Summary
Summary OCR Philosophy and Ethics A Level Knowledge Organisers PHILOSOPHY
- Course
- Institution
- Book
Fully completed mind maps of the OCR Philosophy and Ethics A Level spec with relevant AO1 and AO2 guaranteed for an A/A*
[Show more]
Connected book
Book Title:
Author(s):
- Edition:
- ISBN:
- Edition:
More summaries for
-
THE CHALLENGE OF SECULARISM NOTES AND EVALUATION
-
RELIGIOUS PLURALISM AND THEOLOGY NOTES AND EVALUATION
-
MARX & LIBERATION THEOLOGY NOTES AND EVALUATION
1 review
By: aminasari123 • 2 year ago
There is nothing wrong with the work its good but when i came to look at it it still has the blank squares covering information which is annoying.
Seller
Follow
stalati3
Reviews received
Content preview
ANCIENT PHILOSOPHICAL INFLUENCES (1.1) SAHILSection and trigger terms What is being argued?
The philosophical views of PLATO, in relation to: How the world is superficial and is in turn distracting to reach true knowledge due to empiricism.
Understanding of Plato believed that there was a greater reality beyond the world we experience. He believed that a priori reasoning was the key to
reality - Plato’s reliance on reason as opposed to analogy of the cave.
the senses Plato believed that unlocking true knowledge was hard within this world as our bodies were a distraction to attaining knowledge b
The Forms - the nature of the Forms; hierarchy of In the analogy of the cave, Plato has argued that the objects in our world are merely shadows of real objects; the philosopher is ab
the Forms the real world. In our world, everything is in a process of change: people grow old and die, trees grow and shed leaves, water con
have three sides, 2 + 2 will always be 4. Plato believes that there is a similar unchanging truth about every type of object or quality
For example, if we were to examine lots of different chairs, we would see that despite their differences, there is something that th
may be many beautiful things, and there is one thing that they have in common.
The Form of the Good is the ultimate Form according to Plato. Just as a Form is what all the Particulars have in common (all chairs
Forms have in common. The perfection of the Forms comes from the Form of the Good. In the allegory of the cave, the Good is re
the real world, so the Form of the Good illuminates the other Forms:
It is the reason why the Forms are good.
It enables us to ‘see’ the Forms.
It is the ultimate end in itself
Boethius's best-known work is the Consolation of Philosophy (De consolatione philosophiae). This book argues that despite the ap
power and everything else is secondary to that divine Providence. Could be useful to build on the Platonic idea.
The analogy of the The analogy of the cave plays a key role in Plato’s philosophy. He uses it to sum up his key philosophical ideas. In the story he asks
cave - details of the analogy, its purpose and cave. They have been there since birth and are chained by their neck and ankles. They can only see the shadows projected on the
relation to the theory of the Forms the shadows is all that exists. If one day a prisoner were released and were to venture outside the cave, once his sight adjusted, h
cave itself was just a shadow world. If the prisoner were to return and attempt to pass on his new knowledge, Plato argues that h
kill him. Each item within the cave is representative of the real world.
The prisoners represent ordinary people in our world
The cave is the empirical world that we see and hear around us
The chains are the senses that restrict the way we experience things
The shadows are our everyday sense experiences
The escapee is philosopher who is able to access knowledge
The difficult ascent is an illustration that the road to philosophical knowledge is hard
The Sun is the highest of all the Forms, the Form of the Good
The return to the cave is philosopher being enlightened and feels it is his duty to free and educate the others
The philosophical views of ARISTOTLE, in relation to: How reason can be applied alongside empiricism to discover the truths of our world.
Understanding of Whereas Plato believed that ultimate reality was beyond this world and could only be grasped by a priori reasoning, his pupil Aris
Reality - Aristotle’s use of teleology him as this world is the real world. In order to explain the world, he uses empirical method, meaning he uses sensory experience.
a telos – or a purpose. This is elucidated in his ‘Final Cause’ by which everything within this world has a purpose and is there for a
The four causes - material, formal, efficient and Aristotle believes that every item within this world has four causes: a material cause, a formal cause, an efficient cause and a final
final causes made from. The formal cause is the structure of a form of something. The efficient cause is the maker or source of change by whic
telos of the item. Suppose if we were to take the item of a chair:
,Mover?
The Form of the Good is like the sun according to Plato, in that it both illuminates and allows us to see the Out of these two approaches, I find neither persuasive. On one hand, Plat
world of the forms, and yet also nourishes and is responsible for all the existence of life and all the other world, such as that of goodness and beauty. However, these two ideals ha
forms, so it is the highest form. All the other forms have goodness in them. The Form of the Good is the good may be bad, and vice versa. Furthermore, the perception of beauty h
source of truth, beauty and justice. Understanding the form of the good makes it impossible for you to do what is considered ‘beautiful’. In olden times such as the Medieval Period
wrong and so Plato says you should rule the people as a ‘philosopher king’. wealthy, they had enough to eat, and they were mostly fat. However, in m
symmetrical face, a proportionate figure etc. The ‘Ideals’ are therefore sub
The Prime Mover is not the efficient cause of the universe, since Aristotle believed the universe was eternal. Aristotle’s Prime Mover, it never interacts with the world, never thinks of
The Prime Mover is responsible for the everlasting motion and change of the universe. Since it cannot be has no impact on the world what is the point of attempting to comprehen
moved, it cannot change and is thus pure actuality. It is only form but no materiality, a kind of mind, which futile.
eternally contemplates itself, otherwise it would contemplate things which change and would then itself
change. Our universe is attracted to the prime mover in a sort of orbit. That is how the prime mover sustains
the pattern of change from actuality to potentiality in our universe.
How does Plato’s reliance on reason (rationalism) and Aristotle’s use of Which approach do you find persuasive and why?
the sense (empiricism) compare in their attempts to make sense of
reality?
Plato favors the use of reason rather than empirical method. Philosophical truths are known a priori without The approach that I find more persuasive is that of Aristotle’s theory, whe
any reliance on the senses. Plato also believes that there are innate ideas; our souls already contain simultaneously. The reason that I have concluded this is due to the idea th
knowledge of the Forms prior to being united to our bodies. The analogy of the cave and the theory of the everything that we do, in the sense that our senses guide us and lead us to
Forms can be used to illustrate these ideas. A priori knowledge gives us certainty, but it only seems to give gained posteriori, and this is evident in his scientific approach, whereby he
certainty about mathematics and logic. It does not bring certainty to the things that we experience. classification of animals. He based his classification system off observation
groups, and then into five genera per group, and then into species within
Aristotle favors the use of the senses over reason. Philosophical truths are acquired via the empirical truths.
method using our senses; they are a posteriori truth. Empiricists do not believe in innate ideas; our mind is a
tabula rasa (blank slate) at birth and it is via experiences that the mind gradually fills with ideas. Aristotle’s However, Aristotle also concedes that everything within this world has a p
theory of the four causes helps to illustrate this empirical method. views things that have a purpose and attributes it to all items within this w
have a purpose. Some of these examples can include the appendix, the nip
world and have no purpose. As a result of this, Aristotle’s theory may have
,SOUL, MIND AND BODY (1.2)
Philosophical language of soul, mind and Metaphysics of consciousness – Substance Metaph
body in Plato and Aristotle dualism Materi
Plato’s view of the soul as the essential and immaterial part of a human, The idea that mind and body are distinct substances – key scholars? The idea tha
temporarily united with the body. Plato suggested that the body belonged to the Mind–body dualism is the theory that mind, and body are distinct kinds of material inte
physical world and would one day turn to dust. However, the soul belonged to a substances or natures. This position implies that mind and body not only differ in Materialism
higher realm where eternal truths, such as justice, love and goodness, will endure meaning but refer to various kinds of entities. Substance dualism is a type of physical of m
for ever. The aim of the soul was to break free from the physical world and fly to dualism most famously defended by René Descartes, which states that there are Materialism
the realm of the forms where it had pre-existed its incarnation, and where it two kinds of foundation: mental and physical. This philosophy states that the statements a
would spend eternity in contemplation of the truth. At birth, the soul forgets its mental can exist outside of the body, and the body cannot think. critiqued Des
previous life, but through philosophy, we can be reminded of the nature of true
reality and recall this lost knowledge.
What evidence is there to support Plato’s approach? What evidence is there to support this approach? What eviden
Meno, a slave-boy with no education is given a maths puzzle to solve. Through The basic argument for Substance Dualism follows three premises: (1) If we can It is based on
questioning, he is able to work out the answer, this shows to Plato the boy uses exist without bodies, then we cannot be bodies. (2) We can exist without bodies. that being m
knowledge learnt before birth, and that intuition is evidence of knowledge prior (3) Therefore, we cannot be bodies. As a result of this, it is quintessential and effect.
to birth. Showing souls lived before on the world of perfect forms. Plato also uses evidence to establish that there is some weight and proof to emphasizing that
the chariot analogy to posit the soul, whereby there is a chariot pulling two the mind and body are two different substances. Behaviourism
horses. The two horses are 'appetite' and 'emotion' basic needs which pull us Example of P
along and motivate people. The charioteer, 'reason', makes them work together.
This is a 'tripartite view' as there are three elements.
Aristotle’s view of the soul as the form of the body; the way the body behaves Descartes’ proposal of material and spiritual substances as a solution to the The rejection
and lives; something which cannot be separated from the body. He views the mind/soul and body problem. Dawkins doe
soul as a 'substance' and takes a more materialist view than Plato. It distinguishes I think therefore I am or ‘cogito ergo sum’ is the pinnacle of Descartes’ argument made up of D
a living thing from a dead thing. The soul gives the matter it's form, the efficient because all Descartes can trust is his that his mind (not the body) exists - and ‘gene machin
and final purpose. The soul cannot live separate from the body. He differentiates therefore the two must be distinct. Descartes believed he could not doubt his takes a reduc
between an animal and human soul by saying that animals have a ‘perceptive’ own existence because he can think therefore, he is. There are two kinds of made of mea
soul, because they sense, experience and have intelligence to tell between pain foundation - The mental (mind) and the body. The mental can exist outside of the itself as an in
and pleasure. Humans have higher soul allowing reason and rationality. body, the body cannot think.
Berkley has t
Descartes’ contemporary, Nicholas Malebranche accepted his dualism and took it minds and th
upon himself to grapple with the causation problem. His solution was to claim doubt that m
that interaction did not occur. Instead, on every occasion when a conjunction of simplest cou
mental and physical events happened, God acted to make it happen, so creating actually iden
the appearance of cause and effect. This doctrine is known as “occasionalism”. causation are
, What are materialist critiques of dualism?
• Gilbert Ryle Argued Descartes made a category mistake assuming there was something separate to the body doing the thinking. Ryle used analogy of Oxford University to po
where the university is - made a category mistake assuming it was something different to what they had been shown. He sees this as the Ghost in Machine - assuming an uns
applies to the activity of the body.
•
• In The Analysis of Mind (1921) and The Analysis of Matter (1927), Russel abandoned this notion in favour of what he called neutral monism, the view that the “ultimate stuff”
between the two. Here, Russel aimed to show that the mind cannot exist without the physical body and has to be interlinked and intertwined with the matter of the mind its
•
• Hume also claims that we never directly apprehend the self. Unlike Descartes, he concludes from this that there is no substantial self. In a famous passage, Hume uses introsp
perceptions. Locke agrees that self-reflection is important to the nature of the self. But while Descartes takes self-reflection to reveal that nature, Locke seems to suggest tha
ergo sum’ – I think therefore I am, Locke believes that because of our self-perception, we exist wholly.
• Dawkins' theory about evolution and the selfish gene, however, does not explain things like emotions. According to his theory, emotions would be a mistake since they are us
• The minds are nonphysical objects, how can the mind cause anything to happen in the physical world? For example, I think of running for the bus; but if my mind is not linked
place?
Spinoza claims that the notion of dualism relates not to substances, but to properties: two distinct types of property, mental and physical, can be ascribed to a single thing (a
cannot be analyzed in terms of one another. So, the different properties describe different aspects of the same entity (the view is called ‘double aspect theory’). The theory c
themselves have both physical and mental aspects.
The problem with minds and consciousness, is that they remain so mysterious, so unlike anything else that we are familiar with, that is altogether unclear as to what might co
the mind can be seen as another symptom of the more general mind-body problem. IF our theory of mind can demystify the relation between mental and physical phenome
interlinked.
Other scholarly approaches to the Soul, Mind and Body problem:
• Bryan McGee wrote in Confessions of a Philosopher (1997), ‘The human body is a single entity, one subject of behaviour and experience with a single history. We are not two
category mistake.’ This supports the idea of monism, whereby the soul, mind and body are one and therefore interlinked rather than two different items.
• A possible answer to these problems was offered by John Hick’s replica theory, where he suggested that if someone dies and appears in a new world with the same memorie
person. For instance, Hick says that if a person in London disappeared and in the next instant appeared in New York with the same memories and bodily features, then they w
in London even though they would not understand how they had arrived in New York.
• Sigmund Freud believed that the psyche was composed of three components:
• The id, which represents the instinctual drives of an individual and remains largely unconscious.
• Leibniz’s law of ‘identify of indiscernible’; if two things, A and B, are identical, every property of A will be a property of B; and hence, if A has a property that B lacks, A and B a
about something are not real properties of that thing: you can know something under different descriptions (different interpretations).
The benefits of buying summaries with Stuvia:
Guaranteed quality through customer reviews
Stuvia customers have reviewed more than 700,000 summaries. This how you know that you are buying the best documents.
Quick and easy check-out
You can quickly pay through credit card or Stuvia-credit for the summaries. There is no membership needed.
Focus on what matters
Your fellow students write the study notes themselves, which is why the documents are always reliable and up-to-date. This ensures you quickly get to the core!
Frequently asked questions
What do I get when I buy this document?
You get a PDF, available immediately after your purchase. The purchased document is accessible anytime, anywhere and indefinitely through your profile.
Satisfaction guarantee: how does it work?
Our satisfaction guarantee ensures that you always find a study document that suits you well. You fill out a form, and our customer service team takes care of the rest.
Who am I buying these notes from?
Stuvia is a marketplace, so you are not buying this document from us, but from seller stalati3. Stuvia facilitates payment to the seller.
Will I be stuck with a subscription?
No, you only buy these notes for $7.16. You're not tied to anything after your purchase.
Can Stuvia be trusted?
4.6 stars on Google & Trustpilot (+1000 reviews)
75057 documents were sold in the last 30 days
Founded in 2010, the go-to place to buy study notes for 14 years now