What should I focus on for AQA Education A-Level Philosophy?

In essays, ensure each theory is presented with precise technical definitions before evaluating. Use diagrams to illustrate the differing claims about the relationship between perceiver, perception, and object.

What should I focus on for AQA Education A-Level Philosophy? (2)

When discussing the argument from illusion, distinguish between the kind of illusion that challenges direct realism and the more radical challenge of hallucination.

What should I focus on for AQA Education A-Level Philosophy? (3)

For high marks, engage with the philosophical responses to problems; for example, evaluate how direct realists might appeal to disjunctivism to handle hallucination.

What should I focus on for AQA Education A-Level Philosophy? (4)

Always define key terms (e.g., a priori, innate, intuition, deduction) at the start of your essay to establish a clear conceptual framework and meet assessment objective criteria for knowledge and understanding.

What should I focus on for AQA Education A-Level Philosophy? (5)

When evaluating innate knowledge, explicitly consider classical criticisms such as Locke's argument from universal consent or the lack of empirical evidence for innate ideas, and balance them with rationalist rejoinders.

What are common mistakes in AQA Education A-Level Philosophy?

Confusing direct realism with naive realism, failing to recognise that direct realism involves direct perception without an intermediary like sense-data.

What are common mistakes in AQA Education A-Level Philosophy? (2)

Mischaracterising idealism as solipsism, when Berkeleyan idealism is typically intersubjective due to God's perception.

What are common mistakes in AQA Education A-Level Philosophy? (3)

Assuming indirect realism inevitably leads to scepticism, overlooking that some indirect realists (e.g., Locke) hold we can have knowledge of primary qualities.

Philosophy

AQA Education

A-Level

Specification: 100/0351/4

This subject will help you develop key knowledge and skills required for exam success.

Topics

Objectives

Exam Tips

Pitfalls

Ready to practise?

AI-powered quizzes tailored to your specification

Start Practising

Key Features

Master key concepts
Develop exam technique
Apply knowledge effectively

Assessment Objectives

AO1

78%-80%

Demonstrate knowledge and understanding of the core concepts and methods of philosophy, including through the use of philosophical analysis

AO2

23%-25%

Analyse and evaluate philosophical arguments to form reasoned judgements

What Gets Top Grades

A*/Grade 9

Knowledge & Understanding

Demonstrates comprehensive and accurate knowledge

Uses correct subject-specific terminology
Shows detailed understanding of concepts
Makes accurate connections between topics
Demonstrates depth beyond surface-level knowledge

Application

Applies knowledge effectively to new contexts

Selects relevant knowledge for the question
Adapts understanding to unfamiliar scenarios
Uses examples appropriately
Shows awareness of context

Analysis & Evaluation

Develops sophisticated analytical arguments

Constructs logical chains of reasoning
Considers multiple perspectives
Weighs evidence to reach justified conclusions
Acknowledges limitations and nuances

Key Command Words

AQA Education

State

1 mark

Give a single fact or term

Identify

1 mark

Name, select, or recognise

Outline

2 marks

Set out main features briefly

Describe

2-4 marks

Give an account of what something is like or what happens

Explain

3-6 marks

Give reasons with developed cause→effect chains

Compare

2-4 marks

State similarities AND differences (both required)

Analyse

6-9 marks

Examine in detail showing cause→effect→consequence chains

Evaluate

6-12 marks

Weigh up BOTH sides, reach JUSTIFIED conclusion

Assess

6-12 marks

Make judgments about importance with justification

Calculate

2-4 marks

Show formula→substitution→calculation→answer with units

Common Exam Mistakes

Pitfalls to avoid in your exams

•Confusing direct realism with naive realism, failing to recognise that direct realism involves direct perception without an intermediary like sense-data.
•Mischaracterising idealism as solipsism, when Berkeleyan idealism is typically intersubjective due to God's perception.
•Assuming indirect realism inevitably leads to scepticism, overlooking that some indirect realists (e.g., Locke) hold we can have knowledge of primary qualities.
•Confusing rationalism with idealism: some students mistakenly assume that rationalism entails that the mind creates reality, rather than focusing on the source of knowledge.
•Misinterpreting innate knowledge as fully-formed conscious ideas from birth, rather than potentialities or dispositions that are triggered by experience (as per Leibniz's analogy of veined marble).
•Assuming that deductive reasoning always yields certain knowledge without scrutinising the truth of the initial premises, thereby overlooking the problem of infinite regress or the need for intuitive foundations.
•Confusing a priori knowledge with innate knowledge, failing to recognize that a priori propositions can be known independently of experience without necessarily being inborn.
•Treating 'belief' as equivalent to 'knowledge', overlooking that a belief must also be true and justified to qualify as knowledge.

Top Examiner Tips

Expert advice for exam success

•In essays, ensure each theory is presented with precise technical definitions before evaluating. Use diagrams to illustrate the differing claims about the relationship between perceiver, perception, and object.
•When discussing the argument from illusion, distinguish between the kind of illusion that challenges direct realism and the more radical challenge of hallucination.
•For high marks, engage with the philosophical responses to problems; for example, evaluate how direct realists might appeal to disjunctivism to handle hallucination.
•Always define key terms (e.g., a priori, innate, intuition, deduction) at the start of your essay to establish a clear conceptual framework and meet assessment objective criteria for knowledge and understanding.
•When evaluating innate knowledge, explicitly consider classical criticisms such as Locke's argument from universal consent or the lack of empirical evidence for innate ideas, and balance them with rationalist rejoinders.
•Structure your evaluation around philosophical criteria like clarity and coherence, comparing rationalist explanations with empiricist alternatives and concluding with a justified judgement on the strength of the intuition and deduction thesis.
•When explaining the tripartite definition, always incorporate a concrete example (e.g., knowing that Paris is the capital of France) to illustrate how the belief, truth, and justification conditions are each satisfied.
•In essays, use precise epistemological terminology: refer to 'justification' rather than vague terms like 'proof' or 'evidence', and clarify whether your examples involve a priori or a posteriori justification.

Specification Topics

4 topics

Epistemology

This subtopic examines philosophical theories of perception as a foundation for knowledge: direct realism claims we perceive mind-independent objects directly; indirect realism proposes we perceive mind-dependent sense-data caused by objects; idealism denies mind-independent objects, holding reality is mental. Students explore and assess arguments including illusion, hallucination, perceptual variation, time-lag, and the causal argument.

Perception as a source of knowledge, Reason as a source of knowledge, What is knowledge? +1 more

0 objectives13 tips14 pitfalls4 subtopics

Moral Philosophy

Meta-ethics investigates the foundations of moral language and properties, focusing on whether moral statements express beliefs and can be true or false. Moral realism asserts mind-independent moral facts, while anti-realism denies them, often linking to debates between cognitivism (moral judgments are truth-apt beliefs) and non-cognitivism (they express non-cognitive attitudes). This subtopic is central to understanding ethical objectivity and the meaning of moral discourse, underpinning later normative theories.

Meta-ethics, Aristotelian virtue ethics, Utilitarianism +1 more

0 objectives13 tips17 pitfalls4 subtopics

Metaphysics of God

The arguments for the existence of God are foundational in the philosophy of religion, encompassing a priori ontological arguments that deduce God's existence from the concept of a perfect being, and a posteriori cosmological and teleological arguments that infer a first cause or intelligent designer from features of the world. This subtopic explores the logical structure, strengths, and weaknesses of these arguments, including classic formulations by Anselm, Aquinas, and Paley, and their critical evaluations by philosophers such as Gaunilo, Hume, and Kant. A rigorous understanding equips students to analyse the nature of proof, necessity, and the limits of human reasoning in metaphysical inquiry.

Arguments for the existence of God, Religious language, The concept of God

0 objectives11 tips11 pitfalls3 subtopics

Metaphysics of Mind

Physicalism in the metaphysics of mind is the view that mental states are entirely constituted by physical states and processes. This subtopic explores two prominent physicalist theories: type identity theory, which claims mental types are identical to brain state types, and functionalism, which defines mental states by their causal roles, allowing multiple realizability. Evaluating physicalism requires examining challenges like the knowledge argument, the explanatory gap, and the hard problem of consciousness, which question whether physical facts fully account for subjective experience.

Physicalism, Mind and consciousness, Dualism

0 objectives11 tips11 pitfalls3 subtopics

Ready to master Philosophy?

Start practising with AI-powered quizzes tailored to your AQA Education A-Level specification.

Get Started Free