given out...I revised so so much for religious experience and didn't even know where to start with it. I did ontological, religious language and virtue ethics in the end and literally had nothing to say for the first two...
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chandler Bing)
    The religious experience one was hideous! So annoyed, as only half way through I realised that I could have done the easier Virtue Ethics question! í ½í¸*

    How did you approach the religious experience question? I tried to link it to key features and I tried to compare and contrast simply using the wording of the statement.

    Other questions were good imo though!
    I did religious experience, religious language and the critique of the link between religion and morality. I would've done the ontological argument if I'd have know what the religious experience one would be like, but I hadn't revised ontological enough... I tried to start with comparing what the the two statements meant but I had no idea so I tried to just turn it round into writing about religious experience key features and a couple of weaknesses for the first part of the question...


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tillyls)
    I did religious experience, religious language and the critique of the link between religion and morality. I would've done the ontological argument if I'd have know what the religious experience one would be like, but I hadn't revised ontological enough... I tried to start with comparing what the the two statements meant but I had no idea so I tried to just turn it round into writing about religious experience key features and a couple of weaknesses for the first part of the question...


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Same, thats exactly what I did! I started to write onto and then I thought, I wont be able to do this well, in good detail! So, I switched to religious experience! Mentioned key features, some weaknesses and strengths too! Tried to compare too :five:

    I did religious lang and eth lang though :yep:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chandler Bing)
    Same, thats exactly what I did! I started to write onto and then I thought, I wont be able to do this well, in good detail! So, I switched to religious experience! Mentioned key features, some weaknesses and strengths too! Tried to compare too :five:

    I did religious lang and eth lang though :yep:
    The question was something like "compare these two statements - 'I had a dream I saw God' and 'I saw God in a dream'"
    Someone I know said they put that the I saw God in a dream bit meant the person interpreted it as a religious experience - ie they were a theist and had been visited by God. and the I had a dream I saw god was less personal, like they hadn't interpreted it as actually being god it was just a dream not a religious experience if that makes sense - but then everyone I've spoken to has put different things so hopefully the examiners will be kind... 😂


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Tillyls)
    The question was something like "compare these two statements - 'I had a dream I saw God' and 'I saw God in a dream'"
    Someone I know said they put that the I saw God in a dream bit meant the person interpreted it as a religious experience - ie they were a theist and had been visited by God. and the I had a dream I saw god was less personal, like they hadn't interpreted it as actually being god it was just a dream not a religious experience if that makes sense - but then everyone I've spoken to has put different things so hopefully the examiners will be kind...


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Yeah, lemme just copy in what I wrote:

    I spoke about relevant key features: form of argument (in particular, the "experiences" - do dreams come under it?), Swinburne's principle of testimony, Swinburne's belief about the nature of God, James' change in experient and the features of an experience and tried to link it to the relevant key features. I also mentioned that dreams aren't empirically verifiable, so does not provide a posteriori reasoning and I mentioned
    Ramachandran and linked to to the idea that the second may believe the dream is random and engineered / recreated by the brain.

    And then, to completely tie it to the question: I analysed the statements too, about how the former is referring to a religious interpretation and the latter is to an atheistic, sceptical interpretation.

    The operative phrase of the former is "God spoke to me" and how God seems dominant and feelings of belittlement and passivity may be present. And the operative phrase of the latter is "I dreamt" and that this suggests they are in control.

    I also spoke about how the former suggests that God is using the medium of dreams to interact with his creation, how this fits with the idea that he is omnibenevolent and omnipotent.

    The A02, which was "Evaluate a strength of the religious interpretation of religious experiences or..." I chose this, and did normal strengths and
    weaknesses and at the end, I emphasised how a strength is that the religious experience means something to the person and proves the existence of God, but it is very circular and you do need to believe in God to accept this - it does not persuade others that it proves the existence of God.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nalala)
    It was the hardest rs exam I swear they have ever given out...I revised so so much for religious experience and didn't even know where to start with it. I did ontological, religious language and virtue ethics in the end and literally had nothing to say for the first two...
    Imo, I only thought that the RExp was hard tbh, but I can understand it was a pretty hard paper :yep:

    Hopefully, the grade boundaries will be low! The lowest they've gone in 67 / 90 for an A!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chandler Bing)
    Yeah, lemme just copy in what I wrote:

    The A02, which was "Evaluate a strength of the religious interpretation of religious experiences or..." I chose this, and did normal strengths and
    weaknesses and at the end, I emphasised how a strength is that the religious experience means something to the person and proves the existence of God, but it is very circular and you do need to believe in God to accept this - it does not persuade others that it proves the existence of God.
    I did a similar ending to part (ii) I think I mentioned peter Donovan who said that ultimately religious experience shouldn't be completely disregarded, but it should be accepted that it is only of use to the theist/experient and so isn't really a persuasive argument for the existence of God.

    I also found the rest of the exam okay, it was just that question which threw me off


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone do religious language?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nalala)
    Did anyone do religious language?
    Yeah I wrote about analogy, symbol and myth and for the second part I wrote about the verification principle... You?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone do religious experience? I did - was grim


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Did anyone do the Law and Punishment question? If so what did you think of the part (ii)?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    [QUOTE=Tillyls;48124244]Yeah I wrote about analogy, symbol and myth and for the second part I wrote about the verification principle... You?


    Posted from TSR Mobile[/QUOTEj]

    Yeah I did analogy and language games - but then you also had to make reference to the statement 'a study of religious language has shown it to be complex ' - struggled linking that...
    I also felt really limited by the second half where you had to talk about either verification OR falsification - like I had about 50/50 to say about each one but not enough for a whole question for just one on its own.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: June 12, 2014

University open days

  1. University of Cambridge
    Christ's College Undergraduate
    Wed, 26 Sep '18
  2. Norwich University of the Arts
    Undergraduate Open Days Undergraduate
    Fri, 28 Sep '18
  3. Edge Hill University
    Faculty of Health and Social Care Undergraduate
    Sat, 29 Sep '18
Poll
Which accompaniment is best?

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.