A-level Philosophy Study Group 2022

Does anyone have the logical form for the asymmetry between self knowledge and knowledge of other people's mental states? I don't think mine is correct

Reply 141

CoffeeKitten

9

Does anyone have a good essay plan for cosmo arguments? Would you talk about from causation then contingency? That would be my plan but idk

Reply 142

XJTheGreat

9

Original post by CoffeeKitten

Does anyone have a good essay plan for cosmo arguments? Would you talk about from causation then contingency? That would be my plan but idk

Introduction: Define cosmological arguments from causation and contingency + state what side you will be arguing for i.e. cosmological argument succeed/fail.

This plan argues that Cosmos arguments (from causation) succeed!

Argument 1: Kalam argument/Aquinas’ second way (causation).

Objection: Is it necessary for there to be a first cause?(just because we only see evidence of cause and effect, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the universe itself was created).

Response to objection: A infinite regress (sequence) of causes is impossible.

Argument 2: God is the best explanation (Swinburne).

Conclusion: Therefore, the Kalam argument/Aquinas’ second way succeed in proving the existence of God and the objection fail to challenge this and Swinburne illustrates that the best explanation of this first cause is God as He is the only being who is powerful enough to create the grandeur of all the subsequent causes (the universe etc.)

Hope this helped, you don’t have to just argue for causation as you could consider both causation and contigency however, I found that there was enough content to cover for a 25 marker focussing soley on causation, but that is of course up to you.

(edited 1 year ago)

Thank you!!

Original post by Eleanor334

Does anyone have the logical form for the asymmetry between self knowledge and knowledge of other people's mental states? I don't think mine is correct

I didn't write mine in standard form, but this is what I wrote:

An issue for the behaviourist is that there is an important difference between the way I come to know about my own mental states as opposed to the mental states of others. You know more about yourself than you do about others — you have privileged access to your mental states and don’t need to observe your behaviour to know them. You know that you are in pain without having to examine your behaviour. While you may observe someone else wincing and then infer that they are in pain, it would be absurd to suppose you that learn that you are in pain by observing a similar behaviour in yourself. So knowledge about others and their mental states is inferred, but it seems that knowledge of my own mind is not. If behaviourism were true, it would find you asking others about how you are feeling, or looking into a mirror to find whether you are in pain (and wincing), for example. We need not do this because knowledge of our own conscious states is immediate and infallible.
What this shows is that there is an asymmetry between my knowledge of my own mind and my knowledge of other people’s minds. We do not gain such knowledge in the same way, and Ryle’s account in particular ignores this crucial difference.

Reply 145

EAC7228

1

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.

Definitely focus on the one's that haven't come up - AQA made an answers and commentaries document which included a model essay on religious language, so MOG essay is most likely cosmological, ontological, or problem of evil. But do still learn the responses to arguments from one's which have come up, it is always possible (albeit very unlikely) that they will reword a question, so do it just in case (but not as in-depth, just read over before the exam so that if they do come up it will be fresh). Though AQA have said that they aim to cover all topics within a 5-year period so it is very unlikely the same essay will come up twice.

Reply 146

nazma5979

11

Original post by EAC7228

Definitely focus on the one's that haven't come up - AQA made an answers and commentaries document which included a model essay on religious language, so MOG essay is most likely cosmological, ontological, or problem of evil. But do still learn the responses to arguments from one's which have come up, it is always possible (albeit very unlikely) that they will reword a question, so do it just in case (but not as in-depth, just read over before the exam so that if they do come up it will be fresh). Though AQA have said that they aim to cover all topics within a 5-year period so it is very unlikely the same essay will come up twice.

ontological argument essay has come up before too

Reply 147

LovingLucy

17

Original post by CoffeeKitten

Does anyone have a good essay plan for cosmo arguments? Would you talk about from causation then contingency? That would be my plan but idk

You don’t have to talk about Both kinds of cosmological arguments but you can

Reply 148

EAC7228

1

Original post by nazma5979

ontological argument essay has come up before too

Really? When?! I can't find it on this spec

Reply 149

bck.

5

does anyone know how to structure the problem of evil essay? im so confused bc i want to argue bc i need a clear thesis in my introduction and idk how to word it

Reply 150

EAC7228

1

Original post by bck.

what would an essay plan look like for the problem of evil? like im so confused in what to put for the thesis in the introduction of the essay

Introduction: talk about the problem of evil (why it is important for both believers and non-believers), moral and natural evil, position of intent and crucial.

Para 1: logical problem of evil
Augustine's free will defence
Counter
Evaluation

Para 2: Plantinga's free will defence
Counter and response
Evaluation

Para 3: Hick's soul-making theodicy
Counter (evidential problem of evil) and response
Evaluation

Conclusion

Reply 151

bck.

5

does anyone know how to structure the problem of evil essay? im so confused bc i want to argue bc i need a clear thesis in my introduction and idk how to word it

Original post by EAC7228

Introduction: talk about the problem of evil (why it is important for both believers and non-believers), moral and natural evil, position of intent and crucial.

Para 1: logical problem of evil
Augustine's free will defence
Counter
Evaluation

Para 2: Plantinga's free will defence
Counter and response
Evaluation

Para 3: Hick's soul-making theodicy
Counter (evidential problem of evil) and response
Evaluation

Conclusion

thank u sm u saved my life

Reply 152

Proggyblocky

7

Original post by EAC7228

Really? When?! I can't find it on this spec

On the 2021 paper

Reply 153

nazma5979

11

Original post by EAC7228

Really? When?! I can't find it on this spec

it was the 2021 november paper :smile:

Reply 154

y.singh

1

25 marker for MOG - religious language/cosmo
25 marker for MOM - behaviourism/p dualism

Reply 155

username5715172

10

Original post by y.singh

25 marker for MOG - religious language/cosmo
25 marker for MOM - behaviourism/p dualism

Agreed, Good predictions.

Reply 156

ryanlim120405

4

Original post by pee-pee-poo-poo

Agreed, Good predictions.

Why are you up at 2

Reply 157

SolsticeSerpent

11

i don’t know if i should laugh or scream after this exam… anyways i’m glad to have finished philosophy 😭😭 it was fun (sometimes)

Reply 158

nazma5979

11

eliminative materialism essay wtf was that 😭😭

Reply 159

Etaz

1

Yes, I feel like they were 'out to get us' with moral anti realism in the first paper, and now eliminative materialism... I found Asymmetry of self-knowledge a little difficult to expand on but given that I crammed this all day yesterday and today I think I did pretty well lol. I'll miss philosophy so much though. My favourite subject.

A-level Philosophy Study Group 2022

Quick Reply

Related discussions

Latest

Trending

Trending

Articles for you