(no subject)
Firstly, why don't I revise for my first test until the day before? I did the same last year. The first test doesn't ever seem real until the day. Last year this was a physics practical test that resulted in me throwing up before the test, asking for the help card in the exam (which apparently no one has ever done in the history of townley, eh, I like to be original), then crying after I left the room. This year for Philosophy this morning, it meant revising Plato for 2 days and then getting up this morning at 6 to cram in the other 2 modules by 8.30! However when I walked into the exam I felt strangely calm (though it may have been the copious amounts of Rescue Remedy I sprayed in my mouth before I went in because it tastes of whiskey...mmmmm) and managed to answer the questions fairly well.
The first paper was the JTB which I must have somehow known innately, a criticism of coherentism (which I hadn't a clue, so I waffled roughly what it was about and something about not being able to be and not be at the same time, with the 24mark Q on importance of a priori knowledge - and I revised rationalism inside out so yay! 2nd paper wasn't as great, but I still managed to squeeze out half a page for part a, a page for part b and a page and a half for part c. A was refer to abortion, euthanasia or ...something else and discuss the moral disagreements between them. However firstly the wording of the question was different and I didn't reallt understand what it was asking me at first, but then I waffled something out, AND how the hell are you expected to BRIEFLY explain the conflicts? They're too complex! Anywho b was 2 criticisms of utilitarianism, which was yay! and c was assess virtue theory...again strangely stuff just started coming bk to me and that was the only moral theory i didn't revise! Then Plato was b) describe and explain the role of the form of the good = yay! and c) was assess the purpose of the beast!!! Luckily I knew this and becoz I had revised plato for 2 days cud make something out of it. But the Beast is like the smallest simile of the whole book! what was that about making it a 24 mark Q?!?
Anywho I apologise if no one cares what was on my philosophy paper, but some may wish to know and I'll forget. Generally I think I did okay on it. We'll just have to see...
The first paper was the JTB which I must have somehow known innately, a criticism of coherentism (which I hadn't a clue, so I waffled roughly what it was about and something about not being able to be and not be at the same time, with the 24mark Q on importance of a priori knowledge - and I revised rationalism inside out so yay! 2nd paper wasn't as great, but I still managed to squeeze out half a page for part a, a page for part b and a page and a half for part c. A was refer to abortion, euthanasia or ...something else and discuss the moral disagreements between them. However firstly the wording of the question was different and I didn't reallt understand what it was asking me at first, but then I waffled something out, AND how the hell are you expected to BRIEFLY explain the conflicts? They're too complex! Anywho b was 2 criticisms of utilitarianism, which was yay! and c was assess virtue theory...again strangely stuff just started coming bk to me and that was the only moral theory i didn't revise! Then Plato was b) describe and explain the role of the form of the good = yay! and c) was assess the purpose of the beast!!! Luckily I knew this and becoz I had revised plato for 2 days cud make something out of it. But the Beast is like the smallest simile of the whole book! what was that about making it a 24 mark Q?!?
Anywho I apologise if no one cares what was on my philosophy paper, but some may wish to know and I'll forget. Generally I think I did okay on it. We'll just have to see...