The Student Room Group

AQA A-level Philosophy Paper 2 (7582/2) - 22nd May 2024 [Exam Chat]

Poll

How did your AQA A-level Philosophy Paper 2 exam go?


AQA A-level Philosophy Paper 2 (7582/2) - 22nd May 2024 [Exam Chat]

Welcome to the exam discussion thread for this exam. Introduce yourself! Let others know what you're aiming for in your exams, what you are struggling with in your revision or anything else.

Wishing you all the best of luck.

General Information
Date/Time: 22nd May 2024/ PM
Length: 3hrs
(edited 1 month ago)

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1
Now that paper 1 is out of the way any thoughts or predictions on paper 2? I hope religious language will come up as the essay for section A. Not sure what the essay could be for section B property dualism?
Original post by hmmSeb
Now that paper 1 is out of the way any thoughts or predictions on paper 2? I hope religious language will come up as the essay for section A. Not sure what the essay could be for section B property dualism?

im hoping for religious language too!!! defo possible as its only been asked on the sample paper (i think....)
God
- Religious language (never come up)
- teleological (last 2019)
- concept and nature of god (last 2020)

I think RL is most likely, not sure if they would do concept and nature as thats the first section, and they did the first section for paper 1??!!?! I might b being stupid tho


Mind
- what do we mean by the mind (never come up) (as above tho)
- behaviorism (never)
- functionalism (last 2020) PLEASE NO
Reply 4
Original post by racracrac
im hoping for religious language too!!! defo possible as its only been asked on the sample paper (i think....)

Do you have an essay plan in mind?

I think I will probably talk about verification principle with eschatological verification as a response.

Followed by arguing against eschatological verification with Flew's falsification principle.

And ultimately arguing for Mitchell's position.
Past 25 mark questions :smile:

God
2023 - Does the cosmological argument prove that God exists
2022 - Does the existance of evil disprove the existence of God
2021 - Can God’s omnipotence be proved using an ontological argument
2020 - Is the concept of God incoherent
2019 - How successful is the design argument for the existence of God

Mind
2023 - Does MBTIT give the right account of mental states
2022 - To what extent is eliminative materialism correct
2021 - Can a dualist account of the mind be successfully defended
2020 - does functionalism give a convincing account of mental states
2019 - is eliminative materialism convincing
Original post by hmmSeb
Do you have an essay plan in mind?
I think I will probably talk about verification principle with eschatological verification as a response.
Followed by arguing against eschatological verification with Flew's falsification principle.
And ultimately arguing for Mitchell's position.
i've written this essay before and got full marks so i will (hopefully) just try and replicate that lol

first point will be Flew & the jungle clearing analogy
response to this - eschatological verification
response to that - only have empirical evidence to go on....
then Hare's blik argument to show that religious lang is still meaningful in some way
^ sorry i didnt add my actual line of argument but i argue that although religious language is unfalsifiable it is still meaningful
Reply 8
Original post by edwardhoare
God
- Religious language (never come up)
- teleological (last 2019)
- concept and nature of god (last 2020)
I think RL is most likely, not sure if they would do concept and nature as thats the first section, and they did the first section for paper 1??!!?! I might b being stupid tho
Mind
- what do we mean by the mind (never come up) (as above tho)
- behaviorism (never)
- functionalism (last 2020) PLEASE NO

How could you plan a 25 marker for “what do we mean by mind?”. On the spec there’s not really any questions or responses, so I’m quite unsure
Reply 9
Original post by marthabc
How could you plan a 25 marker for “what do we mean by mind?”. On the spec there’s not really any questions or responses, so I’m quite unsure

Seems an unlikely question - but behaviourism and functionalism would say by mind we mean either behavioural language or something functional (functional roles). Whereas dualists would say the mind is non-physical and the standard physicalists would say it's physical. So you could really write about anything!
(edited 1 month ago)
Original post by Joe312
Seems an unlikely question - but behaviourism and functionalism would say by mind we mean either behavioural language or something functional (functional roles). Whereas dualists would say the mind is non-physical and the standard physicalists would say it's physical. So you could really write about anything!


I agree it is unlikely - i put it there as it is one of the major spec points (like SD/PD/MBTIT etc.) I think if it came up we could talk about anything
Original post by edwardhoare
I agree it is unlikely - i put it there as it is one of the major spec points (like SD/PD/MBTIT etc.) I think if it came up we could talk about anything


Moreover, it would be the broadest question theyve ever done - covering basically 25% of the spec. So whilst conceivable, may not be in the realm of AQA metaphysical possibility
Reply 12
Original post by edwardhoare
Moreover, it would be the broadest question theyve ever done - covering basically 25% of the spec. So whilst conceivable, may not be in the realm of AQA metaphysical possibility

and even if it is metaphysically possible, that might tell us nothing about reality!

I watched that video someone posted in the other thread from the AQA chief examiner - they seemed to say the criteria for 25 mark questions was whether there are enough bullet points on the spec to justify it - so he said they could never ask a full question on just the paradox of the stone for example. But by that criteria - epiphenomenalism might be possible as it has 3 bullet points (and technically the interaction problem is relevant to it, since if descartes can solve it [he can't but he tries..] then epiphenomenalism is an unnecessary move for dualists to make).
I've seen a few people say that epiphenomenalism is a possibility for 25 marker... how would you plan an essay around it if anyone has any plans?
Reply 14
Original post by flabbycasper
I've seen a few people say that epiphenomenalism is a possibility for 25 marker... how would you plan an essay around it if anyone has any plans?

Epiphenomenalism is also called non-interactionist dualism. It holds that the mind is causally inefficacious. Mental states cannot causally affect physical things, nor other mental states. This view is compatible with both substance and property dualism.

Epiphenomenalism is based on two claims:

1. Arguments for dualism succeed.

If arguments for dualism fail, then we have no reason to accept any form of dualism, including epiphenomenalism.

2. The interaction problem cannot be solved and is thus best avoided.

If the interaction problem could be solved, then interactionist dualism is valid and so proposing non-interactionist dualism would be unnecessary.


So I would do

Paragraph 1: can the interaction problem be solved? (probably not..)

Paragraph 2: do any arguments for dualism work?

Paragraph 3: evaluate one of the epiphenomenalism issues on the spec (natural selection, introspection, phenomenology of mental life etc).
Have asked my teacher who marks for the exam board and hes said that a “what do we mean by the mind” question wld be very unlikely as it wld cover the whole spec. More likely is a overarching dualism/physicalism question
They’ve never asked substance dualism outright also
ibr the perfect set of 25s are probably religious language and behaviourism. Considering they blessed us on p1 tho, they'll probably shaft us with functionalism or a non physical 25 marker (epi, substance/property and etc), and for God they'll probably do like evil problem (imo thats the hardest one they could do, but god 25s aren't that bad)
Original post by hi12345679
ibr the perfect set of 25s are probably religious language and behaviourism. Considering they blessed us on p1 tho, they'll probably shaft us with functionalism or a non physical 25 marker (epi, substance/property and etc), and for God they'll probably do like evil problem (imo thats the hardest one they could do, but god 25s aren't that bad)


Do you think they’d ask problem of even even though they did in 2022
Original post by hi12345679
ibr the perfect set of 25s are probably religious language and behaviourism. Considering they blessed us on p1 tho, they'll probably shaft us with functionalism or a non physical 25 marker (epi, substance/property and etc), and for God they'll probably do like evil problem (imo thats the hardest one they could do, but god 25s aren't that bad)


Evil came up in 2022, they might pull a fast one and do it again though…

Quick Reply

Latest

Trending

Trending