Skills practice questions.

After reading a passage about a firm that scores its employees' attention using desk cameras, a candidate lists four questions. Which one is philosophical rather than empirical, legal or practical?

• Does attention scoring measurably raise output in the firms that have adopted it?
• Does the practice satisfy the notice requirements set out in employment law?
• What would it cost the firm to move to a less intrusive system of monitoring?
• Is a choice made under constant observation still an exercise of freedom?

Answer: Is a choice made under constant observation still an exercise of freedom?

Empirical, legal and practical questions are settled by evidence, by statute or by costing. The remaining question asks what the concept of freedom requires, which is the move a stimulus response has to make before any argument can begin.

A plan for a stimulus response consists of four paragraphs summarising the passage and a closing sentence saying that it raises interesting questions. Which single change does most to lift the answer out of the lowest markband?

• Adding a paragraph on the historical background of the events described
• Quoting more of the passage so that the summary is demonstrably accurate
• Naming one philosophical issue in the passage and arguing for a position on it
• Listing several philosophers whose work is loosely connected with the subject matter

Answer: Naming one philosophical issue in the passage and arguing for a position on it

The lowest band is reserved for answers that retell the stimulus without philosophical work, so what is missing is an identified issue together with an argument. Adding names or background without argument leaves the answer descriptive and therefore in the lower bands.

A Paper 1 essay states a clear thesis, defends it with two developed arguments and closes with a summary. No objection is discussed anywhere in the answer. Which single addition would do most to lift it into the top markband?

• A developed objection to the thesis, with a reply that defends the thesis
• A further supporting argument drawn from a second philosopher's work
• A longer introduction defining each technical term in advance
• An account of the historical background to the debate

Answer: A developed objection to the thesis, with a reply that defends the thesis

The markbands separate a competent answer from the top band chiefly by the treatment of counter-argument: an answer that never meets an objection argues in one direction only. A third supporting argument merely repeats work that has already been credited.

A Paper 1 Section B question asks: 'To what extent can scientific method deliver objective knowledge?' Beyond an accurate account of what that method involves, what does the command term require of the answer?

• A definition of each technical term that appears in the question wording
• An equally detailed account of two rival positions, with no verdict reached
• A judgement about how far the claim holds, supported by reasons
• A description of how the debate about objectivity arose

Answer: A judgement about how far the claim holds, supported by reasons

'To what extent' is an evaluative instruction: the answer must reach a defended verdict about how far the claim holds, not merely display the competing positions. Setting out two rivals in balanced detail and stopping is the standard way of staying in a middle band.

In an essay on normative ethics a candidate writes: 'Utilitarians hold that anything at all is permitted so long as somebody enjoys it. Since some pleasures are plainly vicious, utilitarianism must be rejected.' What is the main weakness of this passage?

• It runs act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism together as one position
• The objection that follows attacks a position no utilitarian defends
• It relies on a technical term that has nowhere been defined
• It draws a conclusion about every pleasure from one kind of case

Answer: The objection that follows attacks a position no utilitarian defends

Utilitarianism judges an act by its effects on the welfare of everyone affected, not by whether somebody enjoys it, so the objection defeats a position no utilitarian holds: a straw man. The fault lies in the misattribution itself, not in an undefined term, a confusion of act and rule versions or a generalisation from one case.

Which opening sentence commits an essay to a thesis rather than merely announcing a topic?

• This essay will consider whether the mind is identical to the brain.
• The relation of mind to brain has been debated ever since Descartes.
• There are several competing theories of the nature of conscious experience.
• The mind cannot be identical to the brain, and this essay shows it.

Answer: The mind cannot be identical to the brain, and this essay shows it.

A thesis states a position an opponent could deny; a topic announcement commits the writer to nothing that could be argued against. Examiners can only credit a line of reasoning once there is a claim for the reasoning to defend.