The Intermittent Student

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 23

2012-03-01T09:00:00.001Z

3 March •

This week starts early to try and get a head start on this topic and read in to what appears to be an almost impossible question for TMA05, "Can your mind extend beyond your brain?".

Book 5: MIND Chapter 1, Descartes and dualism

A222 Exploring Philosophy - End of Week 22

2012-02-29T18:35:00.001Z

I guess with the final submission of the TMA, Week 22 effectively ends now.

I must say that the Open University submission website is pretty robust as regards dealing with crap internet connections. At home submissions take seconds, tonight with the reported WiFi Connections speeds varying between 700kbps and 48Mbps, and occasionally nothing at all, the submission took over four and a half minutes and while other website were reporting no or slow connection, and an inability to contact the server, the OU page just kept the 'loading' icon going round and round and round and round until it eventually confirmed the file had been delivered.Pretty impressive really.

Tomorrow, its on with Week 23 and the next book on MIND.

A222 Exploring Philosophy - Internet Problems Hampering TMA Submission

2012-02-28T00:25:00.001Z

Nearly there......

Working away from home this week which brings other challenges to study and writing essays, but also the challenge of poor and unreliable internet, not helped by a ship dropping its anchor on East Africa's fibre link.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-17179544

I guess these things happen, BUT WHY THIS WEEK !

As I've previously experienced Kenyan internet problems, I'd already agreed with my tutor that I could submit as many partially finished essays as I want, in case I don't get to submit anything, and they will mark the last successful submission received before the deadline.

I'll continue to tweak away at this essay, even though further edits may never get submitted :-(

The internet is painfully slow here, I may never complain about UK internet speeds again !!!

A222 Exploring Philosophy - TMA 4 Nearly finished.

2012-02-26T10:55:00.000Z

This seems to have been the most straight forward TMA yet, which makes me think I have missed something, but as the question is straightforward and pretty much based only on Chapter 1 the outline is,

Intro - what I'm going to do.
Set Scene - Descartes distrust of knowledge from authority.
Explain Method of Doubt
Criticisms of Method of Doubt
Criticisms of Descartes need for certainty in knowledge and is his foundation of knowledge based on certainty realistic and even desirable.
Comclusion

The motivation to write this TMA has been the hardest thing, I may be getting a bit study fatigue as it has been relentless study for over a year now - glad now I didn't try and to do two overlapping courses simultaneously, and I maybe should have had a break between courses - too late now.

So four days to get the essay finished and polished.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 22

2012-02-25T12:32:00.000Z

25 February •

Assignment week

Assessment resources Resource page

Events

Assignment: TMA 04 (cut-off date 1 March)

A222 Exploring Philosophy - End of Week 21

2012-02-24T13:10:00.000Z

Another week down and another week torn between reading the next chapters of the book and cracking on with the TMA.

This is one aspect of this course which I believe is very poor. When doing my last course, DD101, it was necessary to cover all of the reading for that section of the course and then attempt the TMA. With this course it has, so far, been possible to write the TMA after only covering the first chapter or two of each section.

I suspect that this will mean come the exam there will be a lot of frantic reading of unread course material, and probably not just by me.

I have about 1400 words done on this TMA, so a bit more to add and then that will do....

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Writing TMA04

2012-02-21T21:15:00.000Z

Oh.... what a struggle, not because its a particularly difficult TMA question,

"Explain how René Descartes applies his method of doubt and evaluate whether the method delivers Descartes’s objective of finding certainty."

probably the opposite, the answer seems so obvious that it is all a bit pedestrian and predictable.

Oh well, 800 words from tonight's start, hopefully finish on Thursday and have the weekend to mull it over and adapt and edit....

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 21

2012-02-18T14:39:00.000Z

18 February •

Book 4: KNOWLEDGE Chapter 4, Kuhn

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 20

2012-02-17T19:23:00.001Z

A bit of an odd week, what with school holidays and being caught between writing the TMA and reading the next chapter, so have sort of achieved neither.... Although I have helped my son complete a mock GCSE Maths paper even if they seem to teach the kids very odd ways of doing Maths these days. Makes me realise that I'm getting old :-)

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 20

2012-02-11T14:37:00.000Z

11 February •

Book 4: KNOWLEDGE Chapter 3, Scientific knowledge: general remarks and Popper

A222 Exploring Philosophy - Last Lot of Study Materials Delivered

2012-02-08T14:09:00.000Z

Received another cardboard box with course books today at work. After the initial confusion of wondering what I had bought from Amazon, and indeed when I had bought it - which was probably more worrying (possibly the effect of dreams and evil daemons) it has turned out to be the last two books for the A222 course - MIND and POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY.

Its strange that it now feels as though the course is coming to a close when in actual fact we have just gone past half way.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA04

2012-02-07T19:28:00.000Z

The question for TMA04 is,

"Explain how René Descartes applies his method of doubt and evaluate whether the method delivers Descartes’s objective of finding certainty."

Can't help feeling that this question will get a response that is somewhat thin.

The description/explanation of the application is pretty straight forward and I guess examples backing up the reasons for his doubts will be needed.Once this has been done evaluating the method needs to be the bulk of the essay, so I suppose I'd better crowbar Hume, Popper and Kuhn in there somewhere, though not entirely sure where yet.

1500 words may be a bit of a struggle......

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Tutorial for Chapter 4

2012-02-05T13:51:00.000Z

Worthwhile tutorial at the weekend. The general census of opinion was that Descartes has dug himself a hole that just can't get out of.

Had he been trying to prove his existence he was probably about there with "I think, therefore I am", even if, as pointed out, this is a conclusion with only one premise, so the best he can really say is "I think".

But as a foundation for knowledge his 'Method of Doubt' and his extreme scepticism leaves him doubting too much and therefore no certainties.

Scepticism and knowledge interesting subjects to study, although some colleagues of mine were surprised and amused that I was learning about sceptisism and not actually teaching it - so I'm not sure that that says about me :-)

We also looked at Hume and inductive versus deductive knowledge and its value, and talked briefly about Popper and scientific knowledge.

So about a month to write TMA04, which we've now done all the reading for, and read up on Hume and Popper.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 19

2012-02-04T14:36:00.000Z

4 February •

Book 4: KNOWLEDGE Chapter 2, Hume on induction

Book 4 discussion ForumNG
Available from 21 January 2012.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA03 Marked and Returned

2012-02-02T14:39:00.000Z

Another solid Pass 2, just shy of 80%. Most of the criticism of the essay seemed to be about not mentioning Act and Rule Utilitarianism, which was a deliberate decision on my part based on the fact that the question was about their views on hedonism, and because I had been marked down previously for going off topic.

Oh well.... could have been worse, now to concentrate on the very overrated ideas of Descartes before Saturday's tutorial.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Disappointed with Descartes

2012-02-01T10:16:00.006Z

I can't help feeling a bit disappointed by Descartes whole 'Cogito Ergo Sum', I was expecting a bit more - and it took a lot of pages of reading to end in a bit of an anti-climax.

I agree that your senses can be fooled, and so when he discards all knowledge based on sensory perception I can see the reasoning behind that.

To then discard what you can presently see and feel on the grounds that it could all be a dream, is a bit more of a step towards the unlikely, but has some validity, but only some.

But most problematic was to then discard all science knowledge such as 2 + 2 = 4 because an evil supernatural spirit may be playing with you mind. This is just fanciful and I doubt he'd be able to get away with such reasoning these days.

This however leaves him with his one true fact. If I am thinking, then I must exist, and Descartes says he can rely on nothing else.

This obviously gives him a bit of a problem regarding building all knowledge on this one true fact, and for this to be the foundation of all certainty. Descartes then falls on the time proven crutch of those who have run out of ideas and invokes the idea of God. Descartes says that if he has nothing else, he has an idea of a God which God must have put there, so he must exist.

This may be his lesser known idea "I am thinking of you, so you may exist" - not quite as snappy a line.

But having discounted the possibility of 2+2=4 being true due to a evil supernatural entity playing with his mind, why would the idea of a God not also come from this evil supernatural entity.

I know which one I am surer about being factual.

Firstly, I think it more likely that the idea of God was put there by his parents and society.

Secondly, if Descartes was searching for certainty, having gotten down to the one certain fact, 'I think therefore I exist', it seems a bit of a cop out and counter intuitive to then rely on existence of God to further his ideas.

If there has been one concept or idea that has provoked more debate about its existence or not I have yet to find it.

So, it may be the most famous philosophical line ever written, but the theory behind it, to my mind, is full of holes.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : 3 Minute Guide to Descartes

2012-01-29T13:00:00.001Z

Below is one of many 3 Minutes Guides to philosophers, this one sets Descartes out in a way that helps engage more seriously with him once you've seen it.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 18

2012-01-28T10:26:00.001Z

28 January •

Book 4: KNOWLEDGE Chapter 1, Certainty and doubt: Descartes

Well, this is the start of the second half of the course - 3 books and TMAs down, 3 to go (plus the exam). It'll be finished before we know :-)

Book 4 discussion ForumNG
Available from 21 January 2012.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 17

2012-01-27T11:37:00.000Z

It was a bit 'turn the handle, churn out a TMA' this week. Now the wait is on to find out the mark. as I wrote somewhere before, the DD101 TMAs were a bit easier to judge and the scores seemed to be proportional to effort expended, this Philosophy lark seems a lot harder to judge.

I think I stuck rigidly to answering the question and added in my own examples, which seems to be the way forward, even referenced Red Dwarf's 'Better than Life' - not too sure how helpful that will be in the final analysis.

So now on to Book 4, Knowledge, and from the little I have read so far this looks proper interesting, Rene Descartes and scepticism, right up my street !!!

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA03 Submitted

2012-01-24T12:16:00.000Z

Well that is a first, submission a whole 2 days before the deadline, never done that before, and finally trimmed it to 1998 words, so decided to stop messing about with it and submit.

Now to try and motivate myself to crack on with book 4.... or wait until the weekend.

1 Year of Open University Study

2012-01-24T01:08:00.000Z

The DD101 course website opened exactly one year ago, so I guess this is effectively the end of year one of my PPE Degree (if I ever get there).

The most surprising thing is that this blog has received over 15000 page views in this first year, and that was never expected as this was basically a motivational device to keep me on track.

Still, now DD101 in the bag, and half way through the TMAs for A222, just 4 more courses to go !!!

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA03 word count growing

2012-01-23T21:44:00.000Z

Not sure how this is possible.

Sat down to do a final read through of the essay before submission, started at 1850 words, tweaked it here, re-arranged a sentence there, added a reference, checked the word count - 2046.

So I seem to have taken a step back from a final read to now needing to edit about 50 words out - I should just have submitted it. It is always the same, it is the last 5% of tweaking and tarting about that takes up far more than 5% of the time.

Argh !!

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA03 nearly done....

2012-01-22T17:59:00.000Z

Despite 2 cracking football matches on TV this afternoon, I now have the TMA pretty much complete. I am waiting for it to be proof read and then I'll read it through a couple more times, but it is about ready to go.

This is the first assignment that I have not struggled to get under the word count, but as the word count is a pretty wide 1500 to 2000 words, I'm hoping that at 1850 I've answered the question as fully as I need to.

I was marked down in the first TMA of this course for including the ideas of Hume and Parfit when the question asked specifically about Locke, and that was really because in the last course (DD101), the essay answers needed to know about all you'd read in that section of the course, so that is what I did in this course's (A222) first TMA.

So in this TMA I have stuck rigidly to the question of views on hedonism and avoided the temptation to wander into the discussion on 'act' or 'rule' utilitarianism - we'll see when the mark comes back if this was the correct way to answer the question.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 17

2012-01-21T12:14:00.001Z

21 January •

Assignment week

Assessment resources Resource page

Events

Assignment: TMA 03 (cut-off date 26 January

Working on first draft. Have about 750 words with the introduction, definition of terms, description of Bentham and Mill's hedonism, going in to the criticisms of both views. Then need to explain why these are not adequate and write a conclusion.

I think I will carry on with this until its sort of finished. Re-read Chapter 2, and the Tutorial Forum regarding hedonism - make sure I haven't missed anything, then edit and re-write as necessary. Hope to finish draft by end of Sunday, then a couple of days for the re-write.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 16

2012-01-20T15:22:00.000Z

This looked like it was going to be an interesting and challenging week, with regard to discussing the legal and moral implications on abortion. However, the one aspect that I was most interested in - when does a fetus become a person - was not discussed. Just the fact that a fetus had potential to become a person, but not the point when we should argue that it has.

The thought experiment on the violinist was not that gripping, and all in all, the chapter felt a bit thin.

Now I have 6 days to write the TMA about Bentham and Mill's hedonism, then it is on to book 4 - this course is flying by......

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 16

2012-01-14T11:04:00.000Z

14 January •

Book 3: ETHICS Chapter 4, The morality of abortion

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : The Only Way is Ethics, Bentham & Mills

2012-01-12T18:07:00.002Z

I had a really good stab at this part of the book, started really well in fact, felt I was getting somewhere and then the rest of my life got in the way.......

I have a presentation to give on Tuesday which is taking up too much of my time, but on the upside it looks like I will be traveling for about 9 hrs this weekend so maybe some reading time there.

The other problem with this course is that each section seems to have a book of 4 chapters, one a general introduction, the second is the TMA, which makes me think 3 & 4 will be the exam questions. However, all this does at this point is allow you to slide on reading knowing that in the short term for the TMA all you need is to read one chapter thoroughly - but course of action this will come home to roost in June if other chapters have not been covered :-(

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Study will recommence today..... after the Man City v Man Unt Match

2012-01-08T11:08:00.000Z

Yesterday was spent carrying out overdue household chores and jobs that had been put off for some time. I think I must have had 6 trips to the trip with car loads of stuff we should have gotten rid of ages ago.

The plan was then to catch up with the study today, but with the football live on terrestrial TV its gonna be pretty difficult to get any reading done with that going on in the background. So with any luck, study will start from about 3PM.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 15

2012-01-07T01:02:00.000Z

7 January •

Book 3: ETHICS Chapter 3, Kant: the good will

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 14 & TMA02 Marked and Returned

2012-01-06T12:08:00.001Z

I have received my marked TMA02, and it was an encouraging jump, although just to the other end of a Pass 2, so still below the marks for DD101.

I don't think I could have put any more effort in to writing this TMA, possibly it was not an easy subject to approach with an open mind which may have hampered my critical thinking slightly :-)

However, on the up side, my conclusion that the theory of evolution destroyed the argument for a Christian god was accepted and positively commemted on.

So, I'd better get on with Chapter 3, as I am now the best part of two weeks behind where I should be, although Ethics is an interesting subject.

Also, the author of Book 3 is available to discuss his book with students which should be interesting and worthwhile.Shame that the author of Book 2, Timothy Chappell, didn't offer students the same opportunity to discuss his very partisan and biased view of the Philosophy of Religion......

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Elluminate Tutorial, but TMA02 still not returned.

2012-01-05T13:04:00.000Z

I experienced the 'Elluminate' on-line tutorial for the first time and it was a bit of a mixed bag. About 6 students logged in and there were the expected connection, audio and punctuality problems, but once it got going it was useful, although we probably got about 20 minutes good discussion from the hour, but better than nothing and some useful pointers for the next TMA.

Although, not having the last TMA marked and returned is severely hampering my motivation to move on and engage with this Chapter. I know the Festive period has gotten in the way, but the submission date was 15th December, and its now the 5th January.

Having written this, it will probably arrive this afternoon :-)

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 14

2011-12-31T09:59:00.000Z

31 December •(but I doubt anything is going to get done for a couple of days)

Book 3: ETHICS Chapter 2, Bentham and Mill: maximising happiness

Book 3 discussion

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 13

2011-12-29T09:52:00.001Z

Still no mark for TMA 02 and it is not now expected until after the New Year, so this fact combined with the festive period is making it a bit difficult to get stuck in to Book 3 - Ethics.

I was also hoping for the result so I could make an informed choice about starting another Level 2 course in February, but as it is unless I get a really high score back before the 4th Jan, I think I will stick to one course at a time.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 13

2011-12-24T09:17:00.003Z

24 December •

Christmyth Festive Period and New Year Break

Best wishes to everyone over the

'Festival of Santa Clause and the Orange Chocolate Egg'

and I wish everyone all the best for 2012

HAPPY HOGMANAY !!!!

see you in 2012.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA 02 Submitted

2011-12-17T13:25:00.000Z

I got a couple of days extension due to working abroad for the last 2 weeks and only arriving back in the UK on Friday. The TMA was written, but I just needed a couple of hours to tidy up references as the massive course text book was just too heavy to carry abroad, and I couldn't get access to any of the internet audios either.

Anyway, it is done now and just shy of the 2000 words. I could have done with a higher word count but I think I've got it all in. Teleological arguments for existence of God all demolished by theory of evolution, Cosmological arguments themselves demolish the argument for interventionist Gods, but leave room for a deist God.

Also found out that the University where Behe teaches have effectively denounced him as the creationist nutter that he is - check out this link Lehigh University Statement

Department Position on Evolution and "Intelligent Design"

The faculty in the Department of Biological Sciences is committed to the highest standards of scientific integrity and academic function. This commitment carries with it unwavering support for academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas. It also demands the utmost respect for the scientific method, integrity in the conduct of research, and recognition that the validity of any scientific model comes only as a result of rational hypothesis testing, sound experimentation, and findings that can be replicated by others.

The department faculty, then, are unequivocal in their support of evolutionary theory, which has its roots in the seminal work of Charles Darwin and has been supported by findings accumulated over 140 years. The sole dissenter from this position, Prof. Michael Behe, is a well-known proponent of "intelligent design." While we respect Prof. Behe's right to express his views, they are his alone and are in no way endorsed by the department. It is our collective position that intelligent design has no basis in science, has not been tested experimentally, and should not be regarded as scientific.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 12

2011-12-17T09:15:00.002Z

17 December •

Book 3: ETHICS Chapter 1, Plato: why be just?

Book 3 discussion ForumNG
Available from 10 December 2011.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA 02

2011-12-12T12:50:00.003Z

‘The modern theory of evolution demolishes the design argument for the existence of God.’ Does it?

This has not been an easy TMA to write, the question appears wrong when related to the course text, and then I have my own prejudices and ideas to put to the side in order to write the essay.

I've got most of it written, just need to tidy up and re-read it some more, but the problem is i think I may be too off track....

Oh well. On a happier note, I have finished Greg Graffin's book "Anarchy Evolution", and very interesting and useful it was too, it will be referenced in the TMA.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 11

2011-12-10T09:14:00.001Z

10 December •

Assignment week

Assessment resources Resource page

Events

Assignment: TMA 02 (cut-off date 15 December)

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Course Result

2011-12-06T15:49:00.000Z

Distinction - so well pleased with that result, just a shame it counts for nothing in the final analysis.

So that is the end of 'DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences' as far as this blog is concerned.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 10

2011-12-03T09:12:00.005Z

3 December •

Book 2: THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION Chapter 4, Acts of God?

Book 2 discussion

A222-Exploring Philosophy : Change of Plan

2011-11-30T22:10:00.001Z

Ah, I'm off abroad with work for two weeks with limited access to Internet which is far from ideal, as the TMA is due before I get back - may have to ask for an extension as I'm not sure if I'll be able to submit the essay even if it is written.

This wasn't really part of the plan :-(

Ho hum

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 9

2011-11-26T09:12:00.001Z

26 November •

Book 2: THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION Chapter 3, Modern versions of the argument from design

Book 2 discussion

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Evolution of Religion

2011-11-23T19:30:00.034Z

After listening to Open University audio on the course website for week 9 titled ‘The Modern Argument from Design’, I think I can see undeniable evidence of the evolutionary process at work within the Christian explanation of ‘God's’ role in the creation of our world .

i. At first it was belief in the explanation of the creation of life as told in the bible's book of Genesis, and espoused by Aquinas.

Belief in this explanation was encouraged through the torture and murder of unbelievers after being accused of the crime of Heresy. Obviously this sort of behaviour, by the church, could not go on for ever, but it did go on for over 1800 years (that's eighteen hundred or one thousand eight hundred years) with the last known heretic executed by sentence of the Roman Catholic Church being Cayetano Ripoll in 1826 (Wikipedia). With more and more people free to question the obvious inaccuracies and flaws in the biblical account, this belief had to evolve.

ii. The original belief therefore evolved to ‘well your obvioulsy not supposed to take the bible literally, but God did made everything - honest' as put forward by Cleanthis.

This held ground for a while until people now getting used to the ability to question the church without fear of recrimination asked why some bits of the world were just a bit crap.

iii. Belief then underwent a form of natural selection when Paley decided that only the selected good bits of the world were made by God. But he didn't explain who made the bad bits though.

Then with the growing mountain of evidence for Darwin's theories, and evolution now being taught in schools the next big step was the evolution of Creationism to Intellegent Design.

After the 1987 Edwards v. Aguillard decision in which the U.S. Supreme Court barred the required teaching of creation science from public schools but allowed evolutionary theory on the grounds of scientific validity, some creationists felt that new strategies and language were necessary to return religious notions to science classrooms.The supplementary school textbook Of Pandas and People was altered to change references to creationism to use the term intelligent design. (Wikipedia)

iv. So the 4th step in this evolutionary process is 'Intelligent Design' within the evolutionary process described as ‘irreducible complexity’ by Behe.

In Kitzmiller v. Dover Area School District, the first direct challenge brought in United States federal courts to an attempt to mandate the teaching of intelligent design on First Amendment grounds, Behe was called as a primary witness for the defence and asked to support the idea that intelligent design was legitimate science. Some of the most crucial exchanges in the trial occurred during Behe's cross-examination, where his testimony would prove devastating to the defence. Behe was forced to concede that "there are no peer reviewed articles by anyone advocating for intelligent design supported by pertinent experiments or calculations which provide detailed rigorous accounts of how intelligent design of any biological system occurred and that his definition of 'theory' as applied to intelligent design was so loose that astrology would also qualify. Earlier during his direct testimony, Behe had argued that a computer simulation of evolution he performed with Snoke shows that evolution is not likely to produce certain complex biochemical systems. Under cross examination however, Behe was forced to agree that "the number of prokaryotes in 1 ton of soil are 7 orders of magnitude higher than the population [it would take] to produce the disulfide bond" and that "it's entirely possible that something that couldn't be produced in the lab in two years... could be produced over three and half billion years."

So Behe’s irreducible complexity of the flagella was shown to be just plain wrong, so this 'belief' then mutated.

v. The new mutant belief was that 'the infinite complexity of physical set-up' such as the complexity of DNA and RNA proves God's existence, as suggested by Meyer.

However this 'belief' also suffers from the fact that with the earth being an estimated 4.5 BILLION years old, there has been plenty of time of things to get complicated. Some theists have said that the chances of a protein molecule forming are infinitesimally small, they liken it to trying to through a six with a dice a 1000 times in a row - pretty unlikely I'm sure you'll agree........

..........and it would be but for the fact that evolution is an iterative process and so all you have to do is throw a 6 (that's 1six) then you could throw 2,3,4,6 (that's 2 sixes) 1,4,3,2,2,6 (that's 3 sixes) 2,3 6 (that's 4 sixes) - do you see where this is going......

....... so in the 4.5 BILLION years since the earth formed, I think you could imagine throwing over one thousand sixes without any problems at all.

So to the latest version of the explanation of God's involvement in the design of the earth.....

vi. 'Fine Tuning - The Goldilocks Principle', everything in the universe had to be ‘just right’ for life to form, and then it sort of cracks on best it can.

This description doesn't seem to leave much room for the Christian God of the bible to be recognisable as the grand designer. It seems that there is a constant rear-guard action by Christians to try and keep the explanation of God's design ahead of the scientific discoverys that are debunking religion.........

It also seems to have gone full circle to Aquinas' second way that 'something started it all and we, in the absence of fact or knowledge, shall call this God'.

There is an interesting alternative theory from Naturalists that says that RELIGION is actually part of the Human evolutionary process that Man will transit through. Man created religion and as we evolve so does it, so like the tail and body hair that we all once had, religion will be shed when it is no longer necessary......... I think this time will be soon upon us :-)

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Should we allow Creationists to vote

2011-11-22T17:44:00.003Z

This course has encouraged me to challenge my preconceptions and try and look at the 'Philosophy of Religion' from both sides. However, I am finding that choosing which Creationists or Intelligent Design publications to read is an almost impossible decision, there are simply too many of these nutters on the internet.

Luckily, help was at hand. Dave Gorman wrote in his book 'Googlewacking' (which I highly recommend, its a great read) about meeting a Dr Gish, who was a 'famous' Creationist. Dave Gorman is a comedian, so I accepted his description of Dr Gish as you would with any comical creation - enough truth to hold the humorous fiction together. But was I in for a surprise, this guy really exists.....and he is as mental as described....

http://www.nwcreation.net/duanegish.html

Reading the website and looking at the books he's written, I realise Dr Gish is not a comedy character dreamed up for our amusement - far more frightening that that, he is actually exactly as described.

These are just some of his books and ideas.....

"the strong Biblical theme makes it unique among dinosaur resource books. Offers plausible explanations for believing that man walked with dinosaurs."

"With devastating facts and logic, Dr. Gish documents in detail, from the writings of evolutionists themselves, the complete absence of any true evolutionary transitional forms among the billions of fossilized animals in the earth's sedimentary rocks. Indeed, the fossil record offers compelling evidence for the special creation of man and each basic kind of plant and animal."

"Having challenged the humanistic religion of evolution, creation scientists have frequently endured the vicious attacks of those who endorse the theory of evolution. Creation's most respected debater examines the major arguments for and against special creation. In so doing, CRS board member Dr. Duane Gish, defends creation scientists against the distorted, inaccurate attacks of evolutionists."

"In six days God created the world and all therein! He has woven into His creation undeniable evidence that He alone is the author and sustainer of life. From dinosaurs to DNA, the story of creation is truly AMAZING!

At times, it presents a humorous look at the predicament in which evolution finds itself trying to explain that which only God can do.

Suggested level, 4th grade - adult."

This would be hilarious if it wasn't true.

This guy has a PhD in Biochemistry and was at Cornell University..... the same University Greg Graffin, of Bad Religion, went to and teaches at (see previous post) - it would certainly be interesting to know if the two met.

The creationist claims just get more and more bizarre, The Institute for Creation Research (http://www.icr.org) has an article "Did Humans Cause Dinosaur Extinctions?" in which they write,

"Thus, it stands to reason that if humans primarily cause the current extinctions of megafauna, then they may have caused past extinctions as well. That could help explain the plethora of legends, found in all cultures, of heroes killing dragons, which were probably dinosaurs in many cases.

Why did the dinosaurs go extinct? One very likely factor—among others, such as climate changes after the Flood—is the same reason the black rhinoceros and so many other megafauna have died out: People moved in and eliminated them."

I do not know how to even begin to discuss the origin of the planet with people who can hold and believe in such statements....... where would you start when it is impossible to argue from a position of well established fact. They seem to be hanging this 'theory' (its not really a theory) on myths and legends of made up monsters (of which we have NO fossil remains), to argue that dinosaurs (of which we have carbon dated fossil remains) were made extinct by humans (which by all known fossil remains did not exist when the dinosaurs did).

The facts are that Humans did not co-exist with dinosaurs, the Flintstones is a child's cartoon not a documentary, it is not based on fact.

So if creationists are this 'stupid', you have to ask yourself is it at all sensible that they are permitted to vote.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Classic Arguments from Design

2011-11-21T19:37:00.005Z

The first part of the text book looked at arguments supporting the existence of God starting with Aquinas. Aquinas’ second way states that 'something' must have started the series of events that got us to where we are. That is a statement which is easy to accept, however Aquinas says that the 'something' that started this series of events is what “everyone calls God”. Aquinas offers no definition, explanation or proof of what “God” is, so his “second way” could be equally be describing a deity or an event of quantum physics such as the big bang.

So, this week's reading is the 'Classic Argument from Design: Cleanthis & Paley'.

David Hume used the character Cleanthis to argue in favour of the existence of God. Cleanthis' argument equates the world to a complicated man-made machine or object – which is a poor analogy.

Cleanthis talks about the world being a machine with an “accuracy which ravishes into admiration all men”. However the world is far from perfect and Cleanthis has no explanation for inclusion of famines, floods, earthquakes, tsunamis, disease and volcanoes within the design of this great precision machine.

Should any man-made machine found to be so poorly designed, I think you would find that nobody would own up to designing it – so perhaps Cleanthis is actually correct, and this explains the absence of god – he’s like a stroppy builder and has simply walked of the job in disgust.

Cleanthis also suggests that the cause of the natural world is the same as the cause of man-made machines ( i.e. designed ), but this would only hold true if the natural world could be replicated multiple times to the exact same plan/design. So this sub-conclusion is false or at least unsubstantiated.

But even if Cleanthis’ shaky main conclusion, that the world was caused to exist through an intelligent designer is accepted, it still suffers from the same problem as Aquinas in that the final answer, God, is undefined and could equally be an event created through quantum physics (the big bang) as an intelligent designer, as depicted in the Abrahamic religious view of God.

Paley's argument is a refined version of the argument put forward by Cleanthis. Paley says those structures in nature that have precise organisation and functionality must have had a designer. This begs the question who designed the structures in nature that are less perfect, also many of the structures he referenced as complex in the late 1700s can now be explained through evolution, reducing the need for his designer.

The next chapter is on the modern Intelligent Design 'theories' - I can't wait.

Intelligent Design seems to be a bit of a rear guard action for 'Creationism', as Christians who realise that the 'explanations' given in the bible are gradually unraveling and being proven to be nonsense, for example the cartoon below.......

Source: http://unfollowingjesus.com/

Go on..... have a look.....its an interesting website !!!!

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 8

2011-11-19T00:32:00.000Z

19 November •

Book 2: THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION Chapter 2, The classic argument from design

Book 2 discussion

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 7

2011-11-18T13:06:00.001Z

Philosophy of Religion : Evolution v Creation

This has been a long week. Partly because I started this part of the course early after submitting TMA01 and partly because I was then waiting on the TMA to be marked - it always seems to take ages even if it is returned reasonably quickly.

Then there was the challenge of dealing with a subject I'm having difficulty engaging with. If I have learned anything about myself in the last week, its that I was a lapsed atheist - and this is very deliberately writen in the past tense. This doesn't seem to have been a big part of my life except when I come into contact with ideas that twist science and fact to support superstition, and then it just really annoys me. Creation / intelligent design versus evolution is such a subject.

Anyway, time to engage with the course material and work towards answered the second TMA question which is,

‘The modern theory of evolution demolishes the design argument for the existence of God.’ Does it?

My initial thought is yes it does and no it doesn't.

Those who believe in science and observable evidence will understand the explanation and evidence of the theory of evolution and will discount 'creationism', even under the guise of 'intelligent design'.

Those who believe in a supreme being, who intervenes in our world and has 'designed' all that is around us are not going to accept the theory of evolution because it is contrary to the teaching of the bible. Although these people may now have to admit that the earth is not flat, that it is not the center of the universe and that it is older than 6000 years - I doubt they are really to admit that the theory of evolution explains things far better than a grand designer.

Anyway, you can only imagine my delight at discovering that Greg Graffin singer with one of my favorite bands 'Bad Religion' has now written a book "Faith, Science and Bad Religion: In A World Without God". Doctor Graffin (@DoctorGraffin for those on twitter) has a PHD in Zoology from Cornell University and lectures there in evolutionary science and biology.

His song lyrics are always intelligent and interesting so I'm looking forward to reading the book - especially to see if there are some relevant quotes for TMA02. It is only available via Amazon in the USA at present so not sure when I'll get the book delivered.

Below are three short interviews about his book......

and how you may better recognise him.....

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA01 Marked & Returned

2011-11-15T13:22:00.001Z

It would appear that there is a bit of a gulf between Level 1 and Level 2 courses, or maybe between Social Science and Philosophy, or maybe I just had a very lenient tutor for my first course, but for whatever reason I just managed to scrape a Pass 2 on this TMA.

Some very encouraging feedback and valid points from my tutor, so some positives and suggestions to think about. So, need to crack on with the next one and improve my critical thinking.

Update:
I asked my tutor for a bit more feedback on where I lost marks, and they looked at my TMA and decided that they had possibly marked harshly and agreed to remark, which I hadn't asked for but seems very a very reasonable and fair thing for them to do. So, as well as getting some additional info about where I had lost marks (my essay wandered off of the question asked at one point), my essay was re-marked as mid-70s, which feels a bit better.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Facebook Group - A222 Exploring Philosophy Oct 11 start

2011-11-14T17:32:00.000Z

There is a friendly and supportive Facebook Group for those studying A222 at,

A222philosophy

It is useful for fresh perspectives, rather than be confined to the regional tutor groups on the OU website.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Religion without objectivity !

2011-11-12T09:51:00.000Z

I’ve only read to page 23 and listened to the first two chapter audios, and I might being missing something, but I am already somewhat underwhelmed by the rigour of the arguments and discussion in the course text and learning materials – it appears, so far, somewhat less than objective.

At the bottom of page 20 the author says,

‘Have a go at making yourself believe this:

Custard is really spaghetti’

And from this ‘experiment’ makes the huge and illogical leap to the statement that,

‘So it is hard to see how you would be able to make yourself believe that God exists, unless you think that there is good evidence that God exists.’

I am missing something here.

This appears to me to be ridiculous, the experiment would have more value to me if he’d said,

‘Have a go at making yourself believe this:

Custard is really spaghetti knowing that…..

You have been told all your life by authority figures, parents and teachers that Custard is really Spaghetti and you were initiated in to this belief as a baby without any conscious choice in the matter, and this belief has been re-enforced all your life by custom and culture.

In every town you visit there is a big building devoted to the belief in Spaghetti Custard. There are many books on the subject of Spaghetti Custard, and history tells us that in the past some people did question the whole custard spaghetti thing, but burning them at the stake seemed to dissuade others from voicing similar opinions. There are festivals to Custard Spaghetti dotted round the year in which we give gifts and thanks for a yellow and al-dente future, although the Custardy Spaghetti message is lost somewhat in the marketing.

If you are good when you die you go to a sweet, warm and yellowy heaven, if your bad you suffer continued Penne-tence . There are other people, in other lands, who believe in a different carbohydrate based sweet or pudding, and wars have been waged in their name. Lastly, tradition and culture dictates that the three major milestones of birth, marriage and death are marked through Spaghetti Custard rituals.

Now would you believe that Custard is really Spaghetti without any real evidence…… I’d have to say…..yes you probably would.

I see the same problem in the audio ‘debate’. The theists are all sincere, intelligent and no doubt good people, but they all talk about their faith as though they came to the decision to follow their particular faith from a ‘blank canvas’ after much examining of the facts and testing of truths in a completely open and objective manner. Then having examined every possible position and religion they then made the decision that the faith they chose was right for them.

However, I suspect (although I have no proof) that they were actually born in to their faith and it is the same as the rest of their family. Social situation and cultural expectations must surely be a major factor in determining the faith they follow, and so the influence of accident of birth is the biggest factor in which faith you follow rather than pure belief in a truth, and surely this cannot be discounted.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 7

2011-11-12T01:43:00.000Z

12 November •

Book 2: THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION Chapter 1, Introducing the philosophy of religion

Book 2 discussion

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : FSM & The Open University

2011-11-09T20:33:00.001Z

Book 2: THE PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION

I have to be honest, I'm not looking forward to this part of the course. I'm a believer in the quote (sorry don't know who) 'Where knowledge ends, religion begins'.

I can understand that humans needed an explanation of why things happen, and this led them to believe in gods of whatever type. Having somebody to blame for crop failure, earth quakes, eclipses is fine - until you understand why these things happen - then your divine being is pointless.

Religion has been used through the ages to subjugate the poor and prop up oppressive rulers - and it continues today. Nearly all scientific steps forward were retarded by the church, as every scientific explanation chips away at the reasons for belief. From the working of the solar system to the explanation of the earth being a sphere the church has persecuted those with ideas that did not fit with their teachings, I could go on but that is not what prompted this post.

Having sent in my assignment I decided to look at the next chapter and as usual checked out the End of Chapter Quiz to get an idea of what is coming up.

Question 1:

Option a. a giant spaghetti monster.

Great ! I thought this book may actually be written from an objective point of view which considers religion from every conceivable angle, and actually looks at the alternative ideas of the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster. It must do, I thought, its the answer 'Option A'.

But then I though that the lack of capitalisation for the Flying Spaghetti Monster was just disrespectful, and also is said 'a' Flying Spaghetti Monster, implying that there is more than one - when it should surely have been 'the' FSM, as there is only the one true FSM. You'd think an academic 'specialising' in the philosophy of religion would have known that!!!

This was troubling indeed.......

I searched the electronic version of the course text book for the terms Flying, Spaghetti and Monster in a mixture of cases and found only two hits - both on the same page, one referring to the other.

In case you can't read it is says,

Unreasonable Hope : If I say ' I do believe in fairies' often enough and loud enough, the Flying Spaghetti Monster will bring Tinker Bell back to life (see Figure 3.8).

This is a ridiculous thing for an academic to write. How can he possibly know this is unreasonable.... and why choose to use a metaphor with a fictional character (Tinker Bell) to test reasonable or unreasonable hope.

The statement would have been equally true had he used other deities such as Budda, Bramha, Vishnu, Shiva, Allah, Waheguru and even, may I suggest, Jesus Christ.

Try it for yourself.......

Unreasonable Hope : If I say ' I do believe in fairies' often enough and loud enough, (insert your god) will bring Tinker Bell back to life (see Figure 3.8).

Each religion substituted in the statement above results in the same outcome, proving all religions are equally valid or invalid..... there, I feel a bit better now, as according to the Open University text book on Religion, the Church of the Flying Spaghetti Monster is as relevant as any other major religion - at least as far as the resurrection of Tinker Bells goes - but then we all know resurrection is a load of nonsense anyway.......

For those who don't know about Pastafarianism, please have a look at the video below and also visit http://www.venganza.org/

RAmen

Spaghetti, Wenches & Metaphysics: Episode 1—The FSM from Matt Tillman on Vimeo.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : TMA01 Submitted

2011-11-08T17:32:00.000Z

Just under 1900 words, and even that took a bit of pruning, but it has gone in now.

It seemed easy to head off on tangents on this essay, and at one point I had written paragraphs on Hume and Parfit that had nothing at all to do with criticizing Locke's views, although I obviously did not notice this at the time of writing.

I spent some time setting out Locke's stall, person, man, soul, and mentioned several of his thought experiments, then focused on criticism or expansion of his ideas by Reid, Hume, Parfit, Butler, and even managed a passing mention of Kant.

The last part was drawing on aspects of personal identity not catered for in Locke's writing and then brought it all together with the conclusion.

Writing for a Philosophy course is probably very different to writing for the Social Sciences. I thought with Social Science that putting in enough effort would result in an appropriate mark, and that approach seemed to work, but I'm not sure sheer effort on its own will be enough this time round so I just hope I have been able to add enough of my ideas in and that they were of value..... Just have to wait for the mark now.

As with the last course, for some reason when I start writing in draft, it is always the second paragraph that ends up being the core of the Introduction and the first paragraph disappears in the editing process.

On to Book 2 in which we study the Philosophy of Superstition, the next part of this course could be a struggle, god help me !!!

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Writing TMA01

2011-11-06T00:19:00.000Z

Good weekend's works so far and well into finishing the first draft of this TMA.

It has been quite an 'easy ride' in so far as there is great material and supporting text for this part of the course, so it has not been too difficult to find content. I suppose the difficult part is presenting it clearly and properly answering the question.

I've enjoyed this part of the course more than I thought I would, and David Hume has certainly struck a chord with me, especially his implied critique of the 'woolly thinking' behind the blind acceptance of religion.

Hume wrote

"If we take in our hand any volume; of divinity or school metaphysics, for instance; let us ask,
Does it contain any abstract reasoning concerning quantity or number?
No.
Does it contain any experimental reasoning concerning matter of fact and existence?
No.
Commit it then to the flames: for it can contain nothing but sophistry and illusion."

This was pretty brave of him at the time he wrote this, as religion does not willingly tolerate intellectual scrutiny, especially in the 18th Century.

Had be been alive today I can't help feeling that David Hume would have been a fan of modern 'philosopher' and song writer Greg Graffin who among his writings wrote,

"Now we all see, religion is just synthetic frippery,
unnecessary, in our expanding global culture of efficiency"

Enjoy the clip below.....

Graffin, G. (2009) "God Song", in Bad Religion's Against the Grain, Epitaph Records, Los Angeles,

&lt;p&gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;br&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;See&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&amp;amp;amp;amp;lt;/p&amp;amp;amp;amp;gt;&lt;/p&gt;

See more Bad Religion at www.badreligion.com/

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 6

2011-11-05T08:34:00.000Z

5 November •

Assignment week

Assessment resources Resource page

Events

Assignment: TMA 01 (cut-off date 10 November)

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 5

2011-11-04T20:14:00.000Z

This weeks reading was about the writing of the modern philosopher Parfit.

I have to say that I was far more interested in David Hume's writing and ideas than Parfit's. I think Parfit's 'thought experiments' are too far fetched and require that certain assumptions are accepted in order for them to work - for example that we have a soul.

The Open University audio even describes Parfit's experiments as 'crazy though experiments', which doesn't fill me with confidence. I think I am a bit grounded in logic, fact and science to be able to fully immerse myself in what is nonsense experiments.

Obviously, I won't be writing that in the TMA, I will have to spin a more thoughtful narrative full of critique and referencing.......

........... which reminds me, I'd better get writing this TMA.

The Intermittent Student now on Twitter

2011-11-04T00:06:00.000Z

Thought I'd better investigate what twitter is all about, can't continue to just ignore this fad..... It might be important :-)

This blog will now publish updates as @Theintermittent and will try and hash-tag as #A222 for the time being. Hopefully an interesting and educational dip into another strand of social networking.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 5

2011-10-29T10:34:00.001+01:00

29 October

Book 1: THE SELF Chapter 4, The self and the future

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 4

2011-10-28T14:21:00.000+01:00

It has been a bit of a struggle time-wise this week, although I prefer reading Hume to reading Locke both from how they write and their ideas.

The TMA seems to be looming over the horizon, and although I think I have a good idea of the issues raised putting it in writing will be a challenge.

Must try and get ahead this weekend........

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 4

2011-10-22T09:43:00.000+01:00

22 October

Book 1: THE SELF Chapter 3, The self as fiction

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 3

2011-10-21T22:12:00.001+01:00

As interesting as this week has been, the reading the original writing of Locke was pretty hard-core as the language was next to impenetrable.

Luckily, there are plenty of companion readings that make his ideas easier to understand and some good pieces on YouTube. I never thought YouTube would be so useful, but there are even videos of lectures on philosophy from Oxford University on YouTube, so maybe a useful resource, although I'll avoid referencing them.

Not sure I agree entirely with Locke, so looking forwards to reading Hume next week and reading other criticisms of Lockes ideas.

The On-Line tutorial has picked up speed (slightly) so hoping for some interesting insights there.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : First OnLine Tutorial

2011-10-20T16:43:00.000+01:00

The OnLine Tutorial has started the tutor has posed a question about Locke's ideas and given an example of a Nazi war criminal with memory loss to discuss.

The forum is no longer a national forum and probably because of this the discussion has been, so far, pretty disappointing. I was looking forward to some debate and testing of ideas, but so far next to nobody is joining in :-(

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : First Tutorial

2011-10-16T17:45:00.000+01:00

I attended the first tutorial yesterday, it was sort of enjoyable, but not earth shattering.

There seemed to be a coupe of people who had previously studied philosophy and made some interesting points, and others, like me, who had no experience of philosophy. So, a fairly mixed group in many ways.

The first on-line tutorial starts next week, so I need to do some more reading in order to be able to contribute to that.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 3

2011-10-15T13:00:00.001+01:00

15 October •

Book 1: THE SELF Chapter 2, Locke on persons

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 2

2011-10-14T12:00:00.000+01:00

The introduction to the ‘Ship of Theseus’ in Chapter 1 and the first two activities are interesting.This is the questions that if Theseus’ ship is constantly repaired and over time everything is renewed, is it still his ship ?

Having just done DD101, looking at the ‘Ship of Theseus’ thought experiment from an identity point of view, I’d say that the planks that were replaced, and the planks that were used to replace the old planks, were to all intents and purposes lacking in individual identity. So, when the planks were taken from the ship they lost the identity of the being part of the ship and this identity was taken by the new parts. This would have been the same for the rusty nails, torn sails etc. So the overall identity of the ship was maintained, as there was always far more of the established ship existing than the new parts being added. Much the same as when your car has its oil, brake pads, windscreen wipers, tyres, spark plugs changed throughout its life – if this was no longer your car then the DVLA and your insurance company may have some philosophical problems of their own !!!

So back to the ship, the next question posed was had somebody gathered all the discarded pieces and reassembled it which ship was then the true ship of Theseus – the ship of discarded parts may seem identical to the Ship of Theseus, but could not be the Ship of Theseus, as that identity is still carried forward by the maintained ship.

There would also be some questions about whether the ‘ship’ constructed of discarded parts is actually a ship –it may look like a ship, but would YOU go to sea in it – rotten planks, rusty nails and torn sails – No of course not - so if it looks the same, and may even be constructed of the same materials, but fails to carry out the function it was originally was built for, how can it claim to be the ‘same’ ship.

This would be the same if your car was involved in an accident and had the chassis replaced, your CAM belt then broke and you needed a new engine, you also needed various panels replaced due to minor bumps – if somebody gathered your old parts from previous services etc. and re-assembled an object that looked like your car, would it be your car - would it even move, and if it did move would it be safe – of course not, so this could not be your car….

I think this is different for ‘objects’ in which the individual parts are unique and have personality. There are several bands that now that have maybe only one original member left performing, but have still carried the band's name forward. Status Quo for example have two original members, if they were to leave the rest of the band may well continue on as Status Quo, but if the original 5 members then got back together again they would surely be the ‘real’ Status Quo as they are unarguably 5 unique parts of the original. Although they would have changed physically over the years, if the purpose of the band is to make music, and these were the original writers and performers, they must be the ‘real’ Staus Quo.

The next part of the chapter asks is it is right to hold people responsible for their actions of long ago – is the concentration camp guard still the same person he was 75 years ago, and should he be held to account for these crimes if he can’t remember them. This is only tackled from a philosophical point of view (obviously), as the only practical answer, I think, can be yes – or else anarchy rules and the need for the wronged to get revenge is not met.

However the following thought experiments on ‘The Prince and the Cobbler’, the 'Night and Day Man’ and the drunk, are all interesting discussion points.

I have to admit that I was not sure I would enjoy or understand philosophy, but is has been a good and interesting start.

The main things from Chapter 1 are I think,

The question of ‘self’ is an important philosophical concept with implications regarding ethics, morality and law.
One stance on ‘self’ from John Locke said that what makes someone the same person over time was memory continuity not necessarily bodily continuity.

First tutorial tomorrow, so that should be interesting……….

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 2

2011-10-08T13:00:00.002+01:00

8 October

Book 1: THE SELF Chapter 1, What am I?

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : End of Week 1

2011-10-07T20:04:00.000+01:00

That was a nice gentle start to the course. The Module introduction was straightforward and interesting and a good scene-setter for the coming course. I even managed to catch BBC4's 'In out time' talking about 'Hume' which was interesting and possibly very useful - I already have many questions forming.

So time to crack on with Book 1 Chapter 1 - What am I ?

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Course Finished

2011-10-03T12:01:00.028+01:00

So the end of the DD101, what have I learned and what do I wish I'd know before it started.

For me, as I have never done any social science studies before, this was a good insight in to what is a vast and interesting subject. It has certainly go me thinking about identities, inequalities, consumerism and waste. The psychology and geography aspects of the course were also very interesting and nearly prompted a change in direction, but now I've paid for A222 Exploring Philosophy and its effectively started, its probably too late to change.

Pretty much every section of the course had something of interest and the TMA essays would not have been overly onerous if you were happy with just a pass, and as the result of this course does not effect any future degree classification, that is all that matters. However I don't really work that way and probably did spend a bit too much time on the essays.

If I had any advice regarding the TMAs it is that, IN MY OPINION, the essay questions are not being asked to find out what you think or think you have learned - they are to find out what you know of the course content, and so your essay has to reflect the text, the authors views and the quoted theorists, and if it doesn't you won't be answering the essay correctly.

I pretty much tried to identify every relevant theorist or idea needed to answer the essay question and then just made sure they were quoted or referenced in the essay. Also dragging in theorists from previous chapters also went down well with my tutor and as the 3 main course strands are inter-linked there is a lot of identity / consumerism / social order ideas through-out the course.

Also, what worked best for me was to work out an essay framework and a rough idea of what I wanted to cover and then using the on-line PDF of the books copy and paste chunks of text that I needed into a word document. Once I had everything in the word document I would start writing the essay from the top of the page and as I covered topics I would delete them from pasted text - this made sure I didn't miss anything and was a good reminder on what I thought needed to be covered.

This way also meant you can get a lot of words and ideas down quickly, and I found it more motivational to know you were over the word count and it was a case of refining language and dropping weaker ideas, than starting at the beginning with 1500 words to write and trying to do it in a linear fashion. I had an iterative repetitive process of writing, reading, refining until I was happy with the essay.

I also thought that the timetable for the course was really good and while ahead of the suggested timetable things seemed in control and there was time to do everything. During the last two TMAs life sort of caught up with me and I fell behind and it just seemed impossible to do everything, so my advice to anybody doing DD101, and what I will make sure I do on my future courses, is to stay a bit ahead of the suggested timetable, its just makes things so much easier.

So that is the end of the first 60 point course, 5 more to go, and looking at the new fee structure it is just as well I started when I did as the new fees would have meant I could not have afforded to even start this course.

Anyway, as we close the Chapter on DD101 (except for the TMA 07 result expected in December) this blog has received just over 10,000 page views which is far more than I ever thought it would receive.

Update:
With the end of course information we found out that 1865 students submitted ETMA 07, and the marks followed the pretty standard bell-curve of A-12%, B-30%, C-39%, D-14%, E-3%, F -2%, G-0%.

A222 - Exploring Philosophy : Week 1

2011-10-01T12:16:00.000+01:00

1 October

Module Guide and introductory material

Already thoughts and forum posts are concentrating and focusing on the first TMA which has the essay question,

Give a critical account of John Locke’s views on personal identity.

This assignment requires you to give both an account of John Locke’s views and some critical assessment of those views. You should summarise the main features of Locke’s account before you go on to consider criticisms that might be levelled against it.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 2 days to go !!!

2011-10-01T10:51:00.000+01:00

Managed to get my essay proof read and it only cost me a good bottle of wine. Good thing too, made some useful points regarding poor punctuation and asked questions which identified areas that needed more clarification.

Anyway, a couple of re-writes and 3 submissions later, I think I am finished. 1649 words and managed to include every theorist bar Hoffman (who is just wrong) from page 57 of the Learning Companion, and several from previous parts of the course. So I think the essay is as 'theorist rich' as it is possible to be, it has a logical framework and the paragraphs seem to flow OK, so I guess the submission below is effectively the end of 'DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences' for me.

Your assessment was received by the University at 10:35:37 (UK time) on 01 October 2011

Bring on A222 Exploring Philosophy

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 3 days to go !!!

2011-09-30T12:00:00.002+01:00

Still waiting for it to be proof-read. Looks like it will be a Sunday submission.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 4 days to go !!!

2011-09-29T13:59:00.000+01:00

FINISHED !!!!

Really, this is as good as it is going to get.

1634 words and all I'm doing now is making such small changes that they do little to change the content, just the way the essay reads. It is now getting counter productive, so I am finished, bar something serious being highlighted if I can ever get it proof-read.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 5 days to go !!!

2011-09-28T18:29:00.000+01:00

A social engagement means nothing further will be done on the essay today.......... I guess its all about priorities :-)

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 6 days to go !!!

2011-09-27T19:57:00.001+01:00

I'm now struggling to get my proof-reader motivated to read my assignment, and to be fair having read it myself several times I can understand her reluctance :-)

So no further forward towards submission today, but there is still six days to go ........ I think this may go down to the wire......

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 7 days to go !!!

2011-09-26T15:32:00.005+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 30

      ‘Conclusion’ to the ‘Ordered lives’ strand of Exploring Social Lives (30 minutes) .
       ‘Reflections on “Ordered lives”’ (Audio CD 3) (1 hour) .
       Online Reflective Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, ‘Ordered lives’ (10–15 minutes)

Most of your time this week will be spent preparing for your final assignment, Assignment 07. Or, if you are running a little late, there is some time to catch up.

To be completed by 9th September

I have to admit to not listening to any of the audio for the last bit of the course, there just hasn't been time. Flicked through the conclusion and aced the quiz. The quiz you get at the end of each section all seem too simple and limited to actually test you. I think they should either be longer and more involved or drop them.

Nothing more done on the TMA, will read it again tomorrow or Wednesday, and I need to get my proof reader motivated :-)

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 8 days to go !!!

2011-09-25T17:01:00.001+01:00

1605 words and very close to finishing this. My proof reader (wife) was however on-call over the weekend and spent most of the time on the phone or actually at work so no proof reading was done, and I was hoping if she could read the essay and understand everything (let alone spot spelling mistakes) then it would be about ready to submit. However, the NHS have scuppered that plan.

There are one or two points I may wish to add, but I need to prune back the work count first, but I think that is enough for today.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 9 days to go !!!

2011-09-24T20:43:00.003+01:00

Well, I've had a good go at getting some words down today although after starting to tackle the essay in the normal way, by working on the introduction and struggling a bit to get in to a rhythm, I gave up and did what I was most certain of.

So I have ended up writing the essay backwards ??? Started with the conclusion which was obvious, then I wrote the outcome of the three tests of empirical adequacy, coherence and comprehensiveness - although I obviously wrote them in the order comprehensiveness, coherence and empirical adequacy.

I then wrote how Jill's story showed the many actions and interactions with the state and then defined the state. The introduction was a bit easier after all that. Managed to work in several references from previous chapters on identity, social order and discourse - which to be fair may be obvious that that is what has been done - still it proves that I've done some reading.

Leave it for tonight and re-read it tomorrow and see if it needs re-written or not. There is definitely enough there for the minimum pass I need, but having put so much effort in this far, I would be very disappointed with less than a very good mark..... we shall see.....

The good thing is that by the time we get the marks, I should be so engrossed in the next course that they won't really matter.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - 10 days to go !!!

2011-09-23T12:35:00.001+01:00

Good telephone tutorial last night, well for me anyway - not sure what the others thought. Confirmed that my basic plan is heading in the right direction,

i. Intro
ii. Definition of 'The State'
iii. Look at Jill's story and tie this to interactions with the state
iv. Use same three tests of an argument as in last TMA - Empirical accuracy, that it makes sense and comprehensiveness of argument.
v. Discuss outcomes of the tests
vi. Conclusion

Need to get as many references as possible from previous chapters and 7,8,& 9, definitely looking at identity and discourse, and hopefully some others.....

The tutor also pointed out some other arguments I could use, although they did also say that with a limited word count and much to write about you have to be very selective in what you wish to write about.

Hopefully, I will have broken the back of this by the end of the weekend.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 29

2011-09-22T15:31:00.000+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 29

Chapter 9 of Exploring Social Lives (7 hours) .

Online Activity 43 .

‘Making connections: POLIS and social policy and criminology’ (Audio CD) (45 mins) .

Online Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, Chapter 9 (10–15 minutes)

To be completed by 2nd September.

Right this is done, telephone tutorial later today then just two weekends left to get this TMA done....

Feels like time is pressing, especially as the course materials for the next course have now arrived.....

I would like a lot more time, but then I'd only slack off until the last two weeks so better crack on.

A222 Exploring Philosophy - Study materials delivered, tutor assigned and website open.

2011-09-22T11:44:00.001+01:00

Well this is an interested distraction, but one that I could really do without :-)

A222 looks very interesting and as the final TMA on DD101 is beginning to drag a bit I'm looking forward to starting a new course afresh.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 28

2011-09-21T15:31:00.000+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 28

       Chapter 8 of Exploring Social Lives (7 hours) .
      ‘Citizens and the state’ (Audio CD 3) (1 hour) .
       Online Activity 42 (1 hour) .
       Online Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, Chapter 8 (10–15 minutes)

To be completed by 26th August.

Well this Chapter was obviously of more use than Chapter 7, didn't really find much substance in Chapter 7 unless I have missed something. I have looked at Chapter 9 and it would seem to be of more use to Option A, but I'll read that tomorrow.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 27

2011-09-20T20:45:00.001+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 27

       ‘‘Introduction’ to ‘Ordered lives’ strand of Exploring Social Lives (30 minutes) .
Chapter 7 of Exploring Social Lives (7 hours) .
            'Integrating different sources’ (Developing skills Audio CD) (30 minutes) .
            Online Activity 41 (1 hour) .
           Online Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, Chapter 7 (10–15 minutes).

To be completed by 19th August.

Well what happened to the timetable..... now doing things in the wrong order........

Having decided on Option B, I am now reading Chapters 7,8,9, looking for relevant parts to include in the TMA Essay. Not ideal, but effectively losing 4 weeks of study between handing in TMA 06 and now, due to work, holiday and getting married means something has to give.

Oh well I'd better get on with it !!!

DD101 Introducing The Social Sciences - TMA 07, descision made.

2011-09-18T16:50:00.001+01:00

Good tutorial on Saturday and it has really helped me decide which option to go for between,

Option A:
Critically assess the claim that states are necessary evils.

or

Option B:
'Jill's story tells you all you need to know about the state.' Explain and evaluate this claim.

I will be doing Option B, as the discussion with other tutors at the session made it seem that this is the more obvious question to answer correctly, partly because the answer is obviously 'no it doesn't', but also because there is a better framework for the essay rather than Option A which is a far more open question and so the risk of going off on a tangent is greater.

Also, the discussions and guidance notes regarding Option B seemed to make far more sense and offer far more help.

I am a bit behind where I would ideally be, but with two weekends before the final submission this should not be too of a panic. So re-read chapters 7,8,& 9 looking for obvious theorists and references and see how I can tie this in with previous parts of the course and once done I ampretty much ready to start putting the essay together.

DD101 Introducing The Social Sciences - TMA 07, back from holiday

2011-09-15T16:03:00.001+01:00

Back from holiday and with very little done on this part of the course I need to get a wriggle on as there is a day school tutorial this weekend, and the deadline is fast approaching.

DD101 Introducing The Social Sciences - TMA 07, on hold due to holiday

2011-08-26T07:31:00.001+01:00

Now 'officially' on holiday until mid-September and I can't see me getting much done between now and then, so TMA 07 will be a bit of a rush on my return.....

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 06 Marked & Returned

2011-08-22T11:40:00.001+01:00

Well a bit disappointed, lowest mark yet just managing a Pass 1, however very useful and sensible comments from my tutor.

The problem with my TMA was that I had sort of re-interpreted the question. I thought that the claim we were to evaluate has been made by Hollway in her research, she certainly supported it, but this was a more general claim and I should have looked and discussed further than just Hollways research.

On the positive side the criticism of Hollways methods and conclusions were well received.

So the main thing is with the next TMA is not to make the same mistake and to be absolutely clear who has made the claim and from what body of work or research we need to be drawing from.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 06 Submitted

2011-08-16T11:11:00.000+01:00

Well that was a lot tighter than it should have been. Less than one hour to go before the deadline. I think it was always pretty much under control, but competing priorities meant I had to finish it off this morning. My previous Internet provider did not help, I could never recommend TalkTalk going by my experience of the last 3 months. As of 1030 this morning I am a BT Infinity customer and the download speeds are staggeringly good, however as I was disconnected from my previous supplier earlier than expected, I was a bit unsure if I could submit from home or would have to go out and find a hotspot - but it all came good in the end.

The TMA actually, I hope, turned out pretty well. Seemed to get lots of arguments to question the validity of the claim and the methods used, so we will see when the mark comes through.

Oh well, better get reading for the final TMA, not long to go and I have about 3 weeks of holiday in the middle in which I intend to do no study at all !!!

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 06, not sure what happened there ?

2011-08-13T11:02:00.001+01:00

40 minutes of judicious editing and the word count went up !!!

I'm going to have to get a bit more radical with cutting bits out, but I think that's enough for today.....

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 06, coming together but too many words.

2011-08-13T10:18:00.001+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 26

       ‘Reflections on “Connected lives”’ (Audio CD 3) (30 minutes) .
         Online Reflective Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, ‘Connected lives’ (10–15 minutes)
         Most of your time this week will be spent on completing Assignment 06.

To be completed by 12th August.

Most of your time will be spent on TMA 06 - well your not wrong there !!!

Too many words, currently at over 1750 and need to trim back to below the 1650 target of 1500 plus 10%.

This TMA has been different from the others as it is easy to get the argument for the claim down on the paper, but the evaluation part, where I am criticising the research methods, outcomes and limited use of appropriate theories has too much information.

The audio CD on evaluating arguments says to use three tests,

The validity of the research - small cohort, few examples, motivations to 'find' the answer.
The logic behind the research findings, do they stand up to questioning.
Comprehensiveness, could better theories have been used to analyse the 'evidence'.

It has also been useful to look back at other TMAs mentioning identity and I have lifted references and quotes from those to use again in this TMA - the references used are as valid of this TMA as they were for the previous ones.

So it is nearly done, some trimming required and a bit of a re-read to check all points are covered, but to be honest if I am already over the word count and have missed a point it may have to stay missed :-)

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 25

2011-08-08T17:17:00.002+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 25

Conclusion’ to the ‘Connected lives’ strand of Exploring Social Lives (30 mins)

‘Making connections: psychology and sociology’ ( Audio CD) (45 mins)

To be completed by 5th August.

I'm not sure what to make of the Audio CD, that's 45 minutes of life I'm never going to get back.

However on a brighter note, TMA 06 is coming together, and after leaving the last one until pretty much last minute at present I feel this one is under control. There is more work to be done, but it is really a matter of reading and re-reading the material in Chapter 6 and getting every point possible identified in regard to supporting, or not, this claim.

The problem really, and this may be mentioned in my conclusion, is that the question itself is far from ideal. It would have been far better had it been "Evaluate the claim that conflict is the main (or the only) catalyst for identity change."

The question as it stands is "Evaluate the claim that conflict is a catalyst for identity change.", the answer is obviously Yes it is, but how important is it and of what value is the evidence that has led to this claim is what I believe this TMA is about.

Anyway, over a week to go, plenty of time :-)

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 24

2011-08-05T18:29:00.000+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 24

Chapter 6 of Exploring Social Lives (7 hours) .

‘Changing identities’ (Audio CD 2) (1 hour) .

Online Activity 40 (1 hour) .

Online Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, Chapter 6 (10–15 minutes

To be completed by 29th July.

Finished the reading and rest of the work after the motivation of the phone tutorial. So pretty much back on track and the TMA is coming together, still some way short of finished but the frame work and arguments are taking shape.

After the tutorial I re-read the chapter and information I had previously dismissed as irrelevant is now very much part of the evaluation argument.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 06 Phone Tutorial

2011-08-04T23:25:00.002+01:00

I took part in a telephone tutorial this evening. I wasn't sure how useful this would be as telephone conferences can be difficult without the visual clues and etiquette that dictate who should speak next, there was the odd incident of people talking over each other, but all-in-all it worked very well.

But best of all it was a really useful tutorial. The concerns I had about the TMA question have pretty much been answered and I now fully understand (or I think I do) the 'evaluate' part of the question - so this will be a really good practice for the TMA 07, which is another evaluate question.

I am off work tomorrow, the plumber is coming, so I am pretty enthusiastic about getting some of the ideas down on a document and from there start working these ideas etc. in to the final answer. As I said before this was a really good tutorial for me, partly because I had done a lot of pre-reading and had some ideas and questions, the other members of the group appeared to be equally prepared so there were no problems with people going off on a tangent or 'not getting it'.

So the basic plan is, explain the claim, back it up with evidence, explain the method of collecting the evidence, question the validity of the evidence and the motivations that could alter their findings, question if other theorists could explain the claim better, then a sensible conclusion. Admittedly, this is a bit sketchy, but with a bit more thought it should work - it's a mile away from where I was before the tutorial.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 23

2011-08-03T16:07:00.000+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 23

Chapter 5 of Exploring Social Lives (7 hours) .

‘Evaluating arguments’ (Developing skills Audio CD) (1 hour) .

Online Activity 39 (1 hour) .

Online Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, Chapter 5 (10–15 minutes)

To be completed by 22nd July.

As I'm a bit behind just skim read this, interesting but not relevant for the TMA. Just as well there is a weeks break factored in to the schedule in August as I feel the timetable is getting away from me a bit.

Still I've started the reading for Chapter 6, so not too far behind.

A222 Exploring Philosophy - Signed Up

2011-07-28T07:56:00.000+01:00

That was a quick £700, but I have now paid for the next course, and even bought the course text book which looks pretty impenetrable.

The course starts 1st October, and I hope it is a slow starter as DD101 doesn't finish until 3rd October and a small break would be good......

Right...... back to worrying about DD101 & TMA06.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 22

2011-07-27T00:18:00.000+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 22

      ‘Introduction’ to the ‘Connected lives’ strand of Exploring Social Lives (45 minutes) .
    Chapter 4 of Exploring Social Lives (7 hours) .
      ‘Thinking about migration’ (Audio CD 2) (45 minutes) .
      Online Activities 37 and 38 (2 hours) .
    Online Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, Chapter 4 (10–15 minutes) .
      ‘Reflection: Working with different forms of assessment – being a flexible learner’ (30 minutes)

To be completed by 15th July.

To be honest life is sort of catching up with me a bit, too busy at work, trying to lose weight and learn a new language which takes more time out of the day, while also planning a wedding and honeymoon somewhere between TMA06 and TMA 07.

So as I've decided on Option B - Chapter 6, I'll be skim reading his and the next chapter in case there is anything relevant - not ideal as I would prefer to study all chapters properly - but there is simply not the time and as these chapters are not necessary for the TMA I will study for the test rather than the knowledge.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA05 Marked and Returned

2011-07-20T23:27:00.000+01:00

Best mark yet, which I am very pleased about, but to be fair this TMA played to my existing strengths as I am used to writing reports and am frequently involved in risk assessments.

Anyway, on to TMA 06, although I have read on the Facebook group that some people are skipping TMA06 as their scores are high enough to allow them to do this. I think this is a mistake, partly because there may be something relevant to TMA07 (the final and externally marked TMA) in the work for TMA06 so you will have to read the chapters anyway, and also because both TMA 06 &07 are based on the question "evaluate the claim", so TMA 06 is a great trial run at answering this type of question.

TMA06
A. Evaluate the claim that Britishness is a matter of ‘shared values, ideas or ways of life’.
or
B. Evaluate the claim that conflict is a catalyst for identity change.

TMA 07
A. Critically assess the claim that states are necessary evils.

or

B. ‘Jill’s story tells you all you need to know about the state.’ Explain and evaluate this claim.

TMA06 is due the middle of August, so 3 weeks to sort it out.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - July Day School Tutorial

2011-07-16T20:47:00.000+01:00

4 hour day school / tutorial today and unlike the last one this one was both fun and interesting, and if nothing else I now know that my initial ideas about the content for TMA06 were well off mark.

I think Chapter 5 or 6, which I haven't read yet, covers 'conflict' and identity, or rather conflict of identity, in a completely different way than I was going to tackle it. The tutor gave us some good pointers on theorists to use within the essay, so at least I have a good starting point for this work.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - Week 21

2011-07-12T15:28:00.002+01:00

The suggested time table for Week 21

‘Conclusion’ to the ‘Material lives’ strand of Exploring Social Lives (30 minutes) .

Online Reflective Quiz: Exploring Social Lives, ‘Material lives’ (10–15 minutes) .

‘Reflections on “Material lives’’’ (Audio CD 2) (30 minutes)

Most of your time this week will be spent on completing Assignment 05.

To be completed by 8th July.

I read the 3 page conclusion and there wasn't really much in it that hadn't been covered already - that's why it was the conclusion I guess.... t

The reflective quiz at the end of the chapters are a bit lost on me, I'm not really in to this type of formal self reflection. I think the only real measure is the TMA marks, if your happy with them then your putting in the right amount of effort - if your not happy with them then more effort required.

The audio was a struggle to concentrate on, too much else going on, so in the end I read the transcript.

At least this week is crossed off the chart.....I'm going to have to think about coming back to Week 20 - Living in a Common World - as I have too much to do to read up and past what is required for this weekends tutorial.

The next TMA is a choice of question and it is either,

Option A:
Evaluate the claim that Britishness is a matter of ‘shared values, ideas or ways of life’.

Option B:
Evaluate the claim that conflict is a catalyst for identity change.

I'm thinking about Option B, as I have worked in conflict zones and seen how it effects people first hand, but I guess I had better read the chapters and see what arguments and theories are put forward.

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 05 Submitted - Done & Dusted

2011-07-11T19:12:00.002+01:00

I've been fiddling with this TMA, every time I re-read it I make a minor change, so I've decided to submit it before I make another change.

The main points are covered. It is in a report format. The contents page is correct. The introduction sets out what I'm going to do. The first section defines expert knowledge and questions both Epidemiological studies and experts. Lay knowledge is then defined. The second section talks about dealing with risk, 4 real examples with lots of referencing and using case studies and quantitative data. Lastly the conclusion supports all other sections and the referencing is correct.

I don't think I can make this any better, so it is fingers crossed for another good mark.

Now with a tutorial this weekend I've got a lot of reading to do as I'm well behind on the course timetable..........

DD101 Introducing the Social Sciences - TMA 05 Submitted - Well V1 anyway

2011-07-09T12:13:00.000+01:00

This is an odd TMA. It doesn't really stretch you academically or intellectually, so there is a real danger of under-estimating what is required or failing to answer the question asked.

I am involved in a lot of fairly serious risk assessments and I write reports, so this should be an easy TMA, but the word count is a problem, as is ensuring all the necessary terms and definitions are covered.

I have submitted the TMA as it stands now, as there is a real 'risk' that more important things get in the way and I forget to submit it in time. The deadline has really crept up on me, so at least at this point there is something tat I'm 95% happy with to actually mark.

I'm waiting on the tutor replying to some questions, but I think I've sorted these answers out for myself.

Need to get a bit more motivated for the next last two sections of the course.