Complete AQA A-Level Philosophy specification revision resources. Tailored syllabus coverage with topic breakdowns, quizzes, and practice questions.
Overview
AQA A-Level Philosophy invites students to explore profound questions about existence, knowledge, morality, and the mind. The course is structured around four core themes: Epistemology (the theory of knowledge), Moral Philosophy (ethics), Metaphysics of God, and Metaphysics of Mind. Through studying these areas, students engage with key philosophical arguments, classic texts, and contemporary debates, developing rigorous analytical and critical thinking skills.
The specification emphasizes active philosophical enquiry, encouraging students to construct and evaluate arguments, assess the coherence of concepts, and consider the implications of different philosophical positions. It draws on the Western philosophical tradition, from Plato and Aristotle to Descartes, Hume, and modern thinkers, providing a solid foundation for further study in philosophy, law, politics, and other humanities subjects.
Designed to be both challenging and rewarding, the course develops transferable skills valued by universities and employers, such as logical reasoning, clarity of expression, and the ability to formulate persuasive arguments. The linear assessment structure ensures a deep, cumulative understanding of the subject, with all examinations taken at the end of the two-year course.
Why Choose AQA for Philosophy?
Clear and structured specification: AQA provides a highly organized syllabus with well-defined topics, making it easier for students to track their learning and for teachers to plan lessons. The division into four distinct areas ensures balanced coverage and avoids overwhelming content breadth.
Emphasis on argument analysis: AQA’s assessment heavily rewards the ability to dissect, compare, and evaluate philosophical arguments. This focus aligns with university-style philosophy, offering excellent preparation for higher education.
Accessible and popular resource support: As the largest exam board in England, AQA has a wealth of published textbooks, online materials, and past papers, making independent study and revision more manageable for students.
Assessment & Exam Structure
The AQA A-Level Philosophy qualification (7172) is assessed through two written examination papers, each lasting 3 hours and carrying 100 marks, accounting for 50% of the A-Level. Paper 1 covers Epistemology and Moral Philosophy, while Paper 2 focuses on Metaphysics of God and Metaphysics of Mind. Each paper is divided into two sections (one per topic), with Section A requiring short and long answers, and Section B consisting of an extended essay question. There is no coursework or practical component; the entire grade is determined by these exams.
Specification Topics
Top Exam Board Tips
- Ensure you can clearly define 'sense-data' and explain its role in Indirect Realism
- When discussing responses to scepticism, focus on the specific arguments provided by the philosophers mentioned in the specification
- Practice evaluating the strength of the arguments against Direct Realism, such as the time-lag argument
- Be prepared to compare and contrast the three theories directly
- Use the set text (Berkeley's Three Dialogues) to support your analysis of Idealism
- Ensure you can clearly define 'a priori' and 'a posteriori' as these are foundational to this topic
- When discussing Descartes, be precise about which arguments are intuitions and which are deductions
- Use the specific terminology provided in the specification, such as 'clear and distinct ideas'
- Practice applying Hume's Fork to specific arguments to demonstrate critical evaluation
- Ensure you can clearly distinguish between local and global scepticism.
Common Mistakes to Avoid
- Confusing the immediate objects of perception between the three theories
- Failing to distinguish between primary and secondary qualities in Locke's account
- Misinterpreting Berkeley's Idealism as a form of solipsism
- Struggling to articulate the specific sceptical challenge arising from Indirect Realism
- Confusing the 'Master' argument with other arguments for Idealism
- Confusing the definition of intuition with common-sense 'gut feeling' rather than the philosophical definition
- Failing to distinguish between the different types of a priori arguments used by Descartes
- Misunderstanding the application of Hume's Fork to Descartes' arguments
Key Terminology & Definitions
- {"theme":"Normative Application","description":"The systematic translation of abstract principles, such as the Categorical Imperative or the Principle of Utility, into concrete moral directives for contemporary dilemmas."}
- {"theme":"Sanctity vs. Quality of Life","description":"The tension between the inherent value of life (Imago Dei) and the instrumental value based on well-being, autonomy, or the avoidance of suffering."}
- {"theme":"Moral Status and Personhood","description":"The criteria for moral consideration, scrutinizing the philosophical thresholds of sentience, rationality, and potentiality in medical and environmental contexts."}
- {"theme":"Cognitivism vs. Non-cognitivism","description":"The semantic debate regarding whether moral statements function as truth-apt propositions (Cognitivism) or as expressions of non-cognitive attitudes such as emotions or prescriptions (Non-cognitivism)."}
- {"theme":"Moral Realism vs. Anti-realism","description":"The ontological investigation into whether moral properties exist as mind-independent facts (Realism) or are subjective, social, or psychological constructs (Anti-realism)."}
- {"theme":"Ethical Naturalism vs. Non-naturalism","description":"The conflict between the reductionist claim that moral properties are identical to natural, empirical facts and the Moorean view that moral properties are simple, unanalyzable, and non-natural."}
- {"theme":"The Coherence of the Divine Attributes","description":"Critical analysis of the logical compatibility of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnibenevolence, specifically addressing the Paradox of the Stone and the Euthyphro Dilemma."}
- {"theme":"A Priori vs A Posteriori Proofs","description":"Evaluation of arguments derived from definition (Ontological) versus those derived from empirical observation of the universe (Cosmological and Teleological)."}
- {"theme":"Theodicy and the Problem of Evil","description":"Assessment of the logical and evidential challenges posed by the existence of moral and natural evil to the concept of an all-powerful, all-loving deity."}
- {"theme":"Cognitivism vs. Non-cognitivism","description":"The fundamental debate regarding whether religious assertions function as truth-apt propositions describing objective reality or as non-truth-apt expressions of emotion, attitude, or moral commitment."}
- {"theme":"The Verification Principle","description":"The logical positivist criterion, primarily associated with the Vienna Circle, asserting that a statement is only meaningful if it is a tautology or empirically verifiable in principle."}
- {"theme":"The Falsification Debate","description":"The challenge posed by Antony Flew, based on Karl Popper’s philosophy of science, suggesting that religious claims are meaningless because no conceivable evidence is permitted to count against them."}
- {"theme":"Rationalism vs Empiricism","description":"The tension between a priori ontological reasoning, which seeks to define God into existence through pure logic, and a posteriori cosmological/teleological arguments based on observation of the natural world."}
- {"theme":"The Nature of Necessity","description":"Exploration of God as a 'necessary being' (ens necessarium) in contrast to the contingent nature of the universe, involving the Principle of Sufficient Reason."}
- {"theme":"Theodicy and the Challenge of Evil","description":"The critical evaluation of whether the existence of suffering is logically or evidentially compatible with the traditional divine attributes of omnipotence and omnibenevolence."}