Approaching Philosophical Issues MR FREEMAN IB PHILOSOPHY Approaching

Approaching Philosophical Issues MR. FREEMAN| IB PHILOSOPHY

Approaching the issue… Things to consider… There a variety of things an answer to a philosophical question can aim to accomplish. It usually begins by putting some thesis or argument on the table for consideration. VERY RARELY ARE PHILOSOPHERS LOOKING TO EXPLICITLY ANSWER OR SOLVE AN ISSUE WITH THEIR APPROACH.

Approaching the issue… The issue can usually be addressed in one of four approaches: Offering a balanced review of two approaches before offering a reasoned conclusion. Arguing for a truth claim as an approach to the issue by A. Considering the merits or lack thereof of an approach B. Offering convincing conclusive evidence to support your claim. C. Examining a counter-claim and reasons that show the claim to be flawed or incomplete.

Approaching the issue… The issue can usually be addressed in one of four approaches: Arguing for a “stale-mate” after examining two contrasting approaches to the issue and uncovering reasons that show the claim(s) to be flawed or incomplete. Arguing for an innovative approach to the issue with substantial evidence to support your claim-considering your innovative approach next to a counter-claim.

The Process of Developing an argument.

An Argument for a Conclusion A philosophy paper is an argument for a conclusion. Before you write a philosophy paper, you should ask yourself the question: what am I arguing for in this philosophy paper? If this question cannot be answered in a declarative sentence of approximately twenty words or fewer, then you do not have a conclusion, and hence, you do not have an argument, and hence, you do not have a philosophy paper.

Failure: "This paper will look at theories of virtue of Plato and Aristotle. . . " "This paper will ask if Plato and Aristotle agree on virtue being. . . " "This paper will compare Plato and Aristotle on virtue and. . . ” Success: "This paper will argue that Plato and Aristotle have contrasting theories of virtue. "

A Correct Introduction A paper should have an introduction of at least one paragraph. An introduction is not a chance to "set the scene", or to tell your reader why you chose to write this paper, or to summarize everything that you know about the philosopher, or the topic, in question.

A Correct Introduction Instead, an introduction should inform the reader of the conclusion that you are going to argue for, and, if necessary, the sub-arguments, with their respective conclusions, that you are going to provide to support that conclusion. Think of the introduction as an "abstract" of your paper, that is to say, a summary of your entire paper.

The Language of Your Argument The correct language of a philosophy paper is as follows: "X argues that" "X's argument is that", etc. "X states" "X asserts" "X denies" "X contends" "X rejects" "X claims" "X concludes" "X contradicts" "X assumes", etc

1. Outline of a philosophy argument Introduction Your The claim Goal of the Paper What you argue for/against The First Approach Explain Define the approach (as objectively as possible) Terms (from the view of the approach) Provide examples for clarity

1. Outline of a philosophy argument Examination Philosophers Implications Evidence The who support your approach (analysis of their claims) of holding this approach (what if the approach were true) to support your approach. Second Approach Explain Define of First Approach the approach (as objectively as possible) Terms (from the view of the approach) Provide examples for clarity

1. Outline of a philosophy argument Examination Philosophers Discuss of Second Approach who support this approach (analysis of their claims) Implications of holding this approach (what if the approach were true) Evidence to support/reject this approach. Weighing up both approaches toward a conclusion Evaluate Give both claims the audience insight into factors that will bring you towards a conclusion.

1. Outline of a philosophy argument Conclusion Restate Offer our conclusion. considerations on the issue that may still need to be addressed.

Topic #1 WHAT, IF ANY, ARE THE RELATIONSHIPS BETWEEN MIND AND BODY?

Importance of this issue… IF THE MIND HAS A SEPARATE NATURE FROM THE BODY, ARE THEY DIFFERENT ENTITIES? IF THE TWO ARE ONE ENTITY, HOW CAN ONE CLAIM TO HAVE A PART OF THE SELF THAT IS SEPARATE FROM THE BODY? IF THE TWO ARE SEPARATE, DOES ONE INFLUENCE THE OTHER? CAN THE MIND BE REDUCIBLE TO MATTER?

Major approaches to the question MATERIALISM: THE VIEW THAT THE MIND CAN BE REDUCED TO MATTER. MENTAL STATES ARE JUST BRAIN STATES. DUALISM: THE VIEW THAT THERE IS A METAPHYSICAL NATURE OF THE MIND (SOUL) THAT POTENTIALLY GOES ON AFTER DEATH DUAL ASPECT THEORY: MENTAL PROPERTIES CANNOT BE REDUCED TO PHYSICAL PROPERTIES BUT THEY ARE BOTH JUST TWO DIFFERENT WAYS OF