Answering A and B Questions

Answering B Questions

• Argument based

• Aim for at least one side of A4

• Usually you are given viewpoint to discuss.

What separates the best answers?

• Considers more than one point of view

• Critical analysis of different viewpoints

• A range of evidence

• What does this mean?

• Detail

• 2 sides

• analysis

What can go wrong?

• Misunderstanding the question

• Struggling to think of arguments for or against in time.

How to show analysis/quality of argument

• Introduction – take a side or point to main strength of argument for or against.

For example

• (b) Morality comes from people not from God.’ discuss

• Take a position/spot the theorists who are relevant to the question – Yes morality comes from people (Freud).

• Arguably Kant was wrong when he argued that Morality comes from God. Freud’s argument that morality is learned behaviour is far more believable.

• OR point to main areas of debate.

• Kant would argue that morality comes from God. To what extent this is true is an area of much debate.

Now it is your turn!

• (B) God’s existence can never be proved by logic. Discuss

• Think which theory/theorist is being mentioned. Which position are you going to take or are you going to sit on the fence?

• Arguably ***** was wrong when he argued that *******. *****’s argument that *******is far more believable.

• ***** would argue that *******. To what extent this is true is an area of much debate.

Developing judgement and analysis.

• How could this be developed?

• It is possible to argue that God is good because in the Decalogue 6 of the 10 commandments are concerned with human ethics.

• It is possible to argue that God is good because in the Decalogue 6 of the 10 commandments are concerned with human ethics. This means that God is immanent in His creation and concerned about mankind. Moreover God also shows his sympathy for mankind when He intervenes in the story of Samuel and helps Hannah to conceive a child. However arguably setting down laws for humankind goes against the principal of free-will thereby questioning God’s goodness. Also performing a miracle for Hannah leads to the question, Why doesn’t God always intervene if He is Omnipotent, again challenging God’s goodness, i.e. why does He allow bad things to happen if He can stop them and has chosen to stop them in the past.

Now it’s your turn!

• Develop this paragraph by adding this means that, moreover and however to the information below.

• It is possible to argue that Plato’s analogy of the Cave tells us nothing about reality in that the whole analogy is centred around the idea that empirical evidence does not reveal the truth and real truth is found only in the Noeton.

Conclusions – make a judgement!

• Not making a judgement

• Therefore we could argue that Plato's analogy of the cave tells us nothing about reality in that it is focused only on seeking truth in the Noeton. However others might also say that it can explain to us how we can recognise things like beauty.

Making a judgement

• Therefore Plato’s analogy of the Cave tells us nothing about reality in that His whole philosophy disregards the empirical world which for centuries has informed Man’s decisions and enabled us to learn from our mistakes. Plato instead places all his faith in a Noeton for which there is no proof.

How to do this?

• Therefore (reference question) in that (explain why you agree or disagree with the viewpoint.

• (b) Aristotle’s theory of the 4 causes is convincing? Discuss

• Good phrases to use – fundamentally, Overall, tells us little in that…

Spotting what the question is asking

• (b) The Universe obviously exists so God must have created it. Discuss

• (b) Arguments from design must fail because they do not prove the existence of a God who is all-powerful. Discuss

• Which topic? Which theorists? Write down all you can about the topic in one minutes – key words, key thinkers

• Now structure this into arguments for and against the proposition in the question.

A Questions

• Explain, describe

• Not an argument

• No judgement

• Detail, detail, detail

• 2 sides A4

The best answers

• Stick to the question

• Detail – examples, technical language, references to theorists

What can go wrong?

• Desire to argue

• Drifting from the questions, explaining everything about a topic

• Struggling to fit two sides of A4 especially if a minor theorist.

Adding Detail

• A) Explain how Irenaeus accounts for the problem of evil

• Irenaeus was concerned about the Problem of evil. He thinks evil is a necessary part of life so humans can develop.

• Irenaeus was concerned about the problem of evil. This means the debate around whether an Omnipotent and Good God can really exist alongside the presence of evil in the world. This is most notably expressed through the inconsistent triad. Irenaeus argued that instead of evil being a negative in the world actually it was necessary for human development. This is because God put humans into the world in infant form. Irenaeus believes that humans can only become like God through struggle and suffering.

When faced with an A question

• Write down everything you know in one minutes including technical language.

• Try to circle relevant parts to the question

• Now quickly write a plan identifying the main ideas in each of your paragraphs.

• Be sure to write an introduction ad conclusion for an A question to show this is a fully developed and finished piece of work

Key Tips

• If asked to criticise a theory it is relevant to explain the theory as well as the criticism but keep referring back to the exact wording of the question

• Introductions – background/overview of theory or theorist – these can be planned in advance, i.e.

• Plato was fundamentally concerned with the search for truth (epistemology) and the nature of reality His theory of….

HTTPS://ITHINKTHEREFOREITEACH.WORDPRESS.COM/

If you would like further information please follow the link below to my

blog: