Approaching
Philosophical Issues
MR. FREEMAN| IB PHILOSOPHY
Approaching the issue…
Things to consider…
There are 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 the 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 subarguments, 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
The
you argue for/against
First Approach
 Explain
the approach (as objectively as possible)
 Define
Terms (from the view of the approach)
 Provide
examples for clarity
1. Outline of a philosophy
argument
Examination
of First Approach
 Philosophers
who support your approach (analysis of their claims)
 Implications
of holding this approach (what if the approach were true)
 Evidence
The
to support your approach.
Second Approach
 Explain
the approach (as objectively as possible)
 Define
Terms (from the view of the approach)
 Provide
examples for clarity
1. Outline of a philosophy
argument
Examination of Second Approach
 Philosophers
who support this approach (analysis of their claims)
 Discuss
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 LOOKING AT THE SAME
THING.