A-level Philosophy Study Group 2022

Hi just wondering if it would be ok to answer a 5 mark 'outline [argument]' question with the formal, step by step argument or if it needs to be presented in prose?

Yeah u can do it in premise form

Reply 121

ToGodly

21

First become rich and then become a philosopher

Reply 122

CoffeeKitten

9

Original post by reeldn

Yeah u can do it in premise form

Thank you

Reply 123

ivywalkerrr

13

so what are we thinking for the essays ?

Reply 124

reeldn

5

Original post by ivywalkerrr

so what are we thinking for the essays ?

behaviourism and i have no idea for the other side.

This paper is hard

Reply 125

LovingLucy

17

Original post by ivywalkerrr

so what are we thinking for the essays ?

Cosmological or religious language

Reply 126

wellsey_

13

Original post by ivywalkerrr

so what are we thinking for the essays ?

I'm thinking cosmological or worst case Problem of Evil for 25 God
Then Property Dualism or behaviourism for mind.

Reply 127

EAC7228

1

Original post by anon2948

For metaphysics of mind, on the advance info under 'dualist theories', it just says property dualism - so my question is, under the dualist theories spec heading, are people going to just revise property dualism (in case of a 25 marker etc) or is it advisable to revise 'issues facing dualism' (so including 'problem of other minds' responses, and 'dualism makes a category mistake'), 'issues facing interactionist dualism', and 'issues facing epiphenomenalist dualism'? I'm unsure whether to revise these issues, as I interpreted the advanced info to just refer to property dualism (and for a potential 25 marker on property dualism, you'd talk about PZ, knowledge/Mary argument etc). Any insight on this is appreciated.

Issues facing dualism aren't included, nor is epiphenomenalism. My philosophy tutor is a senior examiner for AQA so she double-checked to make sure! It's just property dualism, behaviourism, eliminative materialism, and functionalism.
For 25 marker on property dualism, I included PZ argument, issues with the PZ argument and then the knowledge/Mary argument and issues with that, then the conclusion. Hope this helps!

Reply 128

anon2948

1

Original post by EAC7228

Issues facing dualism aren't included, nor is epiphenomenalism. My philosophy tutor is a senior examiner for AQA so she double-checked to make sure! It's just property dualism, behaviourism, eliminative materialism, and functionalism.
For 25 marker on property dualism, I included PZ argument, issues with the PZ argument and then the knowledge/Mary argument and issues with that, then the conclusion. Hope this helps!

Thank you

Reply 129

Teob

8

Premise form is more precise and accurate and less chance to mess up

Reply 130

reeldn

5

Is eliminative materialism as self refuting the idea that they argue common sense mental states like belief do not exist and therefore should be eliminated. But eliminative materialism is a belief and thus it seems to be arguing that eliminative materialism should eliminate eliminative materialism.

Or is it that proponents of eliminative materialism cannot believe it to be true because beliefs don't exist, in which it is meaningless.

Reply 131

daniel_e31

1

Original post by reeldn

Is eliminative materialism as self refuting the idea that they argue common sense mental states like belief do not exist and therefore should be eliminated. But eliminative materialism is a belief and thus it seems to be arguing that eliminative materialism should eliminate eliminative materialism.

Or is it that proponents of eliminative materialism cannot believe it to be true because beliefs don't exist, in which it is meaningless.

My interpretation of the textbook leads me to believe it is the second option: one cannot believe eliminative materialism, hence it is meaningless.

Reply 132

Proggyblocky

7

For a 25 marker on behaviourism would we have to evaluate both hard and soft behaviourism or would it be okay to just exclusively do soft?

Reply 133

Teob

8

Original post by Proggyblocky

For a 25 marker on behaviourism would we have to evaluate both hard and soft behaviourism or would it be okay to just exclusively do soft?

You should consider hard behaviourism first and then move onto soft behaviourism to maximise the scope of your argument.

Reply 134

nazma5979

11

Original post by Proggyblocky

For a 25 marker on behaviourism would we have to evaluate both hard and soft behaviourism or would it be okay to just exclusively do soft?

explain hard behaviourism and then give the strongest criticism (multiple realisabilty imo), and then move on to soft behaviourism for the rest of the essay and evaluate > either it's the strongest behaviourist account or its better than hard behaviourism but also fails

Reply 135

anon332211

6

for me im just doing soft - I outline what hard is but I only focus on Ryle. My tutor said this was ok and I assume as long as the argument is precise and you make it clear you are just arguing for/against soft it should be ok.

Original post by Proggyblocky

For a 25 marker on behaviourism would we have to evaluate both hard and soft behaviourism or would it be okay to just exclusively do soft?

Reply 136

ivywalkerrr

13

Original post by Proggyblocky

For a 25 marker on behaviourism would we have to evaluate both hard and soft behaviourism or would it be okay to just exclusively do soft?

I assumed you would have done hard behaviorism, countered it with super Spartans and then counter super Spartans with soft behaviorism. then counter soft behaviorism with X worlders

Reply 137

Proggyblocky

7

Did some searching and found the mark scheme for the specimen paper. This is what it said in regards to a behaviourism essay:

Students should respond in the form of an argument, to a clear conclusion. They might argue:
• that philosophical behaviourism does give the correct account of mental states
• that philosophical behaviourism does not give the correct account of mental states.

Students might explain philosophical behaviourism in either or both of the following ways (and
some may consider the relative merits of both formulations in the course of the essay):
o 'Hard' behaviourism: all propositions about mental states can be reduced without loss of
meaning to propositions that exclusively use the language of physics to talk about bodily
states/movements (eg Carl Hempel).
o 'Soft' behaviourism: propositions about mental states are propositions about behavioural
dispositions (ie propositions that use ordinary language) (eg Gilbert Ryle).

Reply 138

XJTheGreat

9

At this late stage with paper 2 on Thursday. Would it be reasonable to focus my final preparation around the 25 markers being Property Dualism/Behaviourism for MOM, and Cosmos Arguments/Problem of Evil/Religious Lang for MOG or would it still be advisable to continue to revise other possible essays for the other possible topics. The only reason I ask is because if it we have pretty much established these are the likely topics for the 25 markers (through a process of eliminating previous recent 25 marker topics), then I might just focus on having the best responses ready for these topics.

(edited 1 year ago)

Reply 139

Proggyblocky

7

Original post by XJTheGreat

At this late stage with paper 2 on Thursday. Would it be reasonable to focus my final preparation around the 25 markers being Property Dualism/Behaviourism for MOM, and Cosmos Arguments/Problem of Evil/Religious Lang for MOG or would it still be advisable to continue to revise other possible essays for the other possible topics. The only reason I ask is because if it we have pretty much established these are the likely topics for the 25 markers (through a process of eliminating previous recent 25 marker topics), then I might just focus on having the best responses ready for these topics.

Yeah I'd say so, the 25 markers are almost 100% gonna be on two of these topics unless they do a repeat which (I'm pretty sure) they haven't done before.

A-level Philosophy Study Group 2022

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you