AQA A-level Philosophy Paper 1 (7582/1) - 16th May 2024 [Exam Chat]

I know this is probably silly but can someone quickly help, for a conclusion on indirect realism, is it ok to not advocate for any of them in the end? Just say I don't find indirect realism convincing because XYZ (probably scepticism etc) and not mention my opinion on the other two? Or do you have to at least rule them out?

That video is wrong!
See the spec here
Direct realism
The immediate objects of perception are mind-independent objects and their properties
Issues including:

and responses to these issues.
https://www.aqa.org.uk/subjects/philosophy/a-level/philosophy-7172/subject-content/epistemology
And then see this question from the AQA specimin paper:
Explain one way in which a direct realist could respond to the argument from illusion. [5 marks]
https://filestore.aqa.org.uk/resources/philosophy/AQA-71721-SQP.PDF

https://www.aqa.org.uk/professional-development/inside-assessment/bringing-assessment-to-life/philosophy?subject=Philosophy
This video is by aqa and they said that they won’t ask questions like that (around 5:45). Perhaps they changed their approach after the specimen paper because this video was released within the last year?

Interesting! That makes sense what he's saying about the mark scheme. Thanks for this.

Also some resources I found only this week that might be useful to you all:

This guy posted his 2023 A* marked philosophy script on his linkedin, all his answers/marking/the questions are there https://www.linkedin.com/posts/jakepronger_exam-scripts-activity-7105583812549435392-X2bn

Discontinued AS 2019, 2020 mark schemes (I thought only 2018 existed), some content there not covered in the A level specs e.g Leibniz necessary truth argument

https://edupapers.store/wp-content/uploads/simple-file-list/AQA/A-Level/Philosophy-7172/2020/AQA-7171-W-MS-Jun20.pdf
https://www.exampaperspractice.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2021/09/AQA-71711-W-MS-JUN19.pdf

Thank you so much! Do you have any of these for paper 2?

Nope AS is only paper 1 ☹️

Any for paper two then? <3

All paper 2 is avaliable in the usual place on aqa website, except weirdly 2019 last time I checked

So there's that if your missing 2019 but everything else isn't hidden
https://examoo.s3.eu-west-2.amazonaws.com/papers/uk/a-level/philosophy/aqa/2/19-jun/ms.PDF

For applying ethics do we have to memorise all the scenarios like the TL2 Axeman stuff cos I can’t see it on the spec. I’m guessing its just to help us in our answers

Hey it's very cool that you're active in the chat today. These might also be obvious questions but I'm following your indirect realism 25 marker model essay (thank you), and I want to be super clear with my intent.
Why explicitly is leading to scepticism bad for a theory of perception? I was going to say something like because it's unappealing/counter-intuitive from an epistemological stand-point to imply we have such little knowledge.
Then I was going to say MORE CRUCIALLY that the claims undermine eachother, so the theory/argument collapses but this feels like I might be waffling a bit, is that even more crucial/an argument theory sin?
I love being super specific early in the essay to make integration later easier but I am bad at it lol

Does anyone have a just really solid short answer for necessary and sufficient conditions?
I feel like I know exactly what they are but really stumble over words when trying to explain succinctly.
There is not anything in the mark schemes except one in the examiner report for necessary as 'A CONDITION THAT MUST BE MET FOR X TO BE THE CASE' but I feel like if you gave that in a 3 marker, or even in a 25 it wouldn't be a detailed enough answer
If I had like a basic crutch answer I could rely I'd feel safer lol

Does anyone have a just really solid short answer for necessary and sufficient conditions?
I feel like I know exactly what they are but really stumble over words when trying to explain succinctly.
There is not anything in the mark schemes except one in the examiner report for necessary as 'A CONDITION THAT MUST BE MET FOR X TO BE THE CASE' but I feel like if you gave that in a 3 marker, or even in a 25 it wouldn't be a detailed enough answer
If I had like a basic crutch answer I could rely I'd feel safer lol

nah u dont need to memorise specific scenarios. just know how each theory would judge each action generally