Philosophy Exam Discussion Thread 2016

[Coffee]

Today is the day! Good luck, everyone!

I know we'll all probably do a bit of study today before the exam, but try to relax as much as possible. I'm sure you have all worked hard this year - this is the final hurdle - you know your stuff, you've got this.

Looking forward to seeing you all on the other side

[sarangiya]

Good luck all!

[plants]

How did you guys go?

[Coffee]

How did you guys go?

I smashed that essay! I'm so happy! I think that's the best philosophy essay I've ever written

Section A wasn't what I was expecting. Less questions than last year and I was expecting different content as well. Definitely stumped me a bit and really made me think but I think I've done well. There are a couple of questions I'm concerned about; one was a 6 mark question and I feel like I didn't write enough, and the other was on Locke- question 2b, I think? Overall though, I'm happy!

How did everyone else go?

[sarangiya]

I smashed that essay! I'm so happy! I think that's the best philosophy essay I've ever written

Section A wasn't what I was expecting. Less questions than last year and I was expecting different content as well. Definitely stumped me a bit and really made me think but I think I've done well. There are a couple of questions I'm concerned about; one was a 6 mark question and I feel like I didn't write enough, and the other was on Locke- question 2b, I think? Overall though, I'm happy!

How did everyone else go?

Congratulations! Sounds like you put in your all.

I thought the essay I had written for the 2015 exam was marginally better than the one I wrote on the day. I'm a bit disappointed to tell the truth.
Opening the exam, I was so pleased with the content and just went through realising I knew what each one wanted. I thought I'd smash it, but the more I wrote the more unfocused my responses became (I think) and I really don't know if my contemporary debate and thought experiment were accurate at all.

But overall, I'm not too displeased! Hope you all saw a silver lining too

[RolfHarris]

Was possibly the first year in which section A was the hardest, The question which asked to discuss callicles and Aristotle in regards to self disciple was interesting

[Coffee]

Congratulations! Sounds like you put in your all.

I thought the essay I had written for the 2015 exam was marginally better than the one I wrote on the day. I'm a bit disappointed to tell the truth.
Opening the exam, I was so pleased with the content and just went through realising I knew what each one wanted. I thought I'd smash it, but the more I wrote the more unfocused my responses became (I think) and I really don't know if my contemporary debate and thought experiment were accurate at all.

But overall, I'm not too displeased! Hope you all saw a silver lining too

Glad your pleased and sorry to hear you were a little disappointed with your essay. I'm sure you did just fine though- we are often our own worst critique. 

Was possibly the first year in which section A was the hardest, The question which asked to discuss callicles and Aristotle in regards to self disciple was interesting

My thoughts exactly. Definitely that question threw me off a bit.

Which topic did everyone choose from Section C? I chose question 3; the one about consumerist-culture. Question 2 was interesting. My teacher said there wouldn't be a question that was only very specific to one philosopher but Q2 was definitely very Singer-focused.

[RolfHarris]

Also did topic 3

Paragraph One: Nietzche and Herd Society
Paragraph Two: Dr Clive Hamilton and impact on happiness caused by consumer society
Paragraph Three: Singers solution of giving to the point of marginal utility

[plants]

I also did the third essay. I didn't really like how all the topics connected with obligations to others, but oh well. Also felt a bit iffy about the thought experiment in the second extended response.
it was an alright exam.

[RolfHarris]

Was the second extended response the Comparison between Hume and Nagasena? If so, could have drawn on either the analogy of the republic or the chariot analogy. Obviously their are more but these were ones i found easy to relate.

[sarangiya]

Was the second extended response the Comparison between Hume and Nagasena? If so, could have drawn on either the analogy of the republic or the chariot analogy. Obviously their are more but these were ones i found easy to relate.

I was really confused because I included both then - the chariot for Nagasena and the bundle theory/theatre analogy for Hume, but I thought these were 'analogies' and not really 'thought experiments'.
I did something stupid that I **thought** Hume did about stripping down everything we can imagine to be 'self' and being left with nothing (lol no idea literally in the final five minutes I tacked it on the end). But yeah I'm really confused. If it meant analogies, I should be fine hopefully, but I thought thought experiments were different.

What'd everyone do for the contemporary debate in the question previous about brain and mind?
I think I did cloning which turned out really badly because I realised it was more suited to personal identity rather than dualism/physicalism.

[RolfHarris]

I did how should we regard animals

[Coffee]

I was really confused because I included both then - the chariot for Nagasena and the bundle theory/theatre analogy for Hume, but I thought these were 'analogies' and not really 'thought experiments'.
I did something stupid that I **thought** Hume did about stripping down everything we can imagine to be 'self' and being left with nothing (lol no idea literally in the final five minutes I tacked it on the end). But yeah I'm really confused. If it meant analogies, I should be fine hopefully, but I thought thought experiments were different.

What'd everyone do for the contemporary debate in the question previous about brain and mind?
I think I did cloning which turned out really badly because I realised it was more suited to personal identity rather than dualism/physicalism.

I did the same thing as you for Hume and Nagasena so I think we're in the clear Just remember that if the assessors did mean something else by 'thought experiment' and the majority of the state has written something similar to us, the assessors will open up the scope of their marking to accommodate the varying interpretations of the question.

For the contemporary debate I wrote on alzheimer's disease