I am not a gambling sort of person but I would bet money that you will be asked two application questions. But what about the other two questions? Well, as with my previous predications, all I have to go on is the patterns, links to the specifications and gut instinct (call it my ‘intuition’ if you like).

Meta Ethics: even though this came up last year I still think there is a possibility of it re- appearing. At the end of the day it is not a popular topic therefore it often rears its head repeatedly. If so, my predications are either: Ethical Naturalism specifically or a question worded with Cognitive or Non Cognitive e.g ‘Critically assess a cognitive approach to ethical language’ or ‘A Cognitive approach is the only way to understand ethical language.’

VE: I do not think virtue will come up as a specific question this year but it is worth revising as you might be able to use it in an application answer. If a question on virtue does come up I think it will be quite a specific question e.g. ‘Evaluate the agent centred approach of Virtue Ethics’ or ‘Critically assess the main principles of virtue ethics’ or ‘The concepts of eudaimonia and the Golden mean are flawed.’

Conscience: Very likely! There are a lot of gaps when it comes to conscience questions. There has never been a question on (going back as far as 2007 anyway): Conscience as God given, conscience as innate, conscience as instilled by society, parents ad authority figures, views of Augustine, Aquinas, Newman, Freud, Fromm or Piaget. Gosh that is a lot of potential questions! My sneaking suspicion is going to be an open question that warrants a number of these areas in one go e.g. ‘Critically assess the view that conscience is instilled by society, parents and authority figures’ or ‘ Believing that conscience is God given is flawed.’

Freewill and Determinism: Possibility but it is unlikely you will get a conscience and FW together on the same paper. If this topic does come up I think it will be a hard determinism question angled at Theological Approaches such as ‘Theological determinism is more convincing than religious ideas of Freewill.’ You might also get a question on Darrow, Honderich, Hume or Locke (I doubt it though, these seem very specific and just too mean!) Genetic determinism has also not been on in the past.

Sex and Relationships: Contraception has never been asked and there has never been a specific question on Kant = ‘Kantian ethics is the best approach to issues surrounding contraception.’

Environment and Business: This is a popular area for questions and does come up in the exam quite often. There are still a number of questions you could get asked on this topic. No question has been specifically worded to ‘environment, resources and species’, there has also not been a question specifically on globalisation. Utilitarianism is the only topic that has not been specified in a previous exam. So I would not be surprised with a ‘Utilitarianism is the best approach to business and globalisation.’ I also think you might get a question that asks for the relationship between environment and business (combining both questions last year) so ‘Businesses are not ethical towards the environment. Discuss’.

So my money is on:

1. Conscience (aimed at Freud, Fromm and Piaget)
2. Kant and contraception
3. Meta ethics (worded cog or non cog)
4. Either FW if the examiners are nice or Utilitarianism and Globalisation or Environment with Business combined.

Predicting questions on an exam paper is a risky business because it is about as predictable as a roulette wheel. So what I have written below is not a science and it will not be enough to just learn these areas. If you do you will be caught out. All I can do I emphasize the gaps that have appeared over the years.

RE: One of the most popular topics for exam questions. Everything in the specification has been covered over the years but…Voices. Therefore a previous question/ area may re-appear or a question specifically on voices such as ‘Voices are the most effective way of God revealing Himself directly to a believer’

Miracles: Pretty sure this will come up in some way:

1. Critically assess the different definitions of miracles
2. Evaluate the concept of miracles
3. Critically assess the criticisms of miracles made by Hume
   (or some close variation of these such as a question combining 2 and 3)

Nature of God: Pretty much the whole specification has been asked on this topic. Plus last year’s question was a combination of the three key elements. So if it does come up (I’m not betting my money on it) I think it will be either: A specific Boethius question or a reward and punishment question. I hope it does though, as when answered properly this has A* potential written all over it!

Life after Death: also a very popular topic for questions. Pretty much everything has been asked over the years so be prepared for anything. Possibilities include: ‘Critically assess questions surrounding the nature of disembodied existence’ or a specific question on Plato, Dawkins or Aristotle. You could also get a combination of compare questions. All that has been asked before is Aristotle vs Dawkins and Plato vs Hick and Hick vs Dawkins so you could get e.g. Aristotle vs Plato / Hick vs Aristotle / Plato vs Dawkins.

RL: Verification or A.J Ayer! There has never been a specific question on this area. Everything else has been asked over the years. It might be too obvious so it may be worded as a ‘Religious Language cannot be verified therefore is meaningless’ or ‘Critically assess the views of the Vienna Circle’ but I think it will be on there somewhere.

Examiners try very hard to limit the predictability of their question papers. What this means is = I might be completely wrong (I do not often say that either!) So please do revise all areas and elements in order to guarantee your success but these are my inclinations based on analysis of previous questions alongside the specification.

So my money is on:

1. Miracles (especially Hume)
2. Religious Language (especially Verification)
3. RE ( especially Voices)
4. Either Disembodied (LaD) or Boethius (NofG).

Good Luck!

 

Predicting AS ethics questions is much harder. Why? Because there are so many more variations of questions you could get asked. So my predications are sourced from: what has not been on previous exams for a while and what will no longer be taught in the new syllabus. With this in mind:

• Natural Law has not been specifically asked for a while
• Abortion, GE and War and Peace will not be taught on the new spec
• Singer’s Preference Utilitarianism will not be taught on the new spec.

Good Luck!

If I had a pound for every time I have been asked for my predictions over the past week I could have paid for a luxury holiday to Barbados with a yacht…and cocktails.

Here they are:

1. Ontological
2. Cosmological
3. Problem of  Evil

Either: Aristotle’s Prime Mover, Judeo God attributes or religion/science

I know this is not very specific (and maybe not very helpful) but I wouldn’t be surprised if you got another sweeping pa) like last year’s Teleological question for Ontological and Hume’s criticisms for Cosmological.

Just remember:

• Part a) lots of description, explanation, books, quotes, examples (treat the examiner as if they have never studied the course.)
• Part b) argue!! Do not list names but say whether they are convincing or not. Defend against criticisms and support strengths. You must conclude your argument. Remember if the part b is worded funny look to the topic in the part a) as this will indicate topic area and then think which other names are involved in that topic.

Show Off!

You have one opportunity to show everything you have worked for this year. The examiners can only mark what you write, they never see the homeworks, discussions or stresses.