Higher Philosophy Course code: C854 76 Course assessment code: X854 76 SCQF: level 6 (24 SCQF credit points) Valid from: session 2018–19 This document provides detailed information about the course and course assessment to ensure consistent and transparent assessment year on year. It describes the structure of the course and the course assessment in terms of the skills, knowledge and understanding that are assessed. This document is for teachers and lecturers and contains all the mandatory information you need to deliver the course. The information in this publication may be reproduced in support of SQA qualifications only on a non-commercial basis. If it is reproduced, SQA must be clearly acknowledged as the source. If it is to be reproduced for any other purpose, written permission must be obtained from [email protected]. Where this publication includes materials from sources other than SQA (secondary copyright) this material must only be reproduced for the purposes of instruction in an educational establishment. If it is to be reproduced for any other purpose, it is the user’s responsibility to obtain the necessary copyright clearance. This edition: September 2018 (version 2.0) © Scottish Qualifications Authority 2013, 2018 Contents Course overview 1 Course rationale 2 Purpose and aims 2 Who is this course for? 2 Course content 3 Skills, knowledge and understanding 3 Skills for learning, skills for life and skills for work 11 Course assessment 12 Course assessment structure: question papers 12 Grading 14 Equality and inclusion 15 Further information 16 Appendix 1: course support notes 17 Introduction 17 Approaches to learning and teaching 17 Preparing for course assessment 18 Developing skills for learning, skills for life and skills for work 23 Appendix 2: types of questions 25 Appendix 3: helpful textbooks 33 Appendix 4: argument diagrams 34 Appendix 5: primary texts — extracts 36 Descartes’ Meditation 1 — the text 37 Descartes’ Meditation 3 — the text 43 Hume’s Enquiries section 2— the text 53 Hume’s Enquiries section 4 — the text 57 Primary text: Hume — original version 66 Non-mandatory primary texts: Descartes 75 Non-mandatory primary text: Hume 77 Moral philosophy text extracts 81 Course overview The course consists of 24 SCQF credit points which includes time for preparation for course assessment. The notional length of time for candidates to complete the course is 160 hours. The course assessment has two components. Component Marks Duration Component 1: question paper 1 60 2 hours and 15 minutes Component 2: question paper 2 50 1 hour and 45 minutes Recommended entry Progression Entry to this course is at the discretion of further study, employment and/or the centre. training in a number of areas including the media, politics, social policy, health Candidates should have achieved the professions and law National 5 Philosophy course or equivalent qualifications and/or experience prior to starting this course. Conditions of award The grade awarded is based on the total marks achieved across all course assessment components. Version 2.0 1 Course rationale National Courses reflect Curriculum for Excellence values, purposes and principles. They offer flexibility, provide time for learning, focus on skills and applying learning, and provide scope for personalisation and choice. Every course provides opportunities for candidates to develop breadth, challenge and application. The focus and balance of assessment is tailored to each subject area. This course builds on candidates’ existing knowledge and curiosity about philosophy. Candidates explore questions related to knowledge and morality and they become more aware of the complexity of everyday and philosophical arguments. The course encourages candidates to develop their own ideas and viewpoints and teaches them to analyse and evaluate the philosophical positions of others. Studying philosophy develops candidates’ ability to think logically, to evaluate arguments critically, and to challenge their own ideas and those of other people. Candidates study central philosophical principles, concepts, problems, texts and key figures. Purpose and aims The course develops candidates’ reasoning skills by focusing on complex abstract concepts and philosophical problems. Candidates learn to challenge assumptions and to apply their knowledge and understanding of different positions and theories in philosophy. They develop critical thinking and analytical and evaluative skills, which are important in education and employment. The broad aims of the course are to develop: knowledge and understanding of some key philosophical concepts and questions concerning arguments in action, epistemology and moral philosophy critical thinking, analytical and evaluative skills appropriate to philosophy the ability to engage with abstract ideas the ability to develop and express reasoned arguments and conclusions skills of analysis, evaluation and expressing a coherent line of argument Who is this course for? The course is suitable for all candidates with the appropriate qualifications who have an interest in exploring philosophy. For candidates progressing from National 5 Philosophy, the course provides opportunities to extend their knowledge and understanding of philosophy. Version 2.0 2 Course content The course has three areas of study. Arguments in action develops candidates’ ability to analyse and evaluate arguments. Candidates develop knowledge and understanding of argument structure, philosophical techniques and errors in reasoning. Knowledge and doubt develops candidates’ ability to explain, analyse and evaluate two theories of knowledge. Moral philosophy develops candidates’ ability to explain, analyse and evaluate two moral theories. Skills, knowledge and understanding Skills, knowledge and understanding for the course The following provides a broad overview of the subject skills, knowledge and understanding developed in the course: developing knowledge and understanding of argument structure, philosophical fallacies, philosophical techniques, and other factors relevant to evaluating arguments developing knowledge and understanding of key theories of knowledge developing knowledge and understanding of key moral philosophical theories understanding and explaining the implications and consequences of arguments and theories analysing and evaluating arguments, theories of knowledge and moral theories expressing reasoned views and a coherent line of argument Skills, knowledge and understanding for the course assessment This section provides details of skills, knowledge and understanding sampled in the course assessment: The question papers sample from all three areas of study. Details of the areas sampled in each question paper are in the ‘Course assessment structure’ section of this document. Version 2.0 3 Arguments in action Candidates demonstrate knowledge and understanding of arguments by: distinguishing statements from questions, commands, exclamations and arguments distinguishing arguments from other types of writing (for example, descriptions, explanations and summaries) identifying and describing the components of an argument: — premises/reasons and conclusions — inference indicators for premises and conclusions describing what makes the premises in an argument acceptable, that is, the premise: — is known a priori to be true — is known to be true or can be accepted as true (teachers and lecturers must make candidates aware that while a premise may be considered true and therefore acceptable, aspects of the premise, such as gratuitous references to a person’s race, may render it unacceptable in another sense) — is a matter of common knowledge — is plausible, that is, it is reasonable to take it to be true — is unambiguous — appeals to an appropriate authority — properly represents the facts pertaining to the conclusion describing what makes the premises in an argument relevant to the conclusion, that is, the premise: — provides some justification to support the conclusion — gives support to another relevant premise — contains an appropriate analogy — attacks the claim rather than the person putting forward the claim describing what makes the premises in an argument sufficient to draw the conclusion, that is, the premises — are acceptable and relevant — are enough to engender a well-founded confidence in the conclusion Version 2.0 4 Candidates analyse arguments by: presenting an argument in standard form recognising, explaining and constructing diagrams that represent: — linked arguments, that is, where the premises are dependent — convergent arguments, that is, where the premises give independent support to the conclusion — serial arguments, that is, where there is at least one intermediate conclusion identifying whether an argument is using inductive or deductive reasoning identifying different methods of argumentation: — analogical arguments, including distinguishing analogical arguments from analogical explanations — the use of counter-examples to show that a universal statement is false Candidates evaluate arguments by identifying, explaining and giving examples of the following issues. Although issues are grouped under the headings of acceptability, relevance and sufficiency, there may be occasions when an issue might be legitimately discussed in relation to a different heading. Issues primarily relating to acceptability: two types of ambiguity: lexical ambiguity (equivocation) and syntactic ambiguity (amphiboly) appropriate appeals to authority,