2003 Philosophy GA 3: Written examination

Transcription

1 2003 Assessment Report 2003 Philosophy GA 3: Written exmintion GENERAL COMMENTS Responses to Section A nd B questions generlly were, ccurte, detiled nd clerly expressed. Irrelevnt mteril (usully iogrphicl) ws virtully sent this yer. As with 2002, few students left sections of the pper unnswered, or responded with we did not study him. Responses to the evlution nd nlyses prts of Section B, though not perfect, were generlly plesing. Mny students offered their opinions, though sometimes without dequte resons. Exminers wnt to see tht students hve thought out nd re engged with the rguments nd ides studied nd not just offer neutrl ssessment or the phrse is justified in his rguments ecuse he elieves he is. Techers were generlly successful in dvising students to give rief nswers in Section A, nd to develop more detiled responses in Section B; however, the min difficulty ws the essys in Section C. Though minority, some students either did not know how to write philosophy essy, or hd spent too much time on Sections A nd B, nd s consequence, hd little time to develop their essys in Section C. Another mjor prolem noted in this section ws the wy in which students ddressed the question. It ws cler tht in the essy questions students hd rehersed nswers to previous questions. Mny students did not nswer the question tht ws sked. Though there is similrity etween the essy questions from yer to yer, the specific requirements do chnge nd students must ddress these. The other tendency in this re ws tht some students wrote description of different philosophicl positions relevnt to the question, ut without frming these descriptions in position tht ctully ddressed the question. These essys were more like summry of ides, nd not considered nd consistent response to clim mde in the question. Other concerns were: Mny students do not hve cler understnding of wht philosophicl rgument is. It is not contention. An rgument is mde in order to support or undermine contention. The prolem tht students hve with this distinction ws evident in Question 4 of Section A. Mny students do not hve cler understnding of the term vlid. In the exmintion it ws term tht ws mgiclly employed to justify clim or rgument. Mny students wrote description of philosophicl position nd then confidently stted tht X s clim seems vlid without ny nlysis. Detiled knowledge of the texts in Section B. SPECIFIC INFORMATION Section A The questions in this section re short-nswer. In some instnces single sentence nswer is sufficient for full mrks. Section A is concerned with the detils of the texts. It does not sk for ny nlysis or evlution of the rguments or clims mde in the texts. Section A is lso the only section where every question is compulsory. Aprt from offering n incorrect response, the min difficulty in this section ws tht some nswers were so rief or poorly expressed, tht exminers hd difficulties in ssessing wht the student ctully knew. Answers re supposed to e rief, so long s they re cler nd unmiguous. Question 1 Mrks % According to Epicurus, wht is philosophy? In his view, wht is the vlue of philosophy for (i) the young nd (ii) the old? Philosophy is the seeking of wisdom: in the young so they my hve no fer in the things to come in the old, so they my still e young t hert. The common error ws not to nswer the first question on Epicurus thoughts on wht is philosophy. Students either did not know the nswer, or did not recognise it s question. Mrks % Philosophy GA3 Exm VCAA 2003 Assessment Report 1

2 According to Cllicles, when should we do philosophy? Wht is Aristotle s view? Cllicles reserves philosophy for the young. Aristotle sys tht the older person enefits more from philosophy, though it is of vlue t ny ge. Aprt from the responses tht were fctully incorrect, there were no prolems evident in the nswers to this question. Question 2 Mrks % Wht does Nietzsche men y freedom of the will? self determintion or utonomy or letting go for the wish for certinty A common mistke ws tht students were vgue in their nswer. Mny responded with freedom is the will to do nything which does not nswer the question. Mrks % According to Nietzsche, how do religious people deny themselves freedom of the will? desire to e commnded rther thn commnd ttchment to single point of view demnd y the wek for certinty or support or prop The first two points were necessry for the 3 mrks. Most students who nswered this question hd t lest the first point in their nswer. Some students responded with those with slve morlity. Whilst correct, it lcks the precision of the suggested nswers. Question 3 Mrks % Wht is the reltionship etween the Good nd knowledge in the Repulic? the good is the source nd provider of knowledge nd truth or the good is responsile for everything tht is right nd fine A few students did hve the reltionship the wrong wy round (goodness higher thn knowledge), ut few prolems were evident in other responses. Mrks % Identify wht the following represent in Plto s llegory of the Cve: i. the prison cell ii. the upwrd journey of mn to the entrnce iii. the sun. i. region which is ccessile to sight (flse imges of relity ) ii. the mind s scent to the intelligile world iii. goodness; tht which mkes knowledge intelligile. Answered quite well y most students. There were few exmples of gross misunderstnding or error. Question 4 Mrks % Wht two wys does Descrtes use to distinguish humns from nimls? lck of lnguge in nimls therefore, lck of reson in nimls The first point ws usully mentioned, ut the second point ws often omitted. Mrks % Wht two rguments does Descrtes use to distinguish etween nimls nd humns? nimls do not hve lnguge nd cnnot show wht they re thinking 2 VCAA 2003 Assessment Report Philosophy GA3 Exm

3 inconsistency in ctions therefore lck of guiding intelligence This question ws poorly nswered. Mny students just repeted their responses to 4). Wht ws required ws n elortion of the points mde ove; wht re the premises tht led Descrtes to sy tht humns re distinct from nimls? Question 5 Mrks % Wht is Armstrong s definition of mentl stte? stte of person pt to producing certin rnges of ehviour Usully well nswered. Students either knew the nswer to this question or did not ttempt it. Mrks % Wht resons does Armstrong give for rejecting Behviourism s n explntion for mentl sttes? mterilism is unstisfctory ecuse it doesn t recognise tht mentl sttes re the inner cuses of ehviour nd dispositions mentl sttes re to e defined s such cuses, nd they hppen to e physicl sttes of the centrl nervous system, or exmples used in the point ove Mny students provided the first nswer nd gve n exmple to clrify nd mplify their nswer. Very few students responded with the second point. Section B A generl concern ws with the overll performnce in Section B in The questions this yer were more directed nd so the responses necessry for full mrks required detiled knowledge of the texts. Students were found wnting, prticulrly in the Aristotle (B3) nd Epicurus (B5) questions. Knowledge of ll the rguments is n essentil requirement for the course. Answering prt c of ech question is still prolem for some students. In most cses, these prts re either i) comprison with nother philosopher, or ii) n evlution of the philosopher s position. When offering n opinion s to the vlue of n ide or rgument, one suggestion is for students to frme their responses y I think X s view on the good life is vlule ecuse Even if the resons my not e cler or good ones, the fct tht students hve given some thought to the views of philosopher will e rewrded with some mrks. It should lso e noted tht in most of the prt nd c questions, there is mrk given for the expression nd/or persusiveness of the response. Question 1 Humn nture, s opposed to the ntures of other hypotheticl spiritul eings, hs certin discoverle ttriutes, nd these should e suitly considered in ny discussion of morlity (Murdoch, p. 78). Mrks % Wht concept of humn nture does Murdoch hve? humns re nturlly selfish (essentil point) reluctnt to fce unplesnt relities constntly seek consoltion humns hve consciousness tht protects the psyche from pin This question elicited two types of responses, the fluent nd the ignornt; there ws little middle ground. Mny students nswered with the first point, ut did not mention the others. i ii Mrks % i How does Murdoch s conception of humn nture relte to her vision of the good life? ii Wht similrities nd/or differences does Murdoch s concept of humn nture hve with Mrtin Luther King s concept of humn nture? Humn nture provides context for virtue; it is ckground condition. Correct ction is influenced y: the stte of our consciousness the qulity of our ttchments Philosophy GA3 Exm VCAA 2003 Assessment Report 3

4 the kind of discernment we hve ville. Though Murdoch hs seculr view, nd King hs religious/theologicl view, oth sy tht forces within us work to steer us wy from the Good Life. King sys we re sinners nd re frustrted; Murdoch would gree. The comprison etween Murdoch nd King ws hndled well y most students, ut few students received full mrks for the first prt. Most correctly identified humn nture s the context for virtue, ut could not give the other detils for the Good Life. c Mrks % Do you gree with Murdoch tht understnding humn nture is essentil in determining the good life? Give resons for your nswer. Though Murdoch my e correct in her description of humn nture does it men tht nything necessrily follows from this?, i.e. doctrine of humn nture my e irrelevnt to n nlysis of the Good Life. The contrry could e rgued; for exmple, Murdoch s (or nother s) conception of humn nture is correct, nd it is the frmework or context for ny morl understnding. The min difficulty ws tht students did not nswer the question. Mny responded with criticisms or nlyses of Murdoch s concept of humn nture, rther thn focus on whether the issue of humn nture needs to e understood, which in most respects is n esier question. Question 2 y Existentilism we men doctrine which mkes humn life possile nd, in ddition, declres tht every truth nd every ction implies humn setting nd humn sujectivity (Jen Pul Srtre, Existentilism Is Humnism, p. 419). Srtre identifies two menings of sujectivism. i ii Mrks % i Wht re the two menings? ii Which one does Srtre clim is the essentil mening of Existentilism? the individul chooses nd mkes himself it is impossile for mn to trnscend humn sujectivity it is the second mening tht is the essentil one in Existentilism. The most common prolem in this question ws tht mny students confused humnism with sujectivism. Srtre is rguing tht existentilism is type of humnism, nd sujectivism is n essentil element in his conception of oth. Srtre clims there re four chrges mde ginst Existentilism i ii Mrks % i Wht re the four chrges? ii How does Srtre defend Existentilism ginst ech of these chrges? The four chrges re: invites people to remin quiet dwells on humn degrdtion ignores the possiility of humn solidrity denies the relity nd seriousness of humn undertking (rejects God s commndments, nd this just leves cprice). Aprt from the lst criticism, his defence of Existentilism is the xiom of existence efore essence. He pplies this to ech criticism nd students should ddress ech criticism seprtely to chieve full mrks, i.e. existence efore essence leves mn the possiility of choice so i) they cn remin quiet if they wish; ii) they cn hve hope nd optimism for the future; iii) they cn join in collective ction. For point iv), Srtre replies tht ecuse humn experience nd vlues re t the hert of his project, existentilism is necessrily engged in humn relity nd the undertkings of humns. 4 VCAA 2003 Assessment Report Philosophy GA3 Exm

5 Few students received the full 8 mrks for this question. Mny who ttempted this question did not know ll four chrges, ut most provided Srtre s defence of existence efore essence without ddressing the points in ny detil with this defence. For 8 mrks, it ws essentil tht ech point mentioned in prt i) e ddressed in prt ii) seprtely. c Mrks % Would Plto gree with Srtre s concept of morlly good life? No, ecuse it lcks strict prescription for ction, nd leves it to the individul. Plto would not gree with Srtre s conception of the Good Life. This lck of prescription is its wekness; does existentilism dvocte crude form of morl reltivism, nd llow hedonism? The most common prolem with this question ws tht n opinion ws offered without ny supporting resons or comments. Some students rgued tht Srtre nd Plto would gree ecuse they shred the sme concept of humn nture. Question 3 It is thought tht every ctivity, rtistic or scientific, in fct every delierte ction or pursuit, hs for its oject the ttinment of some good. We my therefore ssent to the view which hs een expressed tht the good is tht t which ll things im (Aristotle, Nicomchen Ethics, 1094). Aristotle sys tht the Good Life is minly mtter of fulfilling our function. i ii Mrks % i Wht does Aristotle think our function ctully is? ii How does he rech this position? n ctivity of the soul in ccordnce with reson/rtionl principle our function must e unique to us we shre nutrition nd growth with plnts nd nimls, nd perception with nimls so, wht is unique is our rtionl ctivity Mny students who nswered this question mde the mistke of prphrsing the prompt s n nswer, i.e. our function is to pursue the Good Life. It therefore ment tht their lter nswers were lso incorrect, or prtilly relevnt, t est. i ii Mrks % i Wht re his resons for thinking tht we must hve function? ii Are his resons sound? Crpenters, for exmple, hve function, so mn s such must hve one eyes, hnds, for exmple, hve functions, so the whole person must hve one crpenters, for exmple, hve their function ecuse of socil need nd interests; does this pply to humnkind s such? does wht holds true for ech prt hold true for the whole?, e.g. round mosic mde of squre tiles. Mny students who scored well in the first section, fltered in the second ecuse they hd no opinion or criticisms to offer. c Mrks % Do you think Aristotle s overll rgument out the function of humns is resonle? why does our function (nd the nture of the good life) hve to e unique to us? wht if Mrtins or dolphins re s rtionl s us? wht if something else insted of rtionlity were unique to humnkind, e.g. cruelty? Few students were willing to support their opinions with some evidence from the text or from their own thinking. Question 4 Politicl power within communities should e in the hnds of people with these chrcteristics, nd right consists in them (Plto, Gorgis, 491d). Philosophy GA3 Exm VCAA 2003 Assessment Report 5

6 Cllicles holds tht some morl rules re mtter of convention, nd some re to e found in nture. i ii Mrks % i Wht kind of morlity does he fvour? ii Wht resons does he offer for his preferred position? the nturl sort; the one found in nture wek second rte people who form the mjority mke rules to serve their own interests ut y looking t nture, it tells us tht it fvours the strong. Overll, students performed quite well on this question on Cllicles nd Socrtes. i iii Mrks % i In the erly prt of the discussion, wht does Cllicles think tht his preferred morlity sys out how superior people should tret inferior people? ii Wht does Cllicles initilly men y the term superior? iii Wht unwelcome consequences of Cllicles position re then pointed out y Socrtes? the superior should dominte the inferior nd they should hve more mteril goods thn the inferior. By superior he mens stronger. The msses re collectively stronger thn ny individul therefore s the strongest they would hve right on their side Most students scored t lest 1 mrk for this question. The min prolem ws in the mount of detil in nswers. In most cses, full mrks were not wrded ecuse not ll points were mde. ci ii Mrks % ci Wht is Cllicles finl view out the sort of people who should rule the community? cii Do you fvour Cllicles initil position or his finl position on who should run community? Give resons for your nswer. those who hve politicl cleverness AND courge initil position criticism: wht hppens in nture tells us wht does hppen, not wht ought to hppen; those who fvour this position need to rgue ginst this criticism ltter position: mentioning skill in politics seems resonle requirement for running community, s is the need for courge in mking unpopulr decisions. Mny students did not include courge in their nswers to prt i). There were some good responses to the finl prt. Most students hd coherent resons for ccepting or rejecting Cllicles view on politicl ledership. Question 5 But men in generl sometimes flee deth s the gretest of evils, sometimes long for it s relief from the evils of life. (Epicurus, Letter To Menoeceus). Mrks % Lter in the text, Epicurus clims tht deth is nothing to us. How does he rgue for this clim? When we re, deth hs not come nd when deth hs come, we no longer re or, whtever cuses no nnoynce when it is present, cuses only groundless pin in the expecttion. This prt of Question 5 ws nswered quite well. 6 VCAA 2003 Assessment Report Philosophy GA3 Exm

7 Epicurus lso sys tht plesure is the end nd im ut not ll plesures should e chosen. i ii Mrks % i Why not? ii Which plesures does he think should e chosen? some plesures ring greter pins or nnoynce, while some pins yield plesures. The plesures we should seek re the less risky ones AND those tht void or prevent pin, e.g. plin fre nd wisdom. The most common prolem in this question ws the sence of the point out the plesures we seek eing lso those tht void or prevent pin. c Epicurus clims tht the wise person scorns fte nd it is etter to ccept the legends of the Gods thn the necessity of the nturlists. ci ii Mrks % ci Wht re his resons for this? cii Do you think they re sound? Give resons for your nswer. one should scorn fte ecuse only some things hppen of necessity, some hppen y chnce, nd some y our own gency. So it is etter to ccept the legends of the Gods ecuse it gives us some hope of escpe (unlike the necessity of the nturlist) wht if nturl necessity is providing something good? wht if we re honouring the wrong Gods? This question ws poorly nswered. It ws evident from the responses tht few students were sufficiently fmilir enough with the text to nswer this question. Though it is d rgument, one is mde, nd n opinion of the student ws then sought. Section C (Aville mrks 30) The nswers in this section re suggested ones s the questions re deliertely left open nd generl; students my focus on one prticulr rgument nd my not hve covered ll of the criticisms mentioned. Question 1 Exmine nd evlute the dulist s clim tht ll humn eings consist of seprte mind nd ody. In your response refer to the views of t lest one of the following: Plto, Descrtes or Armstrong. In this question, students re expected to discuss the proposition tht humns re of distinct properties or sustnces, though it is not expected tht students will necessrily dopt the usul Crtesin position. It is hoped tht other types of dulism, nd/or its usul opposing theory, mterilism, re discussed. Some points relevnt to the discussion on the mind: Descrtes cler nd distinct ides of mind/ody mens there must e distinct mind/ody Descrtes rgument from divisiility nd indivisiility. Arguments for the non-physiclity of mentl sttes: e.g. their essentil privcy, nd their intentionlity (they cn e out things) pltonic concept of soul (triprtite nture; immortl nd imperishle) nd responsile for the retention of knowledge from one life to the next), compred to degenerting, corrupt ody. Mterilism/empiricism s sis for mind (Armstrong) nd the ovious presence of ody: exmple of computers in confirming mterilist/reductionist view of mind does concept of mind necessrily entil tht its possessor exhiit rtionl ehviour?, i.e. if nimls nd plnts possess ody, cn either/oth possess mind in the wy humn cn if the mind is non-sptil sustnce? the Turing Test; cn mchines think/possess mind in the wy humns cn? Questions/Criticisms: the Crtesin conception of mind trpped in ody leds to the prolem of solipsism how do two distinct sustnces like mind nd ody, sptil nd non sptil, mteril nd non-mteril, interct? Philosophy GA3 Exm VCAA 2003 Assessment Report 7

8 scientific/mterilist explntions of mind offer no explntion for our self consciousness or for the sujective nture of personl experience support for Armstrong s mterilism/turing s mchine model. A common mistke in this populr question ws in descriing metphysics s fundmentlly opposed to mterilism. Metphysics, in post-crtesin philosophy, is concerned with the fetures of n ultimte relity, wht relly exists. Most students selected Descrtes nd/or Plto s the exemplrs of dulism. A common error ws in ttriuting Descrtes nd Plto s dulism to their religious eliefs. Descrtes nd Plto re not dulists ecuse they re deeply religious. They hve rguments tht support their clims, nd these need to e ddressed. Question 2 Exmine nd evlute the clim tht the mind is mchine. In your response refer to the views of t lest one of the following: Plto, Descrtes, Turing or Armstrong. The focus of this question is on the mteril y Turing nd Armstrong. Counter exmples could e from Descrtes nd Plto. Some positions tht re relevnt if the mind is mchine re: scientists fvour mterilism, the results of Science re more credile thn philosophy nd religion mentl sttes re to e defined s such cuses, nd they hppen to e physicl sttes of the centrl nervous system Turing s model of mind s mchine. Questions/Criticisms: Explntory gp etween possession of rin (nd its physicl sttes) nd the experience of these sttes sujectively, i.e: why should I experience melncholi if synpse A is ctivted? wht is the progrmme tht runs the mind? Any one of Turing s ojections nd responses: ehviourism is one mterilist view, ut it is unstisfctory ecuse it doesn t recognise tht mentl sttes re the inner cuses of ehviour nd dispositions does the mchine model mke distinction etween humn nd non-humn minds? This question did not generte mny good responses. The most common prolem ws in misunderstnding mterilism (Armstrong s, or others). The other min prolem ws the wy students ddressed the question. Mny hd seprte prgrphs on wht different concepts of mind were, often without once mentioning or descriing wht mchine might e. In mny cses, discussion of the question whether the mind is mchine ws totlly voided. Question 3 Explin nd evlute the clim tht without science, nything we clim to know of the world is just specultion. In your response refer to the views of t lest one of the following: Plto, Popper or Kuhn. Some criticl questions inferred y this question re: do oservtions of the world (of grvity, levity, elstic force, etc.) relly llow the sme degree of ojectivity nd certinty s the strctions of, for exmple geometry? Is it the method of science tht gives this ojectivity? Is it science lone tht is responsile for progress? Answers could include the following, s relevnt: Plto True knowledge concerns the permnent nd unchnging relm of relity, ccessile only to the intellect, rther thn the world of the senses. (Refer to one or more of the imges of the Sun, Line nd Cve.) Criticl questions: Cn the existence of this relm e estlished? Wht does it contin? How re we to e sure tht we understnd it correctly? Popper A theory is scientific only if it is flsifile, i.e. there re conceivle oservtions tht would show it to e flse. Einstein s theory of grvittion psses this test; strology nd the psychonlytic theories of Freud nd Adler do not, for whtever hppens is climed to fit the theory. Unflsifiility is not strength in theory, ut wekness. Confirming evidence should count only if it results from risky predictions, i.e. ones tht re improle prt from the theory. Criticl questions: Does Popper s ccount llow the estlishment of positive scientific knowledge, s opposed to the negtive knowledge tht given theory is flse? Wht is confirmtion, nd is it the sme s proof? Is the qulifying rule for confirming evidence too restrictive? Kuhn The emergence of new scientific theory is often due to crisis the persistent filure of puzzles to e solved in the terms of the old theory. New theories involve the replcement of previously stndrd eliefs or procedures prdigm shift. Exmples include Copernicn stronomy, Lvoisier s oxygen theory of comustion, nd Einstein s theory of reltivity. When puzzles under the new prdigm ecome intolerle, new shift my e required. Scientific progress is mtter of evolution, ut not towrd fixed truth. 8 VCAA 2003 Assessment Report Philosophy GA3 Exm

9 Criticl questions: Aren t some scientific theories true, or t lest truer thn others? Does Kuhn s view relly llow for scientific progress, s distinct from mere chnge? There were some very good essys written on this question. The connection etween empiricism nd knowledge of the externl world ws clerly identified s the issue for discussion, nd the focus ws kept on this issue. However, there were still mny essys tht were just descriptions nd summries of different rguments, without n ttempt to link or integrte these ides into coherent frmework. VCAA 2003 Pulished y the Victorin Curriculum nd Assessment Authority 41 St Andrews Plce, Est Melourne 3002 Photocopying: This puliction cn only e photocopied for the use of students nd techers in Victorin Schools. Philosophy GA3 Exm VCAA 2003 Assessment Report 9