I thought the questions were reasonable but the time allocation is ridiculous.
I answered every question but couldn't write very much per question. One of my 15 markers was also longer than a 30 marker because my time management was awful!
I'm not continuing it next year so hopefully it's an A or B, but I am really not confident about it.
For Philosophy, I did the telelogical argument. I mentioned Aesthetic, Anthropic, Paley ect but I forgot to mention Aquinas and his 5th way. How much will I get marked down for this?
Hi guys was part A situation ethics and part A natural law a Christian ethics question? My friends say natural law was a normal part A question but worded differently. I placed it as a Christian ethics type question.
My ethics teacher said to us its impossible to ask a 30 marker on religious arguments againt (only against) Situation Ethics
If you check the mark scheme for previous question even though it only says against you have to counter argue the points. It would be impossible to gain High marks only outlining one side of the argument.
Hi guys was part A situation ethics and part A natural law a Christian ethics question? My friends say natural law was a normal part A question but worded differently. I placed it as a Christian ethics type question.
I did not answer the natural law question so I can't help you on this one, ask your teacher tomorrrow
Hi guys was part A situation ethics and part A natural law a Christian ethics question? My friends say natural law was a normal part A question but worded differently. I placed it as a Christian ethics type question.
As long as you mentioned the work of Charlie cryer, one of the philosophers and his opinion, you should get near enough full marks
If you check the mark scheme for previous question even though it only says against you have to counter argue the points. It would be impossible to gain High marks only outlining one side of the argument.
That's not true, it's an AO1 you don't have to argue against the question. You literally state / explain all the religious arguments against and showing religious arguments for is not answering the question
That's not true, it's an AO1 you don't have to argue against the question. You literally state / explain all the religious arguments against and showing religious arguments for is not answering the question
So how did you answer the situation ethics question in the exam? How many pages of arguments did you write?
Comeback can you remember if the part A natural law question was Christian ethics? . Thankyou.
Hi, sorry I didn't do Natural Law so didn't read the questions (I chose beforehand to do Situation Ethics and Utilitarianism, went in and circled these and ignored the rest).
I'm sure you didn't misread the question if you're worried about that.