Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Well it's a little late now. I did the exam. And it went well strangely. I'll probably get hit by a bus to make it up for it.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by VivekJ555)
    Predicted 25 Marker Philosophy Q's
    Anyone else have different predictions?

    1A) Explain Plato's Analogy of the cave
    2A) Explain concept of 'Creatio ex nihlo'
    3A) Explain Paley's version of the Teleological (Design) argument
    4A) Pending



    Posted from TSR Mobile

    Not even close dude
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by charrose4x)
    did anyone else talk about hume in 3b because i did and not sure if its right now lol
    I did, I talked about the judaeo christian god allowing natural evil as a punishment or to build divine qualities, then moral evil as a result of free will to take away free will being an unjust and unloving thing to do as man would be like slaves. Then I spoke about the prime move being perfect therefore a good god but unaware of evil as it would detract from perfection to think about anything else rather than its self as it said A GOD not a judaeo christian god
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by htrowslec)
    I did, I talked about the judaeo christian god allowing natural evil as a punishment or to build divine qualities, then moral evil as a result of free will to take away free will being an unjust and unloving thing to do as man would be like slaves. Then I spoke about the prime move being perfect therefore a good god but unaware of evil as it would detract from perfection to think about anything else rather than its self as it said A GOD not a judaeo christian god
    wrong comment to reply to, sorry hahah
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    part A question 1 is ONLY Anslems argument and views etc

    Part B question 1 is The Criticisms and agreements on how gods existence is necessary
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Helzbay)
    part A question 1 is ONLY Anslems argument and views etc

    Part B question 1 is The Criticisms and agreements on how gods existence is necessary
    Yes ! Gaunilo is meant to be in the 10 marker along with Plantinga and Kant. You don't get marks for analysis in the 25 mark question!
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Thanks guys 😉 At least the Philosophy predictions were accurate.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nihil_nimis)
    Alright good I think I did that, thank you
    I looked at the 2009 examiner report for the question "explain irenaues' theodicy" and it said candidates who related it to hick were credited so all good.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    Lol. If you wanted to talk about Plantinga and Gaunilo in the 25 marker, you won't get marked down for it. You needed to make sure you definitely evaluated their arguments in A02 though.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SubZero~)
    Lol. If you wanted to talk about Plantinga and Gaunilo in the 25 marker, you won't get marked down for it. You needed to make sure you definitely evaluated their arguments in A02 though.
    Yeah his secound ontological argument in Proslogion chapter 3, was a response to Gainilo's criticism about the island anyway. I don't know why someone said it wasn't.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by sianne4c)
    You'd get marks for it so long as for the most part you mentioned Anselm and didn't spend the whole toe talking about Ganilo
    Name:  philo.jpg
Views: 118
Size:  162.5 KB
    Those who think you dont get marked if you mentioned Gaunilo in the Anselm question and also those who have a misconception that Anselms second argument was formed after Gaunilo's critisim, check out the examiners report on the same question in June 2010.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by nizmo786)
    Name:  philo.jpg
Views: 118
Size:  162.5 KB
    Those who think you dont get marked if you mentioned Gaunilo in the Anselm question and also those who have a misconception that Anselms second argument was formed after Gaunilo's critisim, check out the examiners report on the same question in June 2010.
    I've found two different opinions from past mark schemes so I'm posed in a difficult position.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Anyone know any good sources to help with the ethics side of things, particularly applied ethics?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    It's over. It's done. Why are you still contemplating how crap you've all done....
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by ThatGuyJosh)
    I've found two different opinions from past mark schemes so I'm posed in a difficult position.
    I'm pretty sure that he wrote his second argument at the same time at his first it was simply another justification. They were both in Proslogian I think. You could see his second argument as a response but he didn't see Gaunilo's work and write another argument based on that it's just that Gaunilo never noticed his second argument haha!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    It's over guys! Let's focus on religious ethics now
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    how would I answer this question?

    describe the concept of moral absolutism? 25 mark
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bethrosina)
    I'm pretty sure that he wrote his second argument at the same time at his first it was simply another justification. They were both in Proslogian I think. You could see his second argument as a response but he didn't see Gaunilo's work and write another argument based on that it's just that Gaunilo never noticed his second argument haha!
    👍👍👍
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Just for any of you guys wondering here is a recap of the Questions in the Exam (I believe), hope it helps:

    Questions in OCR As Philosophy Exam 2016:
    1. a) Describe Anselm's Ontological Argument to prove the existence of God
    b) 'God's existence isn't logically necessary'-Discuss
    2. a) Explain how Kant used the existence of morality to postulate the existence of God
    b) 'morality is a psychological need, not a proof of God's existence.' Discuss.
    3.a) How does Iraneus' theodicy justify natural and moral evil in the world
    b) 'A good God doesn't exist as there is evil in the World'-Discuss
    4. a) Explain why the existence of Irreducible Complexity in some molecules implies an intelligent designer
    b) To what extent is irreducible complexity a creationist delusion
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    So what were the 25 markers?


    Posted from TSR Mobile
 
 
 
  • 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.

  • Poll
    What's your favourite Christmas sweets?
  • 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.

  • 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.