PREDICTIONS FOR JUNE 2013 Philosophy and Ethics AS and A2 PAPERS

You've made it to the right section! Thanks for buying my book – as you know from the fact this a free site it is only by book sales and conferences that I feed myself!

Here are my ideas of what might come up in the June paper this year. Remember these are only my best guesses – there is no guarantee, and you shouldn’t rely on my judgment! You should look carefully at past questions and also do your own analysis of the syllabus. Make sure you know all the key terms listed in the syllabus as these will be there somewhere in whatever question is asked.

June 2013: Ethics predictions (A2)

I think theological determinism is highly likely this year as a question o this syllabus theme has never been asked. Refer to the website for a good table comparing Calvin and Aquinas on this theme. They asked a meta-ethical question in recently on the objectivity of ethical language. How about something linking language to subjectivity – or even a question looking at the issue of naturalism and ethical language? I also think it’s time we had another question linking virtue ethics to an applied theme (see an example below, linking virtue ethics to environmental ethics), and perhaps something linking sexual ethics to rules. Remember they could name one of the sexual ethics issues – how about a question naming “contraception” for example? I would pay careful attention to “issues surrounding homosexuality” because of the gay marriage debate happening about the time the paper would have been set, and issues surrounding contraception because this issue has never been highlighted!

To what extent are moral statements subjective?

Critically assess the claim that predestination is incompatible with free will.

Free will is essential for moral responsibility. Discuss

To what extent is human conscience evidence for freedom of the will?

Virtue Ethics is the best approach to issues surrounding environmental ethics. Discuss

“Sexual ethics requires clear rules to guide behaviour”. Discuss

June 2013 Philosophy of Religion predictions (A2)

On the Philosophy of Religion paper, there are several themes around religious language that have never been examined. Take the idea of “symbol” for example (see below). I think a question on miracles is as near a certainty this year as anything, and so I would revise every aspect of this issues suggested by the syllabus. See below for my suggestion of a question (but don’t limit your revision to this issue and Maurice Wiles!). Boethius is on the syllabus but hasn’t been named for some time (in fact only once). Be prepared in case they name him this time. And I like the idea of a question linking life after death to issues of justice – see below.

Evaluate the claim that symbol is the best way to express human understanding of God.

“A belief in miracles cannot be reconciled with a scientific worldview”. Discuss.

Evaluate Wiles’ claim that the lack of widespread miracles makes it improbable God exists.

Evaluate Boethius’ view that the nature of God is characterised by timelessness.

To what extent does the existence of an afterlife make sense of the problems of evil and injustice?

June 2013 AS Ethics

I think relativism is due to rear its head again so be prepared, for example for a question distinguishing cultural and ethical relativism, or applying relativism to a moral issue. If I was to lay serious money, my preference would be for a question naming Kant specifically – as they haven’t named him for a while. See below for my hunch that a question could come up linking Kant to absolute ethics. They have asked us to compare Bentham and Mill, but what about Bentham and Singer? Peter Singer doesn’t come up very often, so be prepared in case this is the year! Maybe something on the issues surrounding going to war?

Explain the difference between cultural and ethical relativism.
To what extent are issues surrounding genetic engineering best described as “relativistic”.

Explain to what extent Kant’s ethics can be described as absolute.
“Kantian ethics is inflexible”. Discuss

or

Explain how Kant’s categorical imperative might be used to make moral decisions.
“Kant’s categorical imperative is inflexible when facing issues surrounding right to a child”.

Explain the difference between Bentham’s and Singer’s theories of utilitarianism.
Neither Bentham nor Singer give a satisfactory account of the status of the foetus. Discuss

Explain the moral issues surrounding a decision to go to war.
“Religious approaches to war and peace are the best”. Discuss

June 2013 AS Philosophy of Religion

If you look at the gaps in past questions then the ontological argument is definitely due for an appearance. So revise every aspect of this theme. For example, the examiner could ask about Gaunilo, Anslem, Kant or Descartes – and in part b. ask you to evaluate these arguments.

Explain Anselm’s distinction between necessary and contingent existence.
“The idea of God as a necessary being is meaningless”. Discuss

or

Explain Descartes’ version of the ontological argument.
“Descartes’ version is ultimately unconvincing”. Discuss

A question on Judeao-Christian influences is also highly likely this year. The examiner has never asked us to compare Aristotlelean and Christian views. So how about this question:

Compare and contrast Aristotle’s idea of God as prime mover with the Judeao-Christian idea of God as Creator.
“God is involved with his creation”. Discuss

A question on the Problem of Evil is, I think, likely to be in the paper this year. How about a question linking Augustine’s and Irenaeus’ theodicies in some way. For example:

Explain how the theodicies of Augustine and Iranaeus account for the existence of evil.
“Neither Augustine nor Iranaeus give an adequate explanation for evil”. Discuss

For further ideas of possible questions, look at the the starred questions I have made up on pages 90-102 of How to Get an A Grade.