[conorordan]

I've just finished my Philosophy of Religion notes so I'll attach them here, would love it if people could share theirs too so I could see if I'm missing out on anything I/my teacher might not have covered.

What resources are people using to revise? Aside from class notes and teacher handouts I've been using the AQA textbook (a piece of ****e btw), Lacewing, and 'Philosophy of Religion' by Gerald Jones.

[SLlewellyn]

(Original post by alphil)
Something about Cartesian skepticism might come up - this might be helpful:
http://philosophyfaculty.ucsd.edu/fa...SKEPTICISM.pdf

However, don't feel too stressed about it. Rather, think of how you would reply to/how you would criticise some arguments, and then evaluate your own responses. This is one of the best ways to train your philosophical scrutiny and skills for the exam.

Cheers. Looked at a question yesterday, "The possibility of error means we are unable to possess knowledge" and after panicking for a good few hours as to how I'd answer it, I realised it was quite simply Cartesian scepticism. Anyhow I formulated a response involving the waves of doubt, problems with them, but that they help Descartes arrive at his first certainty (knowledge) and then implications of this; criticising the scepticism with Ryle's 'language'-ridden argument. In this instance, studying the Meditations has been a huge benefit - would love for a question like this to come up.

[b41nzy]

(Original post by conorordan)
I've just finished my Philosophy of Religion notes so I'll attach them here, would love it if people could share theirs too so I could see if I'm missing out on anything I/my teacher might not have covered.

What resources are people using to revise? Aside from class notes and teacher handouts I've been using the AQA textbook (a piece of ****e btw), Lacewing, and 'Philosophy of Religion' by Gerald Jones.

do these notes cover everything from the spec? thanks for sharing btw

[conorordan]

(Original post by b41nzy)
do these notes cover everything from the spec? thanks for sharing btw

Yeah it's all there.

[alphil]

(Original post by SLlewellyn)
Cheers. Looked at a question yesterday, "The possibility of error means we are unable to possess knowledge" and after panicking for a good few hours as to how I'd answer it, I realised it was quite simply Cartesian scepticism. Anyhow I formulated a response involving the waves of doubt, problems with them, but that they help Descartes arrive at his first certainty (knowledge) and then implications of this; criticising the scepticism with Ryle's 'language'-ridden argument. In this instance, studying the Meditations has been a huge benefit - would love for a question like this to come up.

That sounds like a superb essay! Congrats!
It would be interesting to include some sort of personal evaluation at the very end of the essay - things like 'the possibility of error should not undermine the possibility of knowledge': if there exists the possibility of error, it doesn't follow that we cannot acquire any knowledge. For knowledge, as traditionally conceived, is justified true belief, where the 'justification' rules out the possibility of error.
For example, imagine that your best friend buys a new dress. Since her favourite colour is blue, you infer that she bought a blue dress - would this be knowledge? No, since the belief 'her new dress is blue'has no proper justification. Now, imagine you go with her at the shop, and that she buys her new (blue) dress in front of you. Would the proposition 'her new dress is blue' be real knowledge?
I would say yes. For the belief 'her new dress is blue' is true and justified.


It is noteworthy how you could build such a good structure for your essay when you stopped panicking - it is crucial to remain calm in the exam, considering what you can do when you stay calm! :-)


Best

[hb31]

Hi, I'm doing the AQA A2 philosophy course of RST4A
Doing the topics of Religious experience, conversion, mystical experience, definition of God/ultimate reality, revelations
Apparently its not a very popular choice of paper, and theres not even a text book (so annoying) - was just wondering if any one here is doing the same paper? I've got the exam on thursday, Just wondering if any one on here is also doing the same exam?

[Hannah_94]

(Original post by Gibbers)
If someone could quickly outline what the Functionalist theory of mind is, I'd be grateful. It's the one part of Philosophy of Mind I'm rubbish at seeing how I missed a couple lessons and when I was in lessons I didn't bother to write notes. I know the objections like Chinese Mind, Inverted Qualia, Jackson's Knowledge argument etc, but I'm struggling to actually understand the theory itself and the internet isn't helping me.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers.

I'll have a go ... basically there's different types of Functionalism ... I've studied Machine Functionalism - the idea the body is like a "machine" working on inputs and outputs (like the Chinese Room does), and Teleological Functionalism, the idea that the body works as a whole system, and everything within it carries out a specific "function".

This is the theory I hate too... but basically if you know the Chinese Room argument you can explain it, because the "room" is basically how they're trying to explain the mind, and that's why it becomes a criticism. Then literally everything to do with subjectivity and qualia can come into this. Hope I helped a little!

[Hannah_94]

(Original post by crazycots)
I'm doing these exact subjects for examination next year. I don't know when your exams are but I would love to have a copy of your notes as even if they are useless to you. I find the more that I physically read the better I understand the topic.

So I am begging you.....

Please can I have a copy of your material?

I'd be more than happy to but I'm afraid I hand write all my notes! I do however have both the AQA and Lacewing books which I've found really helpful just as a little tip!

[crazycots]

(Original post by Hannah_94)
I'd be more than happy to but I'm afraid I hand write all my notes! I do however have both the AQA and Lacewing books which I've found really helpful just as a little tip!

I also have the lacewing book and you are right it is very useful. I sorry to be adamant but is it possible to send the notes to me physically I can pay for the P&P at my end.

[SLlewellyn]

(Original post by crazycots)
I also have the lacewing book and you are right it is very useful. I sorry to be adamant but is it possible to send the notes to me physically I can pay for the P&P at my end.

He should be able to just scan them in and send them to you via email/Student Room surely?

[Torbjorn66]

Does anyone have any decent philosophy of mind notes that I could have a look through? That would be great I also have a lot of notes on religion if anyone needs anything!

[conorordan]

(Original post by Torbjorn66)
Does anyone have any decent philosophy of mind notes that I could have a look through? That would be great I also have a lot of notes on religion if anyone needs anything!

Can I have a look at your religion ones? Cheers.

[DemolitionLovers]

Oh my I am so worried about Phil 3 and 4

(Original post by Gibbers)
If someone could quickly outline what the Functionalist theory of mind is, I'd be grateful. It's the one part of Philosophy of Mind I'm rubbish at seeing how I missed a couple lessons and when I was in lessons I didn't bother to write notes. I know the objections like Chinese Mind, Inverted Qualia, Jackson's Knowledge argument etc, but I'm struggling to actually understand the theory itself and the internet isn't helping me.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers.

Mental states are logically linked to behaviour, not reducible to it.
Mental states exist between input (stimulus) and output (behaviour).
Mental states have causal relations to other mental states eg. being in pain causes belief that one is in pain.
Mental states are functional states>analyse in terms of links it has with stimulus, behaviour and other mental states>analysis rejects type identity theory.
Property 'having function X' can occur in different physical things.
'Being in pain'=functional property>different physical ways and brain states that could be 'being in pain.'

[Perkele]

(Original post by Gibbers)
If someone could quickly outline what the Functionalist theory of mind is, I'd be grateful. It's the one part of Philosophy of Mind I'm rubbish at seeing how I missed a couple lessons and when I was in lessons I didn't bother to write notes. I know the objections like Chinese Mind, Inverted Qualia, Jackson's Knowledge argument etc, but I'm struggling to actually understand the theory itself and the internet isn't helping me.

Any help would be greatly appreciated. Cheers.

functional states convert inputs such as tissue damage into outputs such as pain and screaming.
They are what mental states are reduced to in functionalism but have several criticisms such as the possibility of machines having mental states in machine functionalism. This can be responded to by causal role or teleological functionalism which states that physical elements allowing functional states to be realised must have3 evolved to benefit the organism.
The mary thought experiment attempts to prove how functionalism lacks qualia as 'mary' would supposedly gain new knowledge by experiencing the 'redness' or the qualia of a red flower. In response a functionalist could claim that they would gain no new factual knowledge but would gain trivial everyday knowledge. Chinese room shows how functionalism lacks Intentionality. hope it helps.

[ke95]

Hi, please could someone write me a brief list of the main scholars who are atheists, theists and agnostics please? Would be sooo helpful! Thank you!!

[conorordan]

(Original post by ke95)
Hi, please could someone write me a brief list of the main scholars who are atheists, theists and agnostics please? Would be sooo helpful! Thank you!!

Theists
- Thomas Aquinas
- Richard Swinburne
They should be your main ones, they've got something to say about everything, but you've also got;
- John Locke
- Soren Kierkegaard
- William James
- Thomas Ried
- Alvin Plantinga
- Blaise Pascal
- John Hick
- Rudolf Otto

Atheists
- David Hume - The only major player in atheism.
- Bertrand Russel
- W. K. Clifford
- A. J. Ayer
- Anthony Flew

I'm not too sure about agnostics, maybe Wittgenstein? Hope this helps!

[b41nzy]

Any predictions for philosophy of mind or religion?

[Joey15]

Political Philosophy tomorrow I'm dreading. S**t teacher. **** notes from them. Philosophy Unit 3 overall will wave goodbye to university.

Mill I'm looking forward to!

[Gibbers]

Sorry for replying late, but thanks for all the help regarding functionalism. Appreciate it.

[jerseymackem]

Is anyone else doing Life, Death and Beyond (Unit 4, I think) tomorrow?