As I say every year, it is impossible to accurately predict exam questions due to the magnitude of questions the exam board could ask. They may ask questions that have previously featured in the first or second year exams (even the exact same wording could be used) or they may ask questions on areas of the specification never asked before. With this in mind, these predictions are just my own musings and may be completely wrong, so you must still revise all areas on the spec. But if I was going to write an exam paper this is how I would do it…
- Cosmological: “The logical fallacies in Aquinas’ first three ways cannot be overcome.” Discuss. Or “Hume’s criticisms against the cosmological argument are effective.” Discuss
- Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy: ‘Critically assess the view that Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy gives some purpose to natural evil.’ Or “The existence of evils does not justify the need to create a ‘vale of soul-making.’ Discuss.
- Religious experience critics: “Religious experiences can be explained as merely a psychological effect.” Discuss. Or ‘Critically assess the view that religious experiences are the product of a physiological effect.’
- Religious Language Apophatic (Via Negativa): “The apophatic way enables effective understanding of theological discussion.” Discuss. Or Religious Language Verification: “Ayer’s verification principle presents a convincing approach to the understanding of religious language.” Discuss.
- Plato/ Aristotle: a comparison question between Plato and Aristotle either on FOG vs PM or reason vs senses e.g “Plato’s reliance on reason explains the nature of reality more clearly than Aristotle’s use of senses.” Discuss or Evaluate the claim that Aristotle’s Prime Mover is far clearer than Plato’s Form of the Good.
- Body, mind and soul: Evaluate the materialist critiques of dualism or “The mind can be fully explained by physical or material interactions.” Discuss.
- Teleological: “The challenge of evolution far outweighs the evidence of a designer God.” Discuss.
- Ontological: Critically assess the view that existence can be treated as a predicate.
- Teleological/ cosmological/ Ontological: “An a posteriori argument is far more persuasive than a priori.” Discuss.
I hope your revision continues to go really well! Don’t forget to join the live stream on Sunday 11th June at 6.00 for any last minute exam support. Good luck and remember you have worked very hard for the last two years so this is your time to show off!!
Click here to access the Predictions Teach Along video (member’s exclusive), where I go through the Predictions powerpoint (found on YouTube) giving tips and support for the possible Philosophy, Ethics and DCT questions and how to approach them: