The Student Room Group
Wow, someone else from the Channel Islands on here (though not my island) :woo:

I'm also doing this type of essay, and I'm basing it around the conscience as either an authoritative mechanism or an irrefutable objector.

You'd want to look at Aquinas, the Church, Butler, Plato, Freud etc.

These are the ideas that I'm weaving in and out of it:

Is the conscience worthy of its place above appetites and affections? Hierarchy.
Hume’s emphasis on emotions.

Also address the differences in the tripartite between the individuals mentioned and talk about problems with it.

Is linking it to states of authority worthwhile? Is there a difference between collective consciousness and the conscience of the individual?

Is the conscience of a collective of better standing than the conscience of the individual? Should we predominantly follow a collective conscience and that which generically fits society? Superego's status?

Does its precedence necessarily entail reliance?

Can the conscience always know the greater good?

Value and authenticity of the tripartite.
Just a hint, i did conscience for my extended essay for the exam- and i focused on the mental health issues of conscience etc, freudian ideas etc- always worth putting in
Reply 3
Wow, yours is completely different to mine!!

My question is "Discuss critically the view that we should always follow our conscience when making ethical decisions"

So i'm basically using secular theories vs. religious theories to argue whether we should or shouldn't always follow our conscience . Mine's sort of authority vs autonomy - should we listen to a conscience that has been shaped by society, should we be true to ourselves and just act according to our own beliefs despite the effect on society or should we not follow our 'conscience' at all and just conform to modern laws in order to maintain a harmonious society environment...
Examining where conscience comes from to see how reliable it is...
Using Freud, Fromm, modern - cultural relativism, aquinas, RC understanding, newman, butler and then concluding!!
ChloeGsy
Wow, yours is completely different to mine!!

My question is "Discuss critically the view that we should always follow our conscience when making ethical decisions"

So i'm basically using secular theories vs. religious theories to argue whether we should or shouldn't always follow our conscience . Mine's sort of authority vs autonomy - should we listen to a conscience that has been shaped by society, should we be true to ourselves and just act according to our own beliefs despite the effect on society or should we not follow our 'conscience' at all and just conform to modern laws in order to maintain a harmonious society environment...
Examining where conscience comes from to see how reliable it is...
Using Freud, Fromm, modern - cultural relativism, aquinas, RC understanding, newman, butler and then concluding!!


No, that's my question too. The above ideas are going to be the basis and essentials for my answer before going into detail. It's the angle of authority by which I'm going and they are ways by which itll be addressed. Whether we follow it after being diluted as such by societal influences, whether it's position entails the necessity to follow our conscience etc.
Reply 5
Meh.
I'm just all confused.
My essay just seems to have no real structure to it. My teacher is all about the answer 'flowing through the whole of the essay' but it would seem to me as if that is making my essay too waffly and not concise enough.
He says to 'think' about it and use examples but then again i just find that i am writing forever and just not being punchy enough.
I've not even written about Newman and Butler yet and i'm already at 2,500 words!!! :-S

Latest

Trending

Trending