t a s m a n i a n religion and philosophy c e r t i f i c ... · shahada or tawhid, ... pillars...

TA

SM

AN

IAN

QU

AL

IFIC

AT

ION

S A

UT

HO

RIT

Y

T A S M A N I A N Religion and Philosophy

C E R T I F I C A T E Subject Code: RLP5C O F E D U C A T I O N 2006 External Assessment Report

2006 External Assessment Report

This is the second year for the new Religion and Philosophy course. It is also the second year of the new examination format, and from the papers presented it would seem that the candidates had no real problems with the new format. There has been a slight growth in the subject numbers and the standard of candidates seems to have been maintained. Please note that a large group of markers were involved in this paper, and because of the large number of questions comments were only required for questions that had 15 or more responses, yet a number of the markers generously gave comments for other questions. General comments noted by the markers: Over all this year’s cohort of candidates performed well. • Generally candidates had plenty of information at their fingertips but many tended not

to answer the question asked.

• Some candidates wasted time writing the essay question.

• Candidates would benefit in developing good essay writing technique which would allow them to show case their knowledge to a higher level. In particular, introductions to essays were frequently poor. Many essays did not have an introduction paragraph at all. Many candidates did not address the question in their opening and tended to drift into an answer to the topic somewhere towards the end of their first page. Introductions that start ‘Theologians and philosophers have been arguing about X for Y years’ or conclusions of the ‘it is all a matter of opinion’ type are too vague and unfocused to be of much use.

• Candidates are reminded that essays need to be in paragraphs not dot points, and one

should NOT use ‘text messaging’ shorthand.

• Essays were frequently too brief to cover the content adequately. With an hour to write, candidates should be able to manage at least 4 pages.

• It is important to learn to spell the technical terms relevant to each topic area but also

other words related to the subject. When writing the name of a religion or followers it is correct English usage to use a capital letter. It is also a mark of respect.

• Apostrophes used incorrectly when a word is plural e.g. Hindu’s believe that …

• Some candidates still do not seem to be aware of the content of the support document.

It is this that the markers use as a reference document when marking.

Religion and Philosophy 2

Subject Code: RLP5C


• Candidates consistently wanted to ‘information dump’ and many essays were filled up with information irrelevant to the topic.

• Candidates should not learn - verbatim - definitions or quotes from sources. These,

quite often, add nothing to the quality of the answer. Indeed, an accurate and succinct summary of a term, concept or position in the candidate’s own words (proper naming of the originator is a bonus) demonstrate understanding in depth much better than a quote.

• Teachers ought to advise candidates not to answer questions on topics they have not

studied. Many answers to questions that were answered by only a few candidates betrayed little to no understanding of the intent of the question, nor the terminology, theory and concepts that needed to be addressed. In some cases, the answers appeared to be competent in a field that was not being examined. For example, competent art criticism of particular pieces of art is not philosophy of art.

• It was disappointing that several groups of significant numbers of candidates each

followed exactly the same essay plan – presumably devised by their teachers. The same points were made – even examples used – in the same order. These plans were not always well adapted to the specifics of the question, and especially the need to address particular Criteria. There is nothing wrong with preparing lines of argument in advance, but it is preferable that these lines are the candidate’s own, and that the candidate learns to adapt them to the demands of the question. At the very least, candidates could be encouraged to find or think up their own examples.

• Candidates should avoid arguing through the use of rhetorical questions, or though

merely mentioning support or objections. If they ask a question, they need to give (with reasons) an answer to it. Assertions always need to be supported by reasons.

Question 1 Aboriginal spirituality – 11 responses (A general comment for all of the Aboriginal Spirituality questions) The responses this year were disappointing for all Aboriginal Spirituality questions. The teaching of this unit seems too much focused on the exam and one gained the feeling that most essay were prepared ones as most candidates did not answer the question directly. There needs to be a stronger understanding of the connectedness between the different aspects of Aboriginal Spirituality and the fact that it is deeply rooted in the concept of The Dreaming and its expression. Terms need to be defined to allow for solid discussion in each essay and the candidates need to note the criterion being assessed in each part/question and address these.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Judaism – 15 responses Questions answered on the Jewish tradition, generally speaking, were very impressive. Candidates had a thorough knowledge of the beliefs of Judaism and had a clear understanding of how these beliefs were expressed through behaviour. • Criterion 5

Candidates need to keep in mind that this criterion assesses both terms which apply to particular religions and terms which apply to religious studies in general. Examiners were hoping to hear what was meant by the term ‘beliefs’ and what domains the word applies to. They were also wanted to have the difference between ‘beliefs’ and ‘values’ explained; indeed, the question specifically asked for this, though the request was usually ignored. As a general point, even some of the strong answers on Judaism were deficient when it came to illustrating values – though this is something better discussed under criterion 8. When it came to terms used in the various traditions, (for example Shahada or Tawhid, or Hesed or Mitzvot), candidates provided cogent little thumbnail explanations; candidates had clearly spent time learning to spell these terms correctly as even those whose English spelling was poor took care to show respect to the traditions they were discussing.

• Criterion 4

Candidates were asked by the examiner to show how basic obligations followed from beliefs and values. All did this, though for a significant minority there was little connection between the beliefs and values they outlined and the ‘obligations’ they described. Candidates seemed to have prepared their work under ‘watertight’ headings – beliefs, rituals, structures and stories; they seemed to miss the interconnections between them – and in doing so appear to have missed the ethos of the religions they were describing. Most answers sensibly gave lots of illustrations and most missed falling into the trap of giving a criterion 6 approach which concentrated heavily on description.

• Criterion 8

In the main, candidates did well in this criterion. Their answers showed that they knew the basics of the traditions they were discussing, but, as a general comment the examiners noted that sects, schools and divisions within the chosen traditions were neglected by the candidates. This is poor examination technique and it also does an injustice to the traditions being discussed. Most answers failed to differentiate between beliefs and values – most discussed values (they could scarcely fail to do so), but it was left up to examiners to decide what they were; examiners are not obliged to do this.

Most answers concentrated on rites of passage, rites of devotion and sacred time. Better answers included discussion on morality. It did surprise the examiner that even some of the best answers on Judaism neglected to discuss some of its moral expectations – one


Subject Code: RLP5C


wonders why the teachings of the Prophets are so neglected – perhaps it was because it was just so much easier to discuss the food laws?

Christianity – 3 responses This is a hard religious tradition to study because of the wide range of expressions it has, even if you were to restrict yourself to the mainstream recoginised denominations. While most candidates showed a solid understanding of aspects of the tradition they fell into the error of speaking about one expression or denomination. Some candidates coped better with this than others by highlighting that they wished to speak about certain expression of the tradition and used that as an example of how some Christian would respond to the issues at hand, but there was the ongoing problem of candidates making sweeping statements about different aspects that did not hold true to all the different expressions of the tradition. For example, to discuss the seven sacraments of Christianity, and their mirroring of belief, in Question 14, showed a lack of true understanding of the tradition. The same can be said of references to the Pope as being the leader of the Christianity in the world. Islam – 75 responses Answers on Islam varied a great deal in quality. There was the expected emphasis on the Five Pillars (the Arkan al-Islam) – many candidates seemed to confuse the Five Pillars with the Pillars of Faith (the ‘Aqida ul-Islam) and many did not mention the Aqida at all. Far too many answers made no reference to any other practices in Islam and so missed opportunities to discuss moral behaviour, festivals and rites of passage. Too many candidates just outlined the Five Pillars of Islam with little comment on basic obligations beyond a brief description and there are still major errors of spelling - pilgrimage is often incorrectly spelt and surprisingly ‘prey’ instead of ‘pray’ is quite a common error. The first part of the question asked what is meant by ‘beliefs and values’ so that was a good way to open the essay, even with a brief paragraph. Candidates need to realise that the religion is quite simply ISLAM (not the Islamic religion) and the followers are MUSLIMS (not Islamic people). Muslims prefer the spelling of their Holy Book to be QUR'AN rather than KORAN though this is not essential but it would be more sensitive to use CE rather than AD with dates, or candidates might be in danger of committing Shirk ! Some candidates also thought the Hadith was a book - that needs clarification, and it is quite easy to get a few examples when teaching about them. An 'A' standard essay started with the Seven Cardinal beliefs then moved on to the Five Pillars of Islam and the obligations involved, followed by the sources of the Shari'a and the various categories. Examples of obligations would follow these to cover values, ranging from the Friday prayer at the Mosque and the Haj, to the importance of equality in the Umma and showing compassion to those less fortunate with Zakat.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Some candidates also referred to Rites of Passage which was relevant though a lengthy description was not necessary but Rites of Devotion were relevant in describing the obligations involved with Salat. Hinduism – 23 responses This was a straight forward question and in general the standard of answers was very good. Most candidates demonstrated a sound understanding of key beliefs and then discussed the obligations i.e. practices and rituals which flowed from these beliefs. Better answers also addressed the question of values. These were discussed in relation to fulfilling one’s dharma within the context of sanatana dharma and the values of purity, order and harmony in the cosmos. • Criterion 4

Candidates were required to present evidence of these key beliefs and values. Most answers discussed the practices and rituals of a devout Hindu. Such a discussion covered the understanding of sva dharma and how that is understood by Hindus of different varnas, ashramas, gender, position in family. Participation in various rituals was also discussed with better answers also making references to the sources of these beliefs and values in sacred scriptures.

• Criterion 5

Most candidates demonstrated a sound understanding of relevant terminology. However it was interesting to note that despite the examiner’s comment from 2005 there were still a small number of candidates who confused the term avatar with gods.

• Criterion 8

Most candidates demonstrated a sound understanding of the key beliefs of Hinduism with the major omission being a discussion of the key values lived out by a devout Hindu.

Buddhism – 91 responses This was a clearly worded question, and most candidates met its basic requirements well. However too many otherwise good essays ignored the request to explain what the terms ‘belief’ and ‘values’ mean and ‘obligations’ was a key term, which remained unmentioned, and this impacted on these candidates rating to some extent. • Criterion 4

This criterion was met by most candidates who were able to provide solid ‘evidence’ of Buddhist beliefs, values and practices. However, the topic must be kept in mind throughout are essay, and content make relevant to the topic. The examiner will not


Subject Code: RLP5C


make necessary connections. (Some candidates had prepared an essay on sacred stories which was inserted into the main section of their answer without any reference to the topic).

• Criterion 5

Most essays used Buddhist terms correctly but the requirement to define/explain the key terms ‘belief’, ‘values’ and ‘obligations’ was too often ignored, and this failure meant that otherwise lucid and well written responses received a lesser rating on this criterion 4 and criterion 8, since solid explanations of key terms, rather than being pedantic, are valuable in restructuring an answer which is directly relevant to the topic. Dictionary definitions are adequate but teachers and candidates would find the text when religion goes to school more useful, since it is specific to studies of religious traditions. Please note that it is not a good idea to abbreviate (ie N8FP for noble eightfold path)!

• Criterion 8

Better answers both described and connected key Buddhist concepts and showed now these led to certain obligations for followers. For example, the precepts are not in themselves beliefs, but stem from beliefs and in this sense they are ‘obligations.

Most candidates explored the Mahayana/Theravada’ split quite well but this may be more profitable referred to in the introduction of the essay, since it impacts on the different obligations for followers of each school.

Question 2 Aboriginal spirituality – 9 responses Refer to Question 1 comments. Judaism – 12 responses On the whole this question was done well, covering a response to the question ‘What is ritual and worship?, then moving on to describe Rites of Passage and the role they played in maintaining Jewish tradition, and then Rites of Devotion which needed to include not only the Sabbath but also daily prayers and blessings. Several candidates referred to various festivals as well. Christianity – 1 response Refer to Question 1 comments.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Islam – 28 responses This was on the whole answered badly. There is a real obsession with the Five Pillars of Islam coming through on any question about Islam, often to the exclusion of any other aspect of the faith. In this case, there is some overlap with Salat and the Haj but there is far more to Rites of Passage and Rites of Devotion than the Five Pillars. The question asked what role these rituals played in maintaining Islamic tradition, so a good answer put Rites of Passage in this context - birth and naming, marriage and death - and Rites of Devotion:

daily Salat and Friday prayers, the Haj, and some reference to Sawm and Zakat. Hinduism – 1 response Buddhism – 2 responses Question 3 – (30 responses) This question was generally well answered. Most candidates were able to provide more than one argument for the existence of God. Better answers gave the objections to the arguments. Sophisticated answers attempted to discuss and evaluate and draw conclusions about the merit of objections and arguments etc. Weaker answers merely gave a description of the main arguments for the existence of god. • Criterion 5

Candidates should define some key terms as well as use them correctly within their answer. Most candidates used some terms but many did not provide a definition.

• Criterion 4

Candidates should look to build a case, explaining which parts of the arguments or objections seem persuasive. Avoid using terms such as ‘destroyed’, for example, ‘the first objection completely destroys the cosmological argument’. Candidates should use more moderate terms, in keeping with the need to recognise that both sides of the debate have some scholarly merit.

• Criterion 8

Most candidates demonstrated a good understanding of the main concepts, even very difficult ones such as the ontological argument.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Question 4 – (45 responses) No comment received from the marking examiner. Question 5 – (27 responses) This question was generally well answered, although there was often a lack of knowledge of how some of the ‘portrayals’ are understood by most scholars today, as distinct from the traditional understandings. There were also those who, having obviously prepared thoroughly for a Synoptic Problem question, dumped an inappropriately large amount of that information into this topic. A list of the ‘portrayals’ would include ‘Messiah’, ‘Lord’, ‘Son of God’, ‘son of man’, ‘teacher’, ‘miracle worker’, ‘saviour’, and ‘prophet’. The answers which took a gospel-by-gospel approach, quite valid in itself, starting with Mark and working their way through to Luke, noting the particular emphasis of each evangelist, generally treated a limited range of the ‘portrayals’. • Criterion 4

The available evidence, as found in the Synoptics, was often expressed as direct quotations. Some of these were not very accurate, the best were, and gave chapter and verse.

• Criterion 5

If you are writing about the Synoptic Gospels, you must describe what they are, and, for this question, their individual orientation. However, in this question there was no requirement to dilate upon the Synoptic Problem as such. Two candidates apparently thought that John is a Synoptic.

• Criterion 8

Some candidates interpreted the role of Jesus as Lawgiver as one of rejection of the Mosaic mitzvoth, echoing the old term, now discredited, of the ‘Six Antitheses’. That this is not so should be obvious from Mt 5:17-20.

The Support Material specifies that the ‘Titles’ of Jesus should be examined in the light of modern critical scholarship, but there was only occasional evidence in the responses of an awareness of the provenance of terms such as ‘Lord’, ‘Son of God’, ‘Messiah’, and ‘son of man’. The most authoritative treatment of this is to be found in Vermes, G., Jesus the Jew (SCM Press).


Subject Code: RLP5C


Question 6 – (8 responses) Environmentalism answers to Questions 6 (3 responses), 19 (1 response) and 32 (10 responses) were well done in general, with references to core beliefs and values, in particular the Eight Basic Principles of Deep Ecology, the importance of 'intrinsic value' and a Non-Anthropocentric position rather than Shallow Ecology or an Anthropocentric view of the Environment. Candidates answering Question 32 on Deep Ecology as a Religion had a good understanding of different arguments about what constituted a religion - belief in a Supreme Being; finding salvation in a next life, either earthly or heavenly; or just a set of beliefs and values plus various rituals, sacred stories and sacred structures? Most answers concluded that Environmentalism was a 'Broad Church' and constituted at best a pseudo-religion or quasi-religion, rather than what most faiths would consider constitutes a mainstream religion. Question 7 – (no responses) Question 8 – (44 responses) The danger with the ethics question seems to be an emphasis placed on the issue and mechanics of particular practices (i.e. abortion, euthanasia, etc.). Some information may be relevant to understanding a particular ethical opinion, however, more than this can become excessive and sometimes the focus of the essay. It is also important to note that in discussing ethical opinions it is always useful to know some specific examples, rather than broad generalizations. It is also important to note that the questions are designed as objective discussions on ethics and it is beneficial to avoid turning a response into an argumentative essay that fails to discuss the reasons for and/and or implications of particular points of view. Most candidates for this question showed knowledge of an ethical issue/controversy, and an awareness of ways moral philosophers and other authorities approach these. Candidates who responded well to the question were able to not only outline what an ethical controversy was using their issue, but showed knowledge of specific views on either side of the debate. They also had a comprehensive and clearly explained understanding of at least one main approach to ethical controversies. The best definitions were succinct and integrated well into the discussion. Question 9 – (37 responses) There were quite a few good answers to this question, which is pretty straightforward. These answers could map out the important features of both positions, expand on a number of reasons for holding each, and explore some of the common objections to both.


Subject Code: RLP5C


However, there were also quite a few weaker answers. One mistake that was too common was to state the question and then expand it – in the less extreme cases to include positions not specified, such as idealism and double aspect theory, but in other to questions of the person/human distinction, or personal identity over time. Candidates should focus their whole essay on the title as set. No matter how good the philosophy, if it is irrelevant to the title, it will gain few marks. Other common errors included the introduction of Platonic appearance/reality dualism, without showing its relevance to the mind/body problem, and introducing Descartes’ ‘I think therefore I am’ without either showing why he came to this conclusion, or mapping his argument that led him to the further conclusion that the ‘I’ referred to could not be his body. Also relatively common was a failure to distinguish carefully between the mind (a term which can be used by both materialists and dualists) and an immaterial mind (or soul). Question 10 – (6 responses) Question 11 – (6 responses) Question 12 – (1 response) Question 13 – (no responses) Question 14 Aboriginal spirituality – 11 responses Refer to the comments for Question 1. Judaism – 12 responses The question was quite well done, with candidates covering material well, but a number of them glossed over role of daily prayers and blessings. Christianity – 7 responses Refer to the comments for Question 1. Islam – 89 responses Generally speaking this question was not done as well as it should have been. Many candidates had a sound grasp of what they wrote about but paid little if any attention to the


Subject Code: RLP5C


question. To paraphrase past exam comments, ‘there is more to Islam than the Five Pillars’, and ‘Information dumping is not an effective way to write an examination essay’. It is likely, going by the responses, that a large number of candidates were looking for a different question. • Criterion 5

Failure to address the specifics of the question cost candidates. Many did not explain what ritual and worship are or how they relate specifically to Islam. A much better understanding of beliefs was demonstrated.

• Criterion 6

This criterion was the most ably demonstrated of the three. Most candidates were able to discuss the significance of what they wrote about. It was a pity that so many candidates on the whole limited themselves to discussing the concept of the Five Pillars.

• Criterion 8

Better answers addressed Islamic Ritual and Worship specifically rather than superficially or not at all. Answers were especially appreciated when they managed to discuss the significance of Islamic practices as ‘belief in action’ in a general sense as well as the significance of specific practices.

Hinduism – 12 responses Most responses were of a poor quality – the candidates did not know that sacred structures refer to time, place, people and objects. They seemed to think it had something to do with the caste system and hierarchies. It should be noted that none of the candidates referred to ‘sacredness’ or differentiated between sacred and profane. Buddhism – 20 responses No comment received from the marking examiner. Question 15 Aboriginal spirituality – 2 responses Refer to the comments for Question 1.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Judaism – 32 responses Responses in many cases suffered from the limitations of the 2005 Supplementary Material on Judaism, which, under Sacred Structures omits all mention of synagogue and family home as Sacred Spaces, Shabbat as Sacred Time, and the mohel as on of the Sacred People. Nor were Sacred Objects mentioned, although a number of candidates did treat them. Naturally, candidates were not penalised for these omissions, but it was pleasing to see that many teachers must have remedied these lacunae themselves, and the terms will be included in the revised material. No candidate this year interpreted ‘structures’ to mean ‘buildings’ only. While no specific numbers of different types of structures were nominated, the better answers provided a wide range, giving some idea of the scope and historical richness of Judaism. For example, the best responses dealt with at least the High Holydays and the Pilgrim Festivals as ‘sacred time’. • Criterion 5

With few exceptions, terms were defined and/or used correctly. • Criterion 6

There is a strong connection between history, buildings and the development of Judaism in its various phases. To give but one example, the fact that, during the Babylonian Exile, the Jews had to find alternatives to Temple sacrifice, that this lead ultimately to the development of synagogue worship and that this enabled people to maintain their faith during the Diaspora, coupled with the lack of any strong urge to rebuild the Temple after 70 CE, created a fundamentally different religious orientation for Judaism.

• Criterion 8

The central Judaic concept of K’dushah (holiness) and the role of the structures in enabling people to achieve this should be brought out, as should the festivals as celebrations of the b’rit (covenant).

Christianity – 2 responses Refer to the comments for Question 1. Islam – 27 responses On the whole the responses for this question were very disappointing. A considerable proportion missed the whole point of the essay and wrote generally about Islam or just the Five Pillars. Obviously some candidates had not understood the concept of sacred structures.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Spelling key Arabic words is still a problem and even words like 'pilgrimage.' Several referred to Ramadan as at a fixed time of the Gregorian calendar so those candidates seem not to have understood how a lunar calendar works or looked at when the Islamic calendar began. Islam is the religion and Muslims are the followers - no need for the 'Islamic religion' and 'Islamic people'. A good answer would link sacred structures with how devout Muslims maintain them. Sacred Space covered Mecca (especially the Ka'aba and Haj sites) and Medina, Jerusalem, and important parts of a mosque or masjid. Sacred Times include the two major festivals and Ramadan along with reference to less important ones like the birthday of the prophet and New Year's Day and for the Shi'a, Ashura. Sacred people covers the role of the Imam as prayer leader and for Shi'a, the Ulema and Ayatollahs. Some candidates also referred to veneration of the Qur'an as a Sacred Object and how Muslims treat it with great respect. Hinduism – 3 responses Buddhism – 18 responses The wording of this question seemed to ‘throw’ some candidates who wrote something about sacred structures and continued with a shopping list of things they knew about Buddhism. The better candidates, although including similar lists, actually made an effort to tailor their knowledge to better answer the question with regard to the demands of criterion 6. Given the wording of the question, the candidates who answered this question with regard to Buddhism managed to generally provide some well understood facts and were able to gain satisfactory marks. Care needs to be taken to define what is meant by the term, ‘sacred structures’. Question 16 – (55 responses) There were relatively few really strong answers to this question. This was in part due to the question itself, which invited candidates to discuss an unspecified number of arguments. In many cases, candidates tried to cover too many (up to six: Ontological, Cosmological, Teleological, Religious Experience, Morality, Pascal’s Wager) and consequently tended to just list them and to nominate strengths and weaknesses, rather than to explain each argument in some detail and then argue for the strengths and weaknesses, spelling out the reasoning behind each support or objection. Candidates might usefully be encouraged to pick a couple of arguments and treat them in detail. Further, given that this question appeared in Part Two of the paper, candidates needed to show the implications and/or significance of at least some of the arguments. Again, the question did not explicitly ask for this, but candidates need to be aware that the marking examiner will be searching for these features in their answer. At the very least, some real world examples or awareness of the difficulties would give the examiner something to acknowledge.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Some of the common misconceptions included the assertion that the existence of altruism is an argument against evolutionary ethics. As last year’s report also commented, there is considerable research to show how altruism has evolved. Many candidates were shaky on their science: for example, the Big Bang was several times described as a meteor strike on the Earth. One of the pre-written essay plans used by quite a few candidates attributed to David Hume the view that the universe exhibits chaos, not order. I can find this view nowhere in Hume, though I can find several places (e.g. in An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding alone - Section V Parts I and II; Section VI; Section X) where he asserts the opposite. Candidates should avoid saying (for example) ‘Ontology’ when they mean ‘the Ontological Argument’. Similarly, many cosmologists would be alarmed to see that term used to describe a supporter of the Cosmological Argument. If candidates point out, as many did, that science is provisional (often in relation to the purported indeterminacy of some quantum events), then they need to show why this is relevant and to assess the worth of this argument. To say that science might find hidden quantum variables is to draw a pretty long bow. Question 17 – (63 responses) No comment received from the marking examiner. Question 18 – (12 responses) A full list of ‘Jewish groups’ of the late Second Temple period would have to include Sadducees, Pharisees, Zealots, Essenes, Samaritans, Scribes, Herodians and even that group with whom Jesus had much to do, but who rarely seem to rate a mention, the am ha-aretz, the submerged majority of the population. Messianic expectation and the different interpretations of it help to define some of the groups. The first part of the question was quite straightforward, but the second, ‘Jesus’, part was more problematical. It is obvious that, by the time Mt and Lk came to be written, these evangelists were themselves hazy about the nature of several important groups, and the Pharisees, in particular, are portrayed in a way that is not confirmed by any other sources that we have from the same period. This makes deciding how far Jesus might have shared their ‘beliefs and expectations’ very difficult, especially if one were to rely on ‘evidence from the Synoptic Gospels’. The sample was too small to justify comments on the individual criteria.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Question 19 – (3 responses) Candidates studying Environmentalism refer to Question 6 comments. Question 20 – (3 responses) Question 21 – (71 responses) The danger with the ethics question seems to be an emphasis placed on the issue and mechanics of particular practices (ie. abortion, euthanasia, etc.). Some information may be relevant to understanding a particular ethical opinion, however, more than this can become excessive and sometimes the focus of the essay. It is also important to note that in discussing ethical opinions it is always useful to know some specific examples, rather than broad generalizations. It is also important to note that the questions are designed as objective discussions on ethics and it is beneficial to avoid turning a response into an argumentative essay that fails to discuss the reasons for and/and or implications of particular points of view. In general candidates were able to define ethics, show understanding that different approaches to ethical controversies exist and that these approaches have different implications on society and individuals. Candidates that responded well to this question had a comprehensive knowledge of key approaches and were able to explain these clearly, in context. They were also able to link these approaches to the implications, which these had on the way groups or individuals have responded to a current ethical controversy. Question 22 – (16 responses) Answers were generally fairly brief and as a result, a little superficial. Better answers gave an explanation and made a case for each of the main positions on the issue of free will. A good way of doing this was to link each position with a prominent philosopher, for example linking compatibilism with Hobbes. • Criterion 5

Many candidates did not define the key terms: determinism, compatibilism, libertarian etc.


Subject Code: RLP5C


• Criterion 6

Several candidates addressed this by discussing crime and free will, referring to lawyer Clarence Darrow, this was a good way of showing the ‘implications’ of one’s position on the issue of free will. Many other opportunities to do this were available to candidates, for example candidates could discuss implications for human motivation, education, etc

• Criterion 8

As many answers were a bit brief this criterion was not very well addressed, candidates who intend to tackle free will on the exam should be able to cover the basic positions in some detail or else include some information on science and free will, genetics and free will and other closely related topics.

Question 23 – (6 responses) Question 24 – (2 responses) Question 25 – (no response) Question 26 – (1 response) Question 27 Aboriginal spirituality – 14 responses Refer to the comments for Question 1. Judaism – 18 responses To a large extent, the ‘sacred stories’ are Judaism, that is, beliefs, vales, rituals, worship and structures are all part of the ‘history’ of the Hebrew/Israelites/Jews as embodied in the ‘stories’. The task was simply to look at a number of the ‘stories’ and link them to the other phenomena. • Criterion 5

It was important to differentiate between the three types of stories, (i.e. myth, legend and parable and most candidates were careful to do this. Other than this, the wide range of material referred to by the different candidates makes it impossible to comment


Subject Code: RLP5C


helpfully on terminology, except for the general comment that terms were on the whole used appropriately and spelt correctly.

• Criterion 8

As most of the concepts were basic – b’rit, mitzvoth, monotheism, worship, festival, and so on – candidates generally had little trouble handling them.

• Criterion 9

Most candidates chose to present a series of stories, which they then analysed in terms of their ‘religious ideas’. Analyses were often disappointingly superficial. Abraham was popular, for instance, but most candidates seemed to know little of the terms b’rit or of the significance of the akedah.

Christianity – 1 response Refer to the comments for Question 1. Islam – 4 responses Hinduism – 2 responses Buddhism – 12 responses By way of a preface: those who wrote answers on Buddhism faced a problem that other candidates did not – candidates could not write about myths in this tradition. They had to find ways around this – most did by placing a significant emphasis on parables. In addition, there were several candidates who had prepared for a question on sacred texts: they tried to adapt what they had prepared by pointing out that sacred stories were included within the covers of sacred texts and then went ahead with their prepared material. A passing reference to ‘stories’ did not fulfill the expectations of the question, especially for criterion 9. • Criterion 5

Candidates outlined the teachings of Buddhism, especially the Three Universal Truths, the Four Noble Truths and the Noble Eightfold Path. Other terms pertinent to Buddhism were discussed and defined – though differences between the schools were seldom mentioned, so several important teaching of the Mahayana School, in particular, were usually missing. The good answers also discussed the characteristics of myths, legends and parables as narrative forms and how well they were suited to conveying essential beliefs and values.


Subject Code: RLP5C


• Criterion 8

This criterion required some subtlety – a subtlety most answers did not have. Many candidates simply ‘dumped’ the essential Buddhist teachings into lists or clumsy summaries. The good answers were able to point out Buddhist teachings conveyed in the hero-legend or in various parables. For far too many answers, there was no apparent link between the stories cited and the teachings they were alleged to contain.

• Criterion 9

Nearly all answers had the good sense to note that stories did convey religious teachings, but too many looked only at the hero legend or at a parable. Some looked at both. Examiners were hoping for a little more development than this. One outstanding answer spoke about the significance of the hero legend about Gautama, and then used a range of parables to illustrate the Triple Gem, the Three Universal Truths and the three parts of The Noble Eightfold Path touching lightly on a dozen parables in the process.

Question 28 Aboriginal spirituality – 1 response Refer to the comments for Question 1. Judaism – no responses Four scripts discovered incorrectly numbered – no comment. Christianity – 1 response Refer to the comments for Question 1. Islam – 4 response Hinduism – 4 response Buddhism – 30 responses

This question could have been written with Buddhism in mind. The main problem lay in the Theravadin/Mahavanan dichotomy. Candidates should specify which they are dealing with, in a question such as this, where the term ‘traditions’ could be used to refer to either or both. Most candidates, by statement or inference, wrote about the Theravadin tradition.


Subject Code: RLP5C


• Criterion 5

It was pleasing to see that some candidates were able to write about Theravada using consistently a Pali terminology, even though this is not demanded. There were, however, numerous problems with spelling. Candidates would be well advised to prepare a terminology for each tradition that they study, and refer to it regularly during the year, as well as during the revision period.

• Criterion 8

Most candidates were familiar with the basic concepts (anicca, anatta, dukkha, tanha, nirodha, magga, Noble Eightfold Path, nibbana). The better answers were able to specify the eight elements and explain what each meant, one even giving the names of them in both English and Pali.

• Criterion 9

The commonest reason for finding Buddhism attractive appeared to be that it didn’t require a deity and some extended this to indicating that there was therefore no problem of evil and suffering, unlike in the monotheistic religions. Others liked the idea that it was a discipline rather than simply obeying a set of rules of divine origin. A few ignored criterion 9 completely, a reminder that candidates must keep all the relevant criteria in mind while writing.

Question 29 – (18 responses) Most candidates tackled this by referring to the objections to the traditional arguments for the existence of god. Some candidates included a brief overview of the problem of evil and suffering as well as the objections to traditional arguments. Either approach was acceptable so long as the candidate answered from the ‘atheist’ viewpoint as the question asked for this specifically. Generally well answered, similar to question 3 in that weaker answers described the main arguments, stronger ones gave arguments for and against and evaluated them both. • Criterion 5

The better answers used some very interesting terms, such as ‘reductio ad absurdum’ to describe the form of the argument used by Anselm and Epicurus.

• Criterion 8

Most answers addressed this criterion very effectively, providing a thorough explanation of the main concepts.


Subject Code: RLP5C


• Criterion 9

Many candidates had difficulty providing an evaluation of arguments and responses. Some candidates made sure of a direct evaluation by using terms such as ‘persuasive’ or ‘weak’ to describe particular arguments or objections. For example: ‘…but this objection is not persuasive when one considers the theist’s response that God needs no cause as he exists outside the universe and therefore exists outside time and is eternal.’

Those who demonstrated the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments and drew an ‘overall’ conclusion which was consistent with what they had written in their essays, addressed criterion 9 reasonably effectively.

Question 30 – (132 responses) On the whole this question was well answered. Candidates demonstrated an impressive collective knowledge of theodicies. The best answers were able to identify the issues illuminated by the quotation and discuss the strengths of the alternate views they presented. • Criterion 5

A surprising number of candidates failed to make it clear what they were writing about. More often than not it was the same candidates who missed making important connections in their later discussion.

• Criterion 8

This criterion was well handled in most answers. While it was not required that candidates could specifically identify the quotation, the better answers were able to interpret it and deliberately address the relevant issues.

• Criterion 9

It was important for this criterion that candidates could discuss the strength of the various claims. The question, and this criterion, required more than simply pointing out that a theodicy has flaws, or briefly referring to a criticism.

Question 31 – (58 responses) This question posed a dilemma for candidates in trying to interpret what the examiner was asking for. There appears to be two questions that discuss how the person of Jesus is hidden and revealed in the gospels and then examine what modern biblical criticism has to say about the synoptic gospels.


Subject Code: RLP5C


While one or two candidates actually produced excellent answers to the question as it reads, the markers also agreed to accept answers to either of these questions. Most candidates chose to answer the second of the two possible questions outlined above and I will direct my comments to these responses. The best responses demonstrated a sound understanding of the synoptic problem using examples from the relevant gospels. They went on to discuss the major hypotheses, which have been constructed by biblical scholars in response to this problem and included a critical examination of the merits of the different theories. However a problem with many answers was the tendency to rush into very detailed (and often confusing!) accounts of the myriad theories about ‘who copied whom’. When this discussion was almost devoid of any description of the actual synoptic problem it was very difficult to gain above satisfactory marks. There is a concern that candidates are ‘dumping’ a whole series of theories under the title biblical criticism without including any evidence of familiarity with the actual material in the gospels. Perhaps it would be wiser to begin with a foundational understanding of the gospel texts then look at some of the criticisms in depth. Shallow and descriptive discussion of numerous theories does not demonstrate real understanding. • Criterion 5

Candidates were required to use and demonstrate understanding of terms such as gospel, synoptic, synoptic problem, single, double and triple traditions, oral tradition theory, relevant types of biblical criticism they chose to refer to – source, redaction and form.

• Criterion 8

Candidates were required to discuss the nature of the synoptic problem with reference to the actual gospels. They were also required to demonstrate an understanding of modern biblical criticism, with better answers outlining how it presents a sophisticated range of techniques to improve current understanding of the gospels. These candidates were able to accurately and succinctly outline several of the major hypotheses, which attempt to provide a solution to the synoptic problem.

• Criterion 9

Candidates were required to evaluate the various criticisms they had discussed, highlighting the relative merits and weaknesses inherent in these theories.

Question 32 – (27 responses) Candidates studying Environmentalism refer to question 6. Most responses to this question came from those discussing Secular Humanism. There was a handful of answers on Marxism and in the main the latter were weak. Answers on Marxism


Subject Code: RLP5C


seemed to rely for their structure on a single page from a book by Sherratt and Hawkin – Gods and Men. It is a useful little text, but examiners hoped that candidates would go beyond its limitations. • Criterion 5

The question could not have been more direct – it asked the candidates to ‘Define Atheistic Marxism, or Secular Humanism or Environmentalism.’ Three quarters of the answers took no notice of this request and sailed straight into a discussion of what was meant by the term ‘religion’. Markers could not ignore this omission. Nearly all candidates used Ninian Smart’s technique of describing religions through their seven ‘dimensions’. This was a sensible approach. Some added in Sherratt’s and Hawkin’s definitions for theistic, non-theistic and quasi-religions – adding a useful dimension to their essays. After applying Smart’s formula, most candidates noted that Secular Humanism could not be regarded as a religion; those discussing Marxism felt that on balance, Marxism as it is now practiced, could be regarded as a religion. If the candidates took the next step of using the Sherratt and Hawkin definition, they seemed to conclude that Secular Humanism and Marxism came close to being quasi religions, but pointed out that the adherents of these two world views would be unhappy with this as adherents suggest that there is no afterlife and that nothing exists beyond the material world.

• Criterion 8

Most candidates showed a good knowledge and understanding of the world views they were discussing, though candidates describing Secular Humanism seemed to have a better grasp of the beliefs of this world view than those describing Marxism. The subtleties of materialism, Dialectical Materialism and Historical Materialism were barely mentioned, if at all, though to their credit, most essays on Marxism mentioned Marx’s views on the epiphenomenon of religion.

• Criterion 9

Candidates performed reasonably well on this criterion. Most used Smart’s ‘Seven Legged Beast’ to help them organise their analysis – they used evidence from one or several religious traditions to compare or to contrast with Secular Humanism. This also enabled them to give a good deal of information which was useful for criterion 8. All answers did ‘...attribute appropriate weight to opposing or affirming evidence...’ and the examiner felt that they rather enjoyed the process of coming to a conclusion. Some particularly strong answers used quotations from Marxists or Secular Humanists to sum-up or to suggest why these particular world views should not be regarded as religions in themselves as belief in the supernatural was seen as an offence to the rationality of the writers.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Question 33 – (no responses) Question 34 – (98 responses) This question was generally quite well answered with candidates presenting some very favourable comments with regard to approaches to ethical decision-making. Very few candidates simply wrote about an ethical issue and gave no information about the different approaches that are taken. However, while most candidates were able to give some analysis about the various approaches, only a few remembered to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of the arguments but those who did gained high marks for their efforts. Care needs to be taken with the terms ‘pro-life’ and ‘pro-choice’ when candidates are presenting arguments about the abortion debate as they often did not refer to the differing approaches that are needed for this question. Care also needs to be taken to define terms such as ‘ethics, ethical issue, deontology, teleology’ and other technical terms to do with the issue chosen. Question 35 – (17 responses) A difficult question, which, did not seem to reflect the content of the syllabus as detailed in the supplement. Some candidates successfully reframed the question to enable them to include views of ‘what is a person’ from notable philosophers. Better answers attempted to develop an argument for why we should or shouldn’t include emotion in our decision-making. Some excellent answers contained references to Hume’s claim that reason is a slave to emotion, Kant’s that we should only use our reason not our emotion when making decisions and provided discussion of ‘blind emotion’ as opposed to ‘reasoned emotion’. • Criterion 5

Candidates had to work hard to find some terms to include, some more interesting definitions included ‘tabula rasa’, ‘cogito ergo sum’, ‘will to power’. A definition of key terms such as ‘emotion’ and ‘reason’ was included by some candidates but unfortunately not all.

• Criterion 8

A wide range of concepts were included, better answers explained that both emotion and reason could be seen as defining qualities of ‘personhood’.

• Criterion 9

The better answers attempted to evaluate whether there was a stronger case for including or discounting emotion when making decisions.


Subject Code: RLP5C


Question 36 – (5 responses) Question 37 – (27 responses) No comment received from the marking examiner. Question 38 – (3 responses) Question 39 – (2 responses)

All correspondence should be addressed to: Tasmanian Qualifications Authority

PO Box 147, Sandy Bay 7006 Ph: (03) 6233 6364 Fax: (03) 6224 0175

Email: [email protected] Internet: http://www.tqa.tas.gov.au

t a s m a n i a n religion and philosophy c e r t i f i c ... · shahada or tawhid, ... pillars...

Documents