Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    OMG, this thread has reached the popular threads list!!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    Chomsky argument is: that because children pick up language and use grammar correctly so fast from very limited experience, it makes sense that we have an innate capacity to use correct grammar, it is a bit like have a basic language conceptual scheme (don't say this part in exams), Chomsky says it is an innate capacity for Grammar not one for a language because different children learn different languages as their first language.
    Hmm, interesting. So Chomsky thinks that because young children pick up language so quickly that it must be an innate capacity we have to pick up on language so quickly? So we have a conceptual scheme relating to language and once we gain experience of language our conceptual schemes helps us to decipher the information quickly?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    OMG, this thread has reached the popular threads list!!
    Great! This should mean more people will start commenting on this thread!
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Hmm, interesting. So Chomsky thinks that because young children pick up language so quickly that it must be an innate capacity we have to pick up on language so quickly? So we have a conceptual scheme relating to language and once we gain experience of language our conceptual schemes helps us to decipher the information quickly?
    Yes that is it, but don't mention the conceptual scheme part in the exam, I just said that to add clarity to Chomsky's argument.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    Yes that is it, but don't mention the conceptual scheme part in the exam, I just said that to add clarity to Chomsky's argument.
    Very well. So is Chomsky a Rationalist or Conceptual Schemist?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Very well. So is Chomsky a Rationalist or Conceptual Schemist?
    Rationalist, DO NOT refer to him when talking about conceptual schemes, as the examiner will think that you are confused.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    Rationalist, DO NOT refer to him when talking about conceptual schemes, as the examiner will think that you are confused.
    Very well, I won't! D: What questions do you think will come up for the exam in relation to R+E?
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Very well, I won't! D: What questions do you think will come up for the exam in relation to R+E?
    Innate knowledge or Conceptual Schemes - As 30 mark questions
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Not sure about the 15 mark Questions, maybe on the distinction between induction and deduction
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Very well, I won't! D: What questions do you think will come up for the exam in relation to R+E?
    Did you learn about introspection and the tautological?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    Not sure about the 15 mark Questions, maybe on the distinction between induction and deduction
    That's what my Philosophy teacher says both 15 and 30 mark questions might be on... Explain the distinction between induction and deduction!
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    Did you learn about introspection and the tautological?
    Nope.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RunningInHeels)
    Ahhhh no I haven't learnt/ been taught that one! Yes I think that's an argument from design. The philosophy syllabus is so wide, many students study completely different modern philosophers and still get brilliant grades.

    I don't know anyone else doing 'Knowledge of the external world.'

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Am doing Knowledge of the external world. I hope a question on direct realism or idealism to come up rather than one on representative realism or realism in general.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    That's what my Philosophy teacher says both 15 and 30 mark questions might be on... Explain the distinction between induction and deduction!
    I hope I and your philosophy teacher are right as that would be a pretty easy 15 mark question.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Nope.
    You should try to learn about it from somewhere, maybe online, or from your teacher as it came up in jan 2012.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Nope.
    Or read about it in This document:

    http://cw.routledge.com/textbooks/al.../Certainty.pdf
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    Hi all

    Am doing Reason and experience and the idea of God for Phil1 and Knowledge of the external world and god and the world for Phil2. If any one who's doing these topics can you ask me questions on it?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by the A* guy)
    You should try to learn about it from somewhere, maybe online, or from your teacher as it came up in jan 2012.
    I'll give it a try, but I don't think it's coming up in the exam, since we've hardly done anything on it and the teacher rarely mentions it. I got 31/45 marks in a mock exam we did on it last week. 11/15 marks and 20/30 marks. I would have got more on the 30 mark question if I had finished the question by making a summary and analysis, but I was low on time so I couldn't.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by noor momo)
    Hi all

    Am doing Reason and experience and the idea of God for Phil1 and Knowledge of the external world and god and the world for Phil2. If any one who's doing these topics can you ask me questions on it?
    Haha, we were just doing some questions on Reason and Experience earlier. :P Explain the difference between inductive and deductive.
    Offline

    8
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by PaulyRivs)
    Haha, we were just doing some questions on Reason and Experience earlier. :P Explain the difference between inductive and deductive.
    Deductive arguments refer to a type of reasoning where if the premises are true, the conclusion must be true. For example: all men are mortal, socrates is a man. therefore Socrates is mortal. you cannot accept the two premises but deny the conclusion. Hume categorises deductive arguments as relation of ideas.

    inductive arguments, however, refers to a type of reasoning that is based on the idea that things we have not yet experienced will resemble what we have experienced. we generalise from many instances to make conclusions about instances we have not experienced. to illustrate, if every time you have boiled water, it has boiled at 100 degrees, then inductively you would conclude that all water boils at 100 degree. Hume categorises inductive arguments as matters of facts.

    I don't think that everything :/

    outline and illustrate one argument in support of Innate Knowledge. (15marks)
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
Turn on thread page Beta
Updated: May 21, 2013
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.