Turn on thread page Beta
    • Community Assistant
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Community Assistant
    Here's a thread for anyone studying Higher RMPS this year!

    If you're looking to ask questions about the course, talk about revision techniques, or discuss the exam, then this is the place to be


    So how's everyone found the course? And how are you revising for the final exam?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    https://www.thestudentroom.co.uk/sho...rimary_content
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Does anyone have any advice on how to do the 20 mark question? (I'm doing existence of God) Thanks
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    The key thing to remember is to answer the question. Some times folk see a word or term they recognise and simply write everything they know about it. This means that you will not be answering the question and the marker will have to hunt for marks and try to make different points relevant. So, you need to take a breath and when you see a term like existence, cosmological, First Cause, teleological or Designer,,, STOP... and ask yourself what am I being asked ABOUT this term? So if you get a question like- "How convincing are arguments for the existence of God?" you would home in on "existence of God" but then you have to ask yourself what the question is asking you about the existing of God. The question is asking you how convincing the arguments are. Next thing to think about is what the two arguments you have been studying are and they are the cosmo and the tele arguments. Then you ask yourself what would make something convincing? The main thing that makes an argument convincing is whether or not it is based on fact, whether or not experience backs up the argument or if the argument is so obviously convincing that it is instinctive, then what support it has from science, philosophy and theology and then what contradictions it might have before posing the question- are there any arguments or evidence which make arguments for God's existence highly unlikely?

    Throughout what you write- at the beginning of each point you need to be using the word "convincing" because that is what you are being asked about. If you break the question down as above then you will have 5 mini essays to write rather than one big long aimless one.
    Offline

    4
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Labrador99)
    Here's a thread for anyone studying Higher RMPS this year!

    If you're looking to ask questions about the course, talk about revision techniques, or discuss the exam, then this is the place to be


    So how's everyone found the course? And how are you revising for the final exam?
    Timing is a massive issue for me. 20 mins to write a short essay! Its so hard
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Hi, I'm really struggling with JUSTICE AND MORALITY section and I would really appreciate it if someone could share notes with me?

    I have complete notes on the Origins section, specific to Part A but mostly relevant to part B as well. I also have complete notes on Buddhism and can offer advice on essay structure.

    Good luck everyone
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hi Does anyone have any predictions on what the Buddhism and morality and justice essays will be?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    Oh didn't realise this thread was a thing. Anyway, this year I'm doing Buddhism, Morality & Justice, and Existence of God.

    I'm sure I'll be talking on this thread more in the next couple days up to the exam haha!
    Offline

    9
    ReputationRep:
    Christianity, Morality & Medicine and Origins here

    I expect something about how sin ties into beliefs to come up in Christianity
    Assisted suicide hasn't come up at all in M&M so that could come up too
    Origins is honestly unpredictable

    Only this week have I realised that there is just so much to learn in this course
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    For Buddhism, what comes under the "nature of reality" topic? The SQA says it's maya, anicca & sunyata but I've not been taught any of that.

    The closest thing we've been taught is the 3 marks of existence (anicca, anatta & dukkha); is that it? Because apparently anatta comes up in "nature of human beings" as well.

    Any input would be appreciated
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Morality and Justice

    Causes of Crime:
    Psychological- brain injury or thought impairment is considiered a cause of crime by some. However there are those who believe that people are just born bad and that we all have the capacity to make judgements about what is right and what is wrong. Under this heading comes deviance. Everybody has deviant behaviour in them- every bus far skipped, 50p stolen out of your mum's purse or piece of litter dropped can be classed as deviant behaviour because it is breaking the law. People who are criminals are simply more deviant and not very good deviants because they get caught. Then there's the whole issue of addiction. Addiction is an illness, not a choice whether it be to drugs, gambling, stealing, sex, children or alcohol. Initially it may be the case that there is a choice but when people are addicted to something the ability to choose has gone and the addictive compulsions take over.

    Moral Issues: if crime is the result of a psychological conditions then why are we punishing something over which a person has little control? The response should be one of compassion and not punishment. Furthermore, if this is a cause of crime then the state should fulfil its duty to care for the vulnerable rather than lock them away.

    Environmental: this is the idea that aspects of a person's home environment or neighbourhood influences their behaviour. It is a fact that areas of deprivation seem to produce more criminal behaviour than affluent areas and the conclusion drawn from that it that so-callled bad areas influence criminal behaviour. Also there are individuals who have traumatic upbringings which may have neglect, physical and mental abuse as part of the every day routine. There is a link between some people and this kind of family background. Again, some would argue against this saying that most people from deprived areas and difficult home circumstances do ot resort to crime and that taking part in it is a choice not a consequence of it.

    Moral Issues: If the enviroment causes crime it is not the fault of an individual. Nobody chooses their parents and nobody chooses to stay in a so-called rough area. Society has a duty to work towards removing the inequalites caused by background problems and it has a duty to support those living in challenging conditions. The state also has a duty here. It is a fact that during times of austerity (cut backs) that the sections of society that are going to do the worst are the sections that require the most support so that the vulnerable do not fall into criminal ways.

    Economic Causes: Link to deprivation are the economic causes of crime which are caused by poverty. It is a fact that areas that are described as poor often have higher crime rates than wealthier areas. However, greed can also play a part. There are those who have money and simply want to have more just for the sake of having it and becoming richer. Again there are plenty of examples of people who live in deprived areas who do not commit crimes and wealthy people who also do not commit crimes. It is because of this that some argue that crime is a choice ot a consequence.

    Moral Issues: The moral issues raised here are similar to the ones above- the punishment of those who have no control over their circumstances. For the rich wanting to get richer it could be argued that wealth does not mean that you will not be vulnerable- it is possible for people to become addicted to wealth and are thus unwell rather than criminal.

    Are there any other parts you struggle with?
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bnaca)
    For Buddhism, what comes under the "nature of reality" topic? The SQA says it's maya, anicca & sunyata but I've not been taught any of that.

    The closest thing we've been taught is the 3 marks of existence (anicca, anatta & dukkha); is that it? Because apparently anatta comes up in "nature of human beings" as well.

    Any input would be appreciated
    Main thing about the nature of reality is the three marks of existence. Buddha was unsatisfied with his lot and like many other privileged young men of his time began to think about reality. This involved taking a step back from things and trying to work out what was going on. Borrowing heavily from his own Hindu background he recognised that the universe was characterised by two key things- impermanence and suffering (anicca and dukkha). He noticed that everything changed all of the time so it was difficult then to say what anything actually was because it was in state of flux. He also noticed that an inescapable fact of life was suffering in its many forms. Thus these two things were an absolute fact about life as a human being. Using this model he then focused on humanity itself wondering precisely what humans were and he boiled humanity down to the five skandhas- five parts which were in a constant state of flux which when pulled apart were nothing but component parts which led him to the conclusion that there was no soul (anatta). There is some dispute about this because Buddha spoke of his previous incarnations and taught about kamma and samsara- the soul is a vital part of this process, yet, he said there was none which leaves the question of what is being reincarnated. Some scholars suggest that the way round this is Buddha meant that humans generate an energy which is passed on to a new life form- it works ok to an extent but it could argued that there doesn't seem to be much difference between this and the soul. Other scholars suggest that the Buddha never taught that there was no soul but instead taught that whatever the soul was, it was not like the atman in Hinduism
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Hiyagriva)
    Main thing about the nature of reality is the three marks of existence. Buddha was unsatisfied with his lot and like many other privileged young men of his time began to think about reality. This involved taking a step back from things and trying to work out what was going on. Borrowing heavily from his own Hindu background he recognised that the universe was characterised by two key things- impermanence and suffering (anicca and dukkha). He noticed that everything changed all of the time so it was difficult then to say what anything actually was because it was in state of flux. He also noticed that an inescapable fact of life was suffering in its many forms. Thus these two things were an absolute fact about life as a human being. Using this model he then focused on humanity itself wondering precisely what humans were and he boiled humanity down to the five skandhas- five parts which were in a constant state of flux which when pulled apart were nothing but component parts which led him to the conclusion that there was no soul (anatta). There is some dispute about this because Buddha spoke of his previous incarnations and taught about kamma and samsara- the soul is a vital part of this process, yet, he said there was none which leaves the question of what is being reincarnated. Some scholars suggest that the way round this is Buddha meant that humans generate an energy which is passed on to a new life form- it works ok to an extent but it could argued that there doesn't seem to be much difference between this and the soul. Other scholars suggest that the Buddha never taught that there was no soul but instead taught that whatever the soul was, it was not like the atman in Hinduism
    Damn, thanks so much haha!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    hi does anyone have any advice on the 20 marker? i’m doing origins of life and the universe, i just don’t really understand it as well as buddhism and morality and justice
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hello66067)
    hi does anyone have any advice on the 20 marker? i’m doing origins of life and the universe, i just don’t really understand it as well as buddhism and morality and justice
    What specifically don't you understand?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Bnaca)
    What specifically don't you understand?
    the only part i understand is the genesis stories, but what are the opposing arguments to this? is it the big bang theory?
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hello66067)
    the only part i understand is the genesis stories, but what are the opposing arguments to this? is it the big bang theory?
    Yes, the big bang theory is the main non-religious argument you should use to counter the story of genesis. Purely because the big bang theory essentially disproves the genesis story, and uses actual scientific evidence to support its claim, as opposed to the genesis story which provides no material evidence whatsoever.
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hello66067)
    the only part i understand is the genesis stories, but what are the opposing arguments to this? is it the big bang theory?
    You should also talk about the Cosmological argument for origins of the universe, and the Teleological argument for the origins of life. Also talk about evolution for the origins of life (and natural selection).

    Then just explain the strengths/weaknesses of the arguments/stories/theories, and link to the question frequently!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    thank you very much, do you have any predictions on what the questions are gonna be
    Offline

    13
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by hello66067)
    thank you very much, do you have any predictions on what the questions are gonna be
    No idea. I didn't study the Origins topic.

    But tbh, based on experience, never revise based on predictions. Learn as much as you can from as many topics as you can, because the SQA are sneaky enough to repeat questions & be unpredictable when it comes to what they ask you.
 
 
 

University open days

  1. University of Bradford
    University-wide Postgraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  2. University of Buckingham
    Psychology Taster Tutorial Undergraduate
    Wed, 25 Jul '18
  3. Bournemouth University
    Clearing Campus Visit Undergraduate
    Wed, 1 Aug '18
Poll
How are you feeling in the run-up to Results Day 2018?
Applying to university
Uni match

Find your perfect match

Our tool will help you find the perfect uni course for you

Make your revision easier

Study Help rules and posting guidelines

Groups associated with this forum:

View associated groups

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.