VCE Stuff > VCE Philosophy

Philosophy Practice Exam

<< < (2/3) > >>

Menang:
Thanks for the exam Aurelian! I'm doing it right now and I agree, it's very close to VCAA exams. :)

Ghost!:
Okay I guess I'll kick off a bit of question and answer! We'll start with Section C :)

Question 1. Outline and evaluate Descartes' argument for the conclusion that he knows his mind better than he knows his body.

Descartes holds the belief that he cannot truly know his body, as all empirical evidence cannot be trusted as the senses are, for the most part, unreliable. However he does know that he thinks, as he is currently doing so as he produces his meditations. As this property cannot be separated from him, he is essentially a thinking thing. There are however several issues with this hypothesis, particularly Descartes' habit to jump to conclusions. is he really justified in saying 'I' am a thinking thing? It would make more sense to state that all he truly knows is that thought exists, as he is yet to provide any proof for the existence of 'I'.


Thoughts! Other answers! Discussion! Let's go team exam is Monday :D

ProtonStar:
Had a look at your Philosophy exam Aurelian; looks good! (I can't really answer the questions since I haven't done 3&4 :P)
I'm so shattered that my school didn't run 3&4 Philosophy, it was one of my favourite subjects :(

Aurelian:

--- Quote from: Ghost! on November 12, 2011, 08:59:21 pm ---Question 1. Outline and evaluate Descartes' argument for the conclusion that he knows his mind better than he knows his body.

Descartes holds the belief that he cannot truly know his body, as all empirical evidence cannot be trusted as the senses are, for the most part, unreliable. However he does know that he thinks, as he is currently doing so as he produces his meditations. As this property cannot be separated from him, he is essentially a thinking thing. Strictly speaking, this is not the argument for the conclusion outlined in the question. It is actually the wax argument which provides the above conclusion. There are however several issues with this hypothesis, particularly Descartes' habit to jump to conclusions This can be tighter. Don't waste a sentence saying there are problems with Descartes' argument - just jump right in. "However, it is questionable whether [specific point of address] . is he really justified in saying 'I' am a thinking thing? It would make more sense to state that all he truly knows is that thought exists, as he is yet to provide any proof for the existence of 'I'. You haven't justified this; this is merely assertion. Why does it make more sense to state that all he truly knows is that thought exists? Your justification is what determines whether or not you get full marks for a question. You need to exhibit that you've really thought about the issue at hand and have good reasons for any opinions you have. In addition, and this is more philosophically speaking than from an exam perspective (I'm sure examiners wouldn't mind), but this is a pretty poor evaluation anyway, and in my opinion displays a misunderstanding of the crux of Descartes' position...

--- End quote ---

Comments in the quote. Sorry if they sound harsh/blunt, they're not meant to haha. Just trying to help =)

krith:
Thanks so much for the exam! I went over it a couple of hours ago and here are my answers to Section A (Can't be bothered typing out the rest yet :P) Feel free to rip them apart if need be :P

SECTION A:

Question 1. What importance does Callicles afford to philosophy with regards to the good life? Do you agree?

Callicles asserts that philosophy can prove a cultured mind for the youth, but to pursue it into adulthood is embarrassing and leaves one completely out of touch with human nature. It condemns a man to a low estimation of his own worth and potential as he avoids the thick of the agora where man earns distinction. Furthermore, a philosophy is rendered incapable of defending himself against a corrupt and unprincipled prosecutor, foreshadowing Socrates’ own trial and death. I do not agree with this narrow portrayal of philosophy for as Socrates argues, the contemplative life is able to elevate one morally as it provides one with universal truths dissimilar to sophistry which is only a form of flattery interested in the mere gratification of the audience.

Question 2. Outline and evaluate Aristotle’s argument for the conclusion that mankind has a function and that it is to reason.

Aristotle argues that each organism has a biological function unique to that special and the good life is attainable if we exercise out unique function in accordance with virtue and excellence over the period of our lives. The plant has the nutritive soul and therefore its function is to feel and grow. Animals possess the perceptive soul and hence their function is to feed, grow, perceive, move and reproduce. A human’s function therefore, according to Aristotle, is to use their rational principle. This assessment is, however, problematic. Firstly, Aristotle doesn’t claim who provided one with their function for he does not believe in a God or any other higher power. Secondly, his argument rests on the mere assumption that we even possess a function. Who is to say humans possess an instrumental purpose such as a knife, which is to cut well? Finally, research into chimpanzees begs the question as to whether reason can be uniquely human as these animals express the ability to communicate and apply reason to the completion of particular tasks.

Question 3. What is Weil’s view of the role of society in enabling the good life? What are her reasons for this view?

Weil regards society as playing a large role in the fulfilment in an individual’s ability to obtain the good life. She places great reliance on social collectivities who are able to nurture and satisfy an individual’s spiritual needs and obtain a balance between each antithetical pair: her mean. This dependence on society is further expressed through her plant analogy as she argues that one must be firmly rooted in a stable and healthy environment. Those views are greatly influenced by her own experiences in France and of the instability that ensues as the result of war and foreign invasions.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page