Last year’s Philosophy exam reminded us to always expect the unexpected…Religious Experience was asked for the third year running. With this in mind, we have to be prepared that the exam board could ask curveball questions to avoid people like me ‘accurately’ predicting the questions (I still predicted two out of four topics correctly). This means that they may ask RE for a fourth year running (I doubt it but they still haven’t asked a question on psychological/physiological). Last year they also asked Body/Mind/Soul and RE in both the first year and second year exams. The first year exam this year was Aristotle, Problem of Evil and RE (3 times in 4 years…giving more weight to RE maybe coming up once more in the second year).

I am regularly asked how I decide upon my predictions, I simply judge what hasn’t been asked in a while, study the patterns over previous years (including links between the first year and second year exams) and spot the areas of the spec that have never been asked. You can do the same by checking out my ppt on previously asked questions:

With all 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 were going to write an exam paper this is how I would do it…

1. Plato/Aristotle: A comparison between Plato and Aristotle -Evaluate the claim that Aristotle’s Prime Mover is far clearer than Plato’s Form of the Good (asked in the first year 2023) or a comparison on reason vs empiricism. Or Aristotle on his own e.g. Critically discuss Aristotle’s understanding of reality (asked in the first year 2018), 4 causes (asked second year 2019) or Prime Move (asked first year 2024/ second year 2022)​. Examiners like compare questions as they are more challenging. Aristotle has also not been asked in the second year since 2022 but there are no obvious gaps, probably a repeat Q if he does appear on his own.
2. Teleological or Cosmological: You might get a question on evolution or logical fallacies that is open (you can link to either Teleo and/or Cosmo) or specific to one topic. “The challenge of evolution far outweighs the evidence of a designer God.” Discuss or “The logical fallacies in Aquinas’ 3 ways cannot be over come.” Discuss. These are areas of the spec that have never been asked in the first or second-year exam. Or Teleological on its own e.g. Paley (asked in the first year 2025 but not since 2020 second year). Or Cosmological on its own (only one question asked in the second year in 2024) e.g To what extent does Aquinas’ cosmological argument successfully reach the conclusion that there is a transcendent creator? (asked in the first-year exam 2017)​
3. Problem of Evil: ‘Hick’s reworking of the Irenaean theodicy gives some purpose to natural evil’ Discuss. Or ‘The need to create a ‘vale of soul-making’ cannot justify the existence or extent of evils.’ Discuss. It must come up!!!! I’ve been waiting for this one for years. I think the examiners have forgotten that this is part of the spec. Poor John Hick. Is this going to be the year? I would also prepare for Augustine (asked second year 2022), God’s responsibility, logical vs evidential (second year 2019)​.
4. Nature of God: Any question is possible as not asked in 3 years but obvious gaps could be “Swinburne successfully resolves the problems surrounding God’s omniscience and human freewill.” Discuss. Or “God cannot have divine foreknowledge and be fully benevolent.” Discuss.​

Alternative Q (I think these are more unlikely but are obvious gaps from the spec that have not been asked):

• Soul, Mind and Body: ‘Aristotle presents the most comprehensive view of the soul.’ Or “The mind-body distinction is a category error” Discuss. (Unlikely though as came up in both first and second year exams last year – however examiners have over recent years been repeating topics over multiple years).​
• Teleological/ Cosmological/ Ontological: “An a posteriori argument is far more persuasive than an a priori argument.” Discuss. ​Discussion point on the spec that has never been asked – would be a challenging question to control the description and keep it evaluative.
• Religious Experience: “Religious experiences can be explained as a psychological effect.” Discuss. Or “Religious experiences can be explained as a product of a physiological effect not God.” Discuss. (Very much doubt a Q on RE as it has appeared on last three exams but you never know!)​ I doubt this very much because that would mean Religious Experience has appeared in the last four exams but just in case, this is a massive part of the spec that has never featured on the exam.
• Religious Language: Never been asked: ‘Critically discuss the view that the apophatic way enables effective understanding of theological discussion’. (via negativa) I doubt this one either but it is the only part of Religious Language to never been asked in the exam. Also the examiners like to sometimes ask challenging questions, so by using the term ‘apophatic way’ this might catch a few students out if you are not prepared. Language Games have not been asked since 2019.​

Good luck and remember you have worked extremely hard for the last two years so this is your time to show off!!

Live Stream to help with any last minute questions (3rd June at 7.00):

*Note: I sometimes refer to the exams by the first and second year. This is because OCR still set a paper for students who wish to sit the exam in the first year of the course (formerly known as the AS year), however most colleges no longer do this. The second year refers to the full A level exam (sat by everyone who completes the course) covering all 32 units.

This might also help you spot patterns: