AS Revision Summer 2012

Your questions answered...

• When are my exams?
• What's the format of the exams?
• How do I revise?
• How do I answer the questions?
• Can I see some sample questions for...
  • ...Knowledge of the External World.
  • ...Persons.
  • ...Free Will.
  • ...Reason and Experience.
  • ...The Value Of Art.
  • ...Why Should I Be Moral?
  • ...God And The World.
  • ...Tolerance.

• Each exam lasts 90 minutes.
• In each exam you will have two questions.
• Each question has two parts: an 'a' part and a 'b' part.
• The 'a' part question is worth 15 marks. It will ask you to explain something. You are not required to evaluate. You should spend about 15 minutes on it.
• The 'b' part question is worth 30 marks. It will ask you to explain and evaluate something. You should spend about 30 minutes on it.
• Please note the following!
  • You can answer the questions in any order you want. You might want to think about answering the long questions first if you're the sort of person who has the most energy at the start of an exam.
  • If your handwriting is untidy, write on alternate lines.
  • Make a plan. Do not start writing the moment you see the question. Pause, think, breathe, look around, compose your thoughts, sketch a plan and then begin.

You need to think of revision as both active and passive.

Passive revision is reading and making notes. It is all about consolidating the information you have learned on paper and ultimately in your head. You need to look over your notes, the notes you have from your teachers and any textbooks. You need to re-organise them or rewrite them so that they are in the right format. Which is what?

You need to look at the topics you have been learning and think in terms of a mind-map. At the centre should be a central question. So, for the course Reason and Experience, the central question is: how do we know what we know? Or: what is the source of knowledge? You then need to think of the different positions you have looked at that aim to answer this question. So, you would put down: Empiricism, Rationalism and Kantianism.

You would then need to use your notes to determine the key features of each position: their 'selling points' or 'virtues'. So, we might link Empiricism to Common Sense: we gain knowledge from sensory experience. You might then have a link to a technical term: a posteriori knowledge = knowledge justified by sensory experience. You would also need to have links to arguments to back up the Common Sense point. For example: Hume points out that colour-blind people have no idea of red.

As you move outwards, you are identifying arguments for and against the positions in question. You will notice that an argument for one position is also often an argument against another. Locke argued for Empiricism by arguing against the Rationalists' claim that we have innate knowledge.

Do not worry too much about remembering the names of particular philosophers. You will not be marked down for missing them out or getting them wrong. However it is often easier to memorise arguments if you can remember who put them forward. So, you might remember the argument that reason sees objects, not the senses by thinking of it as Descartes' Wax Argument.

Active revision is making use of the information you have. You revise actively by answering practice questions. No matter how much you think you understand what you have learned, you really don't know it properly until you are able to explain it to someone else. This is what an exam question is effectively asking you to do.

You can revise actively in three ways. First of all, you can write a full answer to the question. Second, you can write a detailed plan. Third, you can give the answer orally. You could explain it to someone else. If there is no-one around who is particularly interested in hearing your thoughts on whether some ideas are innate, then speak to yourself. Don't be embarrassed. You are a philosopher now. People will look at you oddly anyway.

You can find sample questions on the website. We've put up some sample answers too. You can also look at the mark schemes that are given to examiners by following the link to the AQA website on the left. If you do, then please bear in mind that a mark scheme is not a brief summary of exactly how the right essay should look. There is no single right essay. The mark scheme gives general guidance as to the sort of points candidates might make. It will therefore contain a list of more points than anyone could fit into a half-hour essay. Don't think you have to get every one!

Click (or right-click to download) our Examination Advice PowerPoint. Otherwise, read the informatin below.

In the examination you will be asked to answer one question on each topic you have studied. Each question has two parts. Answer both. In the first you will be asked to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the relevant subject matter. In the second you will be asked to make reasoned judgements and to evaluate a theory or claim.

Note that the part (b) question is worth 30 marks while the part (a) question can garner you 15 marks. Given that you must answer two questions in total in each paper (i.e. over two papers you'll answer one question on each of the topics studied this year), this equates to a mark a minute. As a rough guide that is about right. Make sure you leave enough time for the essay part (b).

Below is an explanation of what is required if you are asked to 'define', illustrate', 'evaluate' and so on. In a nutshell: in part (a) questions explain and illustrate; in part (b) questions evaluate by setting out the motivations for the position identified in the question, considering challenges and forming a judgement on the basis of what you have said. Make use of examples in part (b).

Part A - Where you are being asked to demonstrate your knowledge and understanding of the relevant subject matter.

It's really important here not to do too much. You are not being asked to assess or evaluate - to look at both sides of the argument. That's for part (b). You should not write for more than 12 minutes. Even if you write a three-page answer worthy of an encyclopaedia, you can still only get 15 marks, which someone else might have got in 10 minutes with a single side. Remember - an example or illustration will invariably help to make your definition, description, explanation, contrast or outline clearer.

• Define: Where you are being asked to specify the meaning of an expression.
  • Define what philosophers mean by the primary and secondary properties of an object.
• Illustrate: Where you are being asked to provide clarifying examples and connections with other relevant concepts.
  • Illustrate the difference between action and mere bodily movement
• Contrast: Where you are being asked to highlight differences.
  • Contrast a priori with a posteriori knowledge, illustrating your answer.
• Describe: Where you are being asked to set out relevant characteristics.
  • Describe and illustrate two strengths of the view that we value art because of its formal qualities.
• Explain: Where you are being asked to set out reasons
  • Explain and illustrate two criticisms of the claim that morality is a conventional agreement for our mutual advantage.
• Outline: Where you are being asked to set out the main characteristics of anargument or theory:
  • Outline and illustrate how illusion creates a problem concerning perceptual knowledge.

Part B - Where you are being asked to make reasoned judgements, evaluations and make a case.

The basic idea here is to show that you understand that there is a philosophical issue that philosophers have different views on and that you know there are different arguments that these philosophers put forward. So, on the question Is reason the source of knowledge? you would have to show that there's a question of whether reason or experience is the fundamental source of knowledge and then to consider arguments in support of the claim (from the Rationalists) and against it (for the Empiricists). Of course, this battle may have more than two sides and it may go through many levels: the Rationalist might put argument A forward; the Empiricist might attack this with his counter-argument B; the Rationalist will then attack this counter-argument with a new argument...and so on. That's how it goes. But you have only 25 minutes to write an essay, so don't try to do too much.

Do note that you are being asked to write an essay, albeit a very short one. This means that structure counts. You need to You want to have the following sort of structure:

• Introduction. Explain the question and what the issue is. Say what you are going to do.
• Body. Consider arguments for and against. Depth counts here. Don't briefly list as many arguments as you can remmeber. The examiner will just think you've memorised things you don't understand. Pick one or two arguments and discuss them in detail.
• Conclusion. One or two lines. You should announce that you have done what you have said you will do.

A few questions on the structure you might have in mind...

• Q: Should I have a point of view? I don't really know whether I agree with the Rationalists or Empiricists!
• A: No. If you don't have a point of view, weigh the arguments up - explain and criticise them - and announce that there are good arguments on both sides and hence it is unclear whether the claim in question is true.
• Q: I have a point of view! I like Rationalism! Can I say this? I was once told never to use 'I' in an essay.
• A: Yes. If you like Rationalism, then show how the arguments you have studied are good and the alternative are not. You can say things like In this essay, I will argue that...; I will now consider how the Rationalist can reply.../In conclusion, I have shown that... You should not say (or, at most, rarely) I think that Descartes' Wax Argument is a good argument because.../I think that the Compatibilist's definition of 'free' is not correct because.... The reason is simple. You don't need to add "I think that..." By saying Descartes' Wax Argument is a good argument because... / The Compatibilist's definition of 'free' is not correct... you are automatically putting your view forward. So, ask yourself whether your use of 'I' is really adding anything. If not, don't bother with it.
• Q: I have a strong point of view! It's not one we've studied but I want to tell you all about it! Can I do that here?
• A: No. You are being examined on what you have learned. If you favour a position, show how with the arguments you have learned. We all very much hope that by studying philosophy you will want to do more and more philosophy and think about things in your own way. But this is not how the exam system works. Don't blame us for this. Write to your M.P. Or protest. But when you've got the exams out of the way. To repeat: do not use the exam to air your pet theory.

Okay - so here are some sample keywords

• Assess: You are being asked to make an informed judgement; determining the quality of the relevant reasoning or estimating the worth or of the subject referred to.
  • Assess the claim that everything we know, we know through experience.
• Consider: You are being asked to review a body of information or ideas and form evaluations on the basis of that review.
  • Consider the strengths and weaknesses of representative realism.
• Discuss: You are being asked to select the salient features of a debate, argument or idea and to provide an informed commentary on those features.
  • 'Self interest plays no part in genuine morality.' Discuss.
• Explore: Investigate an area of controversy or analyse an idea or theory, drawing out what is philosophically interesting or problematic about it.
  • Explore the claim that bodily continuity is a necessary and sufficient condition for personal identity over time.
• To what extent...: You are being asked to select and weigh up the relevant arguments or evidence and show how those estimations inform your overall conclusions regarding the subject in question.
  • To what extent, if at all, do we value art because it informs us?