Course Guide

PHIL08016:
Greats: From Plato to the Enlightenment

2013/14


Course Organiser:
Dr. Dave Ward ([email protected])

Course Secretary:
Miss Sarah Nicol ([email protected])

1. Course Aims and Objectives
2. Intended Learning Outcomes
3. Lecture Times and Locations
4. Lecture Content
5. Readings
6. Tutorials
7. Assessment
8. Learn
9. Useful Information
10. Common Marking Scheme
11. Essay Questions, Past Papers and Sample Degree Exam paper
12. Careers Service 2013/14
13. PPLS Undergraduate Student Handbook
14. Feedback


Department of Philosophy
School of Philosophy, Psychology and Language Sciences
University of Edinburgh
Page | 2

1. Course Objectives

The course is an introduction to philosophy through the work of four great philosophers
and some of their key texts. The objectives are:

To introduce the main topics and problems of philosophy with some emphasis on
epistemology and metaphysics in a form suitable for students who have little or no
prior experience of philosophy. However, some attention will also be paid to key
issues in (e.g.) ethics, philosophy of religion and philosophy of science, but again
without any prior knowledge of philosophy being assumed.
This year, the philosophers covered will be Plato, Aristotle, Descartes and Berkeley
with students being invited to study in detail at least one representative work from
each philosopher. Thus, students taking this course this year will be introduced to
the works of two great ancient philosophers and two great early modern
philosophers.
The texts chosen are intended to be accessible, easily available, historically
important and interesting in themselves but also to offer a self-contained
introduction to a wide range of different philosophical problems and approaches that
remain of the utmost relevance to modern philosophy.
The course is designed to be self-contained and accessible to students whether or
not they are pursuing other studies in philosophy.

2. Intended Learning Outcomes

Having completed the course, students will acquire and develop:

An understanding of basic problems in philosophy, for example scepticism
concerning knowledge.
An appreciation of the value of characteristically philosophical ways of thinking, for
example deductive argument.
A foundation for the development of further philosophical understanding, particularly
reading primary and secondary philosophical sources.
Analytical skills, such as how to analyse and assess arguments and the concepts
that they employ
An understanding of the differences between philosophical and scientific ways of
thinking.
The ability to express philosophical ideas and arguments orally and in writing, with
particular attention to qualities such as clarity, precision, and concision.
Through close reading of assigned texts and tutorial discussions, students will learn
how to argue effectively and critically in debate while showing deference and
respect to other participants and their views.
Skills without peculiar application to philosophy such as working to deadlines; taking
notes in lectures or tutorials; critical reading and using library resources (including
electronic resources).

Page | 3

3. Lecture Times and Locations

Semester 2
Monday Tuesday Wednesday Thursday Friday
George Square
Lecture Theatre
10:00 - 10:50

George Square
Lecture Theatre
10:00 - 10:50

George Square
Lecture Theatre
10:00 - 10:50

Due to the large number of students which will be attending the lectures please ensure you
are seated prior to the scheduled start time.

4. Lecture Content

Introduction to Philosophy
- Dr. David Levy, [email protected]

After the introductory lecture, the course will be divided into four sections:

Plato Meno, (plus selections from the Phaedo and Republic)
- Dr. Andrew Mason, [email protected]

Aristotle Categories, Physics and Metaphysics
- Professor Dory Scaltsas, [email protected]

Descartes Meditations on First Philosophy
- Dr. Alasdair Richmond, [email protected]

Berkeley Principles of Human Knowledge
- Dr. Alasdair Richmond, [email protected]

Revision lecture

In addition, an introduction to the contexts within which these philosophers were working
will also be part of the lecture content. More detailed information concerning lecture
content may be available on Learn (see section 8 below) or from course lecturers.

Summaries of Lecture Content

Introduction to Philosophy (1 lecture)
The course will be introduced in general by addressing the question: what is the motivation
for doing philosophy?

Page | 4

Plato (8 lectures)
These lectures will introduce the thought of Plato, one of historys most significant
philosophers. In the first six lectures, we will look closely at one of his best known and
most exciting works, the Meno. This dialogue raises questions both about ethics and
about the nature of knowledge and philosophical inquiry. In the last two lectures we will
use passages from other works of Plato, especially the Phaedo and Republic, to explore
overarching themes in his work, seeing how he continued to develop the ideas introduced
in the Meno throughout his career; these lectures will introduce his best-known
contribution to philosophy, the theory of Forms or ideal patterns.

Schedule of Plato lectures:
Lecture 1: Introduction to Plato and to the Meno.
Lecture 2: Virtue and definition.
Lecture 3: The Socratic paradox; no one desires bad things.
Lecture 4: The paradox of inquiry and the theory of recollection.
Lecture 5: Hypothetical reasoning; virtue and knowledge.
Lecture 6: Is virtue teachable? Knowledge and true belief.
Lecture 7: Platos later works (a): Forms and knowledge.
Lecture 8: Platos later works (b): virtue and motivation.

Aristotle (7 lectures).
These lectures will introduce the metaphysical thought of Aristotle, which has been highly
influential in the history of philosophy and continues so today. We will draw from the
classificatory material of his ontological work, Categories, and examine such concepts as
subject and accident. We shall then look more closely into the concepts of change, of
generation, of the nature of things, and of the elements of things in nature, in Aristotles
Physics. Finally we shall touch on his Metaphysics, and address his theory of substance,
and the constitution of substances from matter and form, which have since shaped the
conception of things across the sciences and the humanities.

Schedule of Aristotle Lectures:
Lecture 1: Substances and universals (Categories)
Lecture 2: Kinds of Predication and Kinds of Properties (Categories)
Lecture 3: Principles of Change (Physics)
Lecture 4: Subject and Substratum (Physics)
Lecture 5: The Four Causes (Physics)
Lecture 5: Generation and Mixture (Physics; Generation and Corruption)
Lecture 6: Potential, Actual, and Powers (Generation and Corruption; Metaphysics)
Lecture 7: The Unity of Substance (Metaphysics)

Descartes (8 lectures)
We will begin with an introduction to the context of modern philosophy as inaugurated by
Descartes (1596-1650) in his Meditations on First Philosophy, the work we will be
discussing. In this work, Descartes attempted nothing less than a new foundation for all
human enquiries, scientific as well as philosophical. Having introduced Descartes and his
context in the first lecture, the remaining lectures will follow the course of the Meditations
in detail, roughly covering one meditation per lecture, and then concluding with a
discussion of some of the more important objections printed with Descartes Meditations.

Schedule of Descartes lectures:
Page | 5

Lecture 1: Introduction / Descartes life, works and the context of modern philosophy
Lecture 2: Meditation 1
Lecture 3: Meditation 2
Lecture 4: Meditation 3
Lecture 5: Meditation 4
Lecture 6: Meditation 5
Lecture 7: Meditation 6
Lecture 8: Objections and Replies


Berkeley (8 lectures)
According to the idealist philosophy of Bishop George Berkeley (1685-1753), all existence
comprises minds (or spirits) and the ideas had by those spirits. Despite the
counterintuitive sound of his idealist doctrines, Berkeley claimed his system was the ideal
counter to atheism, scepticism and materialism. He also claimed to offer a truly
commonsensical account of such diverse topics as causation, existence, perception,
ethics, freedom, science, the nature of the self and God. In these eight lectures, we shall
examine Berkeleys system in the light of all these topics through a close reading of his
classic work The Principles of Human Knowledge.

Schedule of Berkeley lectures:
Lecture 1: Introduction / Berkeleys life and works
Lecture 2: Esse Est Percipi
Lecture 3: Ideas and language
Lecture 4: The Master Argument
Lecture 5: Common sense and idealism
Lecture 6: Causation and the self
Lecture 7: Science, signs and space
Lecture 8: Berkeleys later works/Recapitulation

Revision (1 lecture)
Lecturing staff will be available to answer your questions.


5. Readings

Core Texts
The following texts are essential. This course focuses on specific texts by these
philosophers and you will not succeed if you do not read those texts. In addition, we will
be reading three of the four authors in translation. Translations vary in quality and more
recent translations tend to be better. Therefore be wary of trying to use a free translation
from the Internet since these are mostly older or abridged. Save yourself from difficulty
and buy the following editions of the core texts online or at Blackwells on South Bridge
(where you will get a discount if you present your student matriculation card).

Plato, Five Dialogues: Euthyphro, Apology, Crito, Meno, Phaedo, translated by G. Grube
and revised by J. Cooper, Hackett, 2002. [Of these five, we will study only the Meno and
Phaedo.]
Page | 6

Other translations of the Meno are by A. Beresford, revised L. Brown, in Protagoras and
Meno, (Penguin Classics), and by R. Waterfield, in Meno and Other Dialogues, (Oxford
Worlds Classics). Passages from the Phaedo and Republic will be discussed in the last
two lectures; these may be found in the collected edition of Platos works by J. Cooper
(Hackett) and in many other editions.

Aristotles Categories
http://faculty.washington.edu/smcohen/Cats1-5.pdf

Aristotles Physics Book I
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.1.i.html
Aristotles Physics Book II
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.2.ii.html

Aristotles Generation and Corruption
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/gener_corr.1.i.html

Aristotles Metaphysics
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.7.vii.html
and http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3atext%3a1999.01.0052

See also: Barnes, J., ed. The Complete Works of Aristotle, Volumes I and II, Princeton:
Princeton University Press, 1984.
And: http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/webbin/book/lookupname?key=Aristotle

R. Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy, Oxford Worlds Classics, translated by M.
Moriarty, Oxford University Press, 2008.

George Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, many useful editions available (both
electronic and in print e.g. from Oxford World Classics) but the recommended text is that
from the Penguin Classics, ed. Roger Woolhouse, Penguin, 1988 or revised edition 2004.

Secondary Reading

Plato
Recommended Secondary Literature (A) - On the Meno:
D. Scott. Platos Meno.
T. Irwin. Platos Ethics Chapter 9 (available online).
G. Fine Inquiry in the Meno in R. Kraut, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Plato.
A. Sesonske and N. Fleming, eds, Platos Meno: Text and Criticism.

Recommended Secondary Literature (B) - On Plato as a whole and his later works:
A. Mason, Plato (especially chapters 3-5 and 7).
N. White, Platos Metaphysical Epistemology, in R. Kraut, ed. The Cambridge
Companion to Plato.
T. Irwin, Platos Ethics, chapters 13-14.

Aristotle
J. L. Ackrill, Aristotle the Philosopher, (OUP, 1981).
Barnes, J. Aristotle: A Very Short Introduction, (OUP, 1990).
Page | 7

T. H. Irwin, Aristotles First Principles, (OUP, 1988).
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-categories/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-causality/
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-metaphysics/
Ackrill, J., Categories and De Interpretatione, Translated with notes, Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1963.
W. Charlton (translation and commentary) Physics Books I and II (Clarendon, 1983).
Williams, C., De Generatione et Corruptione, Translated with a commentary, Oxford:
Oxford University Press, 1983.
Bostock, D., Metaphysics Books Z and H, Translated with a commentary, Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1994.
Scaltsas, T., 1985, Substratum, Subject, and Substance, Ancient Philosophy, 5: 21540.
Scaltsas, T., 1994b, Substantial Holism, in Scaltsas, Charles, and Gill 1994, pp. 107
128, in Scaltsas, T., D. Charles, and M. L. Gill (eds.), 1994, Unity, Identity, and
Explanation in Aristotle's Metaphysics, Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Descartes
Guidebooks
G. Hatfield, Descartes and the Meditations, Routledge, 2003.
C. Wilson, Descartess Meditations: an introduction, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
G. Southwell, A Beginners Guide to Descartess Meditations, Blackwell, 2008.

Recommended Secondary Literature
S. Gaukroger (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Descartes Meditations, Blackwell, 2006.
B. Williams, Descartes: The Project of Pure Enquiry, Penguin, 1978.
H. Frankfurt, Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen: The Defense of Reason in Descartess
Meditations, several editions, most recently, Princeton University Press 2008.
M. Dauler, Descartes, Routledge, 1978.
A. Rorty (ed.), Essays on Descartes Meditations, University of California Press, 1986.
J. Cottingham, Cambridge Companion to Descartes, Cambridge University Press, 1992.


Berkeley
Recommended Secondary Text
Alasdair Richmond, Berkeleys Principles of Human Knowledge: A Readers Guide,
(London, Continuum, 2009). Offers a section-by-section introduction to Berkeleys
Principles, the key text for this series of lectures. Please note: the whole text of this
Readers Guide is available electronically through the Main Library.

Recommended Secondary Literature
Jonathan Bennett, Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes, (Oxford, Clarendon, 1971).
Jonathan Dancy, Berkeley: An Introduction, (Oxford, Blackwell, 1987).
Robert J. Fogelin, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Berkeley and the Principles of Human
Knowledge, (London, Routledge, 2001).
A. C. Grayling, Berkeley: The Central Arguments, (London, Duckworth, 1986).
Kenneth P. Winkler, Berkeley: An Interpretation, (Oxford, Clarendon, 1994).

Page | 8

Useful Web sites
The International Berkeley Society, http://georgeberkeley.tamu.edu/index.html
Lisa Downing, George Berkeley, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2004), Edward
N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2004/entries/berkeley/.


6. Tutorials
In addition to three course lectures per week, you must attend weekly tutorials. Tutorials
give you a chance to discuss further topics and issues in the course and its lectures.
Tutorials will take place, at times and places to be arranged, during weeks 2 through 11 of
the semester.

Attendance at tutorials is compulsory for all students on this course. To be clear, you must
attend these tutorials. The class tutor will maintain a register of attendance. Unexplained
absences will be brought to the attention of your Personal Tutor.

You must sign yourself up for a tutorial group during the first week of the semester. This is
done via Learn. If you find that none of the available groups meet at a time which is
compatible with your timetable, please inform Sarah Nicol, in the Teaching Office
immediately. (The Teaching Office is on the ground floor of the Dugald Stewart Building
on Charles Street, off George Square.)

Any student who has not signed her/himself up for tutorials by the due date of the mid-term
coursework essay will be deemed to have withdrawn from the course. Students who miss
tutorials may be required to do additional written work.

Further information concerning tutorials will be available on Learn.
Questions to consider when preparing for your tutorials might include:

Plato
1. What is the significance of Socrates proposal in the Meno that virtue is knowledge?
What reasons might there be for holding it, and what objections might be brought against
it?
2. What is Platos theory of Forms? How does it illuminate his approach to philosophy?
3. What is the theory of recollection, and can it help solve Menos paradox?

Aristotle
1. Are the four causes causes in nature or explanations?
- Physics Book I Ch. 3: http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/physics.2.ii.html
- http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-causality/
- For online articles see also: http://philpapers.org/sep/aristotle-causality/
2. The unity of Matter and Form in a Substance
- Aristotles Metaphysics Book VII, Ch. 17:
http://classics.mit.edu/Aristotle/metaphysics.7.vii.html
Page | 9

- http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-metaphysics/#Unity with
http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-metaphysics/#UniRec
- http://www.stthomas.edu/catholicstudies/faculty/pubs/Deavel/Unity%20and%20P
rimary%20Substance%20for%20Aristotle.pdf
- http://books.google.co.uk/books?id=4__8kPBMnMMC&pg=PA107&dq=Substant
ial+Holism+theodore+scaltsas&hl=en&sa=X&ei=UmgnUpKTEJOIhQeCiYHYCg
&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepage&q=Substantial%20Holism%20theodore%2
0scaltsas&f=false
- Gill, ML, Aristotle on Substance The Paradox of Unity, Princeton University
Press, 1991.
Descartes
1. What is the Evil Demon hypothesis supposed to show? How does Descartes resist
radical scepticism? What role does God play in Descartes attempt to overcome
scepticism?
2. What is the Cartesian Circle and how much of a threat to Descartes project does it
pose? What is the meditation on the piece of wax designed to show?


Berkeley
1. Why, according to Berkeley, is matter an impossible entity? Why is mental substance
the only kind that Berkeley allows? What is Berkeleys Master Argument and does it
succeed? (Reading as for lectures 3 and 4 please see above.)
2. How does Berkeley try to establish the existence of God? How does Berkeley to
reconcile the existence of God with the existence of suffering? Are his arguments
successful? (Reading as for lectures 5 and 6 please see above.)


7. Assessment
This course will be examined on the basis of two pieces of assessed work. These pieces
are as follows:

The Mid-Term Coursework Essay
This counts for 25% of the overall assessment mark.

The End of Semester Degree Examination
This counts for 75% of the overall assessment mark.

7.1 Coursework Essay
The coursework essay is a single 1500 word essay answering a question from an agreed
list of questions.

The coursework essay is due on Tuesday 25
th
February 2014 by 12pm.

Page | 10

You should submit one hard copy of your essay to the drop boxes (opposite reception) on
the ground floor of the Dugald Stewart Building. The date of submission will be taken from
your hard copy. You should also upload one copy electronically to Learn,
(use .rls or .doc). The electronic submission is compulsory and should be submitted within
48 hours of the hardcopy deadline. Please contact Sarah Nicol in the Teaching Office if
you are having problems uploading your essay. Please also ensure you fill out and attach
the correct coversheets.

7.2 Word Policy
The word count of your essay, including footnotes but excluding bibliography, must not
exceed the specified word limit. The precise word count must be written on the coversheet.
Overlong essays will be penalised according to the following rule: 5% of the maximum
obtainable mark will be deducted for every 100 words, or part thereof, over the word limit.
So, exceeding the word limit by 1-100 words incurs a deduction of 5%; exceeding by 101-
200 words incurs a deduction of 10%; and so on.

7.3 Examination
The degree examination is a two-hour examination given under exam conditions at a date,
time and place to be announced later in the term.

Detailed information concerning essay titles, readings, submission procedures and the
Degree Examination will be available on Learn.

7.4 Visiting Undergraduates
The assessment arrangements for visiting undergraduates are the same as for all other
students

7.5 Re-sit exams
For those failing or missing the exam, a resit examination is held in late August. It is the
student's responsibility to check the resit timetable on the Registry's website
http://www.registry.ed.ac.uk, find the time and location of the resit exam and ensure they
are present for that resit. No formal registration is necessary and students will not be
individually notified of the resit date and location of resit exams.

8. Learn
You should regularly check your university email and check for announcements on the
course Learn page, which can be assessed from your MyEd page via
http://www.myed.ed.ac.uk/

The course Learn page will provide information concerning:
General information and announcement about the course
Lecture notes and PowerPoint slides
Tutorial arrangements
Information about assessment arrangements

Exemplar essays
Anonymised exemplar essays for this course have been posted on Learn. These are
essays written by past students that they have kindly agreed us to use. We hope that they
Page | 11

are useful to you. We encourage you to read these essays in conjunction with the
Philosophy-specific marking guidelines. We suggest that you discuss the exemplar essays
with your tutor, think about what works and what doesn't in the essays, why the essays fell
into their grade-band, and how the essays could be improved. It is important to emphasise
that there are many ways for an essay to fall into a particular grade-band. The Philosophy-
specific marking guidelines provide explanation of the many and diverse ways in which an
essay can be a 1st, 2.i, 2.ii, and so on; the guidelines also make clear that what
determines a grade-band is a cluster of properties rather than necessary and sufficient
conditions. The exemplar essays only show one way to achieve a certain grade; it is not
the only way. Note that if you attempt to copy text or content from the exemplar essays in
your own work this would be treated as a case of serious academic misconduct and would
have serious repercussions.

9. Useful Information
9.1 Communicating with us
If you have a query regarding lecture content or other specifically academic matters you
can contact Dr Dave Ward as course organiser whose office-hours and other contact
details are as below:

Office: Room 6.05, Dugald Stewart Building
Telephone: (0131) 650 3652
E-mail: [email protected]
Office-hours (Term-time): Wednesday 10am to 12 noon

Please note: if none of these times suit, alternative appointments can be arranged on
request.

If you have a specific query regarding lecture content you should contact the lecturer
directly by e-mail or by visiting them during their office hours. Individual lecturers are
unlikely to answer questions about elements of the course they did not teach. However,
please feel free to question or e-mail lecturers about their own lecture material. Individual
lecturers may have different approaches to handling your questions. Your tutor is also
likely to be able to clarify philosophical / course issues for you or direct you to the
appropriate person.

If you have questions not specifically about lecture content, you should speak to the
Course Secretary, Miss Sarah Nicol, whose office-hours and other contact details are as
below:

Office: G.06 Dugald Stewart Building
Telephone: (0131) 650 3628
E-mail: [email protected]
Office-hours: 9.30am to 4.30pm, Monday to Friday

9.2. Prizes
Students who perform with excellence in Greats are eligible for the James Seth Prize.

9.3 Innovative Learning Week (for information only)
Page | 12

In academic year 2013-14 the University is having an extra week of teaching in Semester
2: Innovative Learning Week, 18-22 February 2014.

Normal teaching slots will be suspended and in their place will be a range of other
activities such as master classes, a research day, a science fair, a Gaelic festival and
guest lectures.

More information click on the below links:
http://www.ed.ac.uk/staff-students/students/studies/innovative-learning
http://www.ed.ac.uk/staff-students/students/studies/innovative-learning/calendar

Page | 13

10. Common Marking Scheme

http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-departments/registry/exams/regulations/common-marking-
scheme

A1 90-
100
Excellent
Outstanding in every respect, the work is well beyond the level expected of a
competent student at their level of study.
A2 80-89 Excellent
Outstanding in some respects, the work is often beyond what is expected of a
competent student at their level of study.
A3 70-79 Excellent
Very good or excellent in most respects, the work is what might be expected of
a very competent student.
B 60-69 Very Good
Good or very good in most respects, the work displays thorough mastery of
the relevant learning outcomes.
C 50-59 Good
The work clearly meets requirements for demonstrating the relevant learning
outcomes.
D 40-49 Pass
The work meets minimum requirements for demonstrating the relevant
learning outcomes.
E 30-39 Marginal fail
The work fails to meet minimum requirements for demonstrating the relevant
learning outcomes.
F 20-29 Clear fail
The work is very weak or shows a decided lack of effort.

G 10-19 Bad fail
The work is extremely weak.
H 0-9 Bad fail
The work is of very little consequence, if any, to the area in question.

10. 1 Grade-related Marking Guidelines - Philosophy

Explaining the function of these guidelines:

(1) These are only guidelines; marking still requires discretion and judgment.

(2) The guidelines are bottom up - each band presupposes that the student has at least
satisfied the criteria laid down under the lower bands. So to get a first, it is assumed that
you at least satisfy all the criteria for a 2-1, etc.
Page | 14


(3) Each set of guidelines should be understood not as providing necessary and sufficient
conditions for a mark in the band specified. Rather, the guidelines under each band
provide a kind of cluster which defines a paradigm of a piece of work falling within the
band in question. A piece of work might deviate from the paradigm in certain respects but
still fall within the band. It might help to explain the idea of a paradigm being invoked here.
By way of comparison, an ornamental chair (as one might find in a museum, and that is not
fit for sitting on) is a less paradigmatic instance of a piece of furniture than an ordinary sofa,
but plausibly an ornamental chair still counts as a piece of furniture all the same. This is
because it satisfies enough of the criteria in the cluster of concepts associated with being a
piece of furniture, though it satisfies fewer of those criteria than an ordinary sofa. Similarly,
a piece of work might be a less than fully paradigmatic instance of a 2-1 but still count as a
2-1 all the same.

(4) Although they are written in a way that might naturally suggest a binary reading, the
guidelines are generally scalar satisfying each of them comes in degrees, and is not all or
nothing. This is important, and relevant to the paradigm point above, in that doing better
with respect to one criteria under a given band could offset doing slightly less well with
regards to another. Also, precisely where within the band a piece of work is assessed will
typically reflect how well the work does in terms of each of these criteria.

(5) The guidelines apply most clearly for essays. In the case of exam questions, part of the
exercise will be for the student to work out the extent to which the question calls for
something going beyond pure exegesis.

(6) For history of philosophy classes, where the instructor explicitly indicates this is the case,
the contrast between exegesis and original argument may be less clear. In these cases,
the original argumentation may be an original argument for an interpretation or reading of a
text, for example. Individual instructors have some discretion in explaining how the specific
details of their course mean these guidelines should be interpreted. As mere guidelines,
they provide only a sort of default setting rather than a one size fits all set of prescriptions,
amenable to only one canonical interpretation.

Page | 15

General Guidelines
Clarity
Is the writing clear?
Is the grammar and spelling correct?
Is the language used appropriate?
Structure
Is a clear thesis or position stated?
Is an argument, or arguments, offered in support of the thesis?
Does each part of the essay/exam have a clearly indicated purpose?
Understanding
Is a sound understanding of relevant issues demonstrated?
Is the exposition of others views accurate?
Are technical terms adequately defined?
Originality
Is there evidence of independent thought?
Is there critical engagement with the material?
Argument
Is the argument convincing?
Are the inferences valid?
Are obvious objections anticipated?

10.2 Grade Bands

Fail (less than 40)

Third Class (4049)
Writing is generally unclear. Frequent spelling or grammar mistakes, incorrect language,
and/or excessively convoluted sentence structure.
Neglects clearly to state a thesis or position and/or fails to support this with arguments.
Contains irrelevant material, or material whose relevance is not adequately explained.
Demonstrates a barely adequate understanding of central issues. Contains several errors
in exposition or in explanation of concepts.
No evidence of independent thought or critical engagement. Merely rehashes arguments
from readings or lectures.
Where arguments are given, these are weak, depend on invalid inferences or implausible
premises. Fails to anticipate obvious objections.

Lower Second Class (5059)
Writing is generally clear, but there are occasional spelling/grammar infelicities and/or
poorly constructed sentences.
A thesis/position is indicated but not clearly defined. Some arguments given, but their
structure often unclear.
Demonstrates a basic grasp of key concepts, but occasional inaccuracies in
exposition/explanation.
Little evidence of independent thought. Some suggestion of original ideas, but these are
under-developed and/or expressed unclearly.
Arguments generally weak or unconvincing.

Upper Second Class (60-69)
Writing is generally clear, marred only by the rare spelling/grammar infelicity or poorly
constructed sentence.
A thesis/position is indicated and clearly defined. Arguments are given with relatively clear
structure. It is generally clear what is going on in each section, why one section follows on
Page | 16

from the previous one, and how the essay as a whole hangs together.
Demonstrates a solid understanding of the key concepts, and the exposition is generally
accurate and thorough.
Substantial evidence of original thought either an original argument of some kind for a
familiar position or an original argument for a novel position. In either case, the argument
should be reasonably well developed.
The authors original arguments are interesting and promising, but fairly central or glaring
problems with the argument are not discussed or addressed in any way, or are given only a
highly cursory treatment.

Low First Class (70-79)
Writing is very clear and engaging throughout. Where examples are used they are both
relevant and memorable. The writing will also be concise.
The essays structure is not only clear and well defined; it also provides a satisfying
narrative arc.
Demonstrates a deep understanding of the key concepts. Explains other philosophers
ideas in the authors own terms, clearly presenting those ideas in a way that indicates that
the author has made them his/her own. Where technical terms are used they are always
carefully defined.
Highly original thought, with well developed arguments. The exegesis will generally be
sufficiently concise as to allow the author to develop his or her own arguments in
considerable detail.
The author very carefully considers the most central and obvious problems with his/her
original argument(s) and has interesting things to say about them.

Mid-First Class (80-89)
Writing is crystal clear and highly engaging throughout. Memorable examples are used to
underscore key points. The writing is concise without coming across as terse or stilted.
The essays structure is clear and well defined, with a highly satisfying narrative arc.
Demonstrates a deep understanding of key concepts. Not only explains the ideas of other
philosophers in a way that shows he/she has made them his/her own, but that actually
casts new light on how we might charitably understand the ideas of those philosophers.
Very original thought, above and beyond what we would normally expect from an
undergraduate. These original ideas will be developed in great detail.
The author very carefully considers the most central and obvious problems with his/her
original argument(s) and has prima facie convincing rejoinders. Author may also consider
more subtle objections to his/her argument(s)/view(s).

High First Class (90-100)
Writing is extremely clear, concise, and engaging - of a publishable quality.
The essays structure is extremely clear and well-defined, with a highly satisfying narrative
arc.
Demonstrates a deep understanding of key concepts. Not only explains the ideas of other
philosophers in a way that shows he/she has made them his/her own, but that actually
casts new light on how we might charitably understand the ideas of those philosophers.
A highly original and well developed line of argument and/or novel view, such that the
essay is publishable, at least in an undergraduate or postgraduate journal, perhaps
bordering on being publishable in a mainstream professional journal.
The author considers the most important objections to his/her arguments/views. The
replies are generally convincing and subtle. If space allows, less obvious objections may
also be discussed in interesting ways.

Page | 17

11. Essay Questions, Past Papers & Sample Degree Exam
paper

11.1 Essay Questions
For your coursework essay, you may answer any essay question from the list given below.

Plato
1. What lessons about definition can we learn from the search for a definition of virtue in
the Meno?

Reading:
Meno, 70a-77a.
G. Fine Inquiry in the Meno in R. Kraut, ed. The Cambridge Companion to Plato.
M. Burnyeat, Examples in Epistemology, Philosophy 1977.
R. Robinson, Platos Earlier Dialectic Ch. 5

2. . What does Socrates in the Meno mean by the claim that no one desires bad things? Is
it defensible?

Reading:
Plato, Meno, 77b-79e
G. Santas, The Socratic Paradoxes, Philosophical Review 1964.
D. Scott, Platos Meno, Chapter 4.
J. Walsh, Aristotles conception of Moral Weakness, Ch. 1.

Aristotle: please see Aristotle tutorial questions, which may also be used for essay
purposes.

Descartes
1. To what extent, if any, is Descartes successful in showing there is a real distinction
between mind and body?

Reading:
Descartes, Meditations, Preface, Synopsis, Meditations 2 and 6.
S. Gaukroger, The Blackwell Guide to Descartes Meditations, chapters 4 and 11.
M. Dauler, Descartes, Routledge, 1978, chapter 6.
J. Cottingham, Cambridge Companion to Descartes, chapters 11 and 12.
B. Williams, Descartes: The Project of Pure Enquiry, chapter 4.
Strawson, Self, Mind, and Body, in his Freedom and Resentment, Oxford University
Press, 1963.

2. Is Descartes reasoning in the Third Meditation circular? If so, is it a problem for
Descartes?

Reading:
A. Gewirth, The Cartesian Circle, The Philosophical Review, 1941.
H. Frankfurt, Descartes Validation of Reason, in Descartes: A Collection of Critical
Essays, ed. W. Doney, Macmillan, 1968.
H. Frankfurt, Demons, Dreamers, and Madmen, chapters 2 and 3.
Page | 18

B.Williams, Descartes: The Project of Pure Enquiry, chapter 7.
J. Cottingham, The Cambridge Companion to Descartes, chapter 7.
S. Gaukroger (ed.), The Blackwell Guide to Descartes Meditations, chapter 8.
J. van Cleve, Foundationalism, Epistemic Principles, and the Cartesian Circle, The
Philosophical Review, 88 (1979), 55-91. [This article is challenging but enlightening.]
Reprinted in Eternal Truths and the Cartesian Circle, edited by W. Doney, Garland
Publishing, 1987); Knowledge and Justification, edited E. Sosa, Ashgate, 1994; Oxford
Readings in Philosophy: Descartes, edited J. Cottingham, Oxford University Press, 1998;
The Blackwell Reader in Epistemology, edited J. Kim and E. Sosa, Blackwell, 1999.

Berkeley
1. How does Berkeley try to establish the non-existence of material substance?

Reading:
Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, 1-30.
Alasdair Richmond, Berkeleys Principles of Human Knowledge: A Readers Guide,
(London, Continuum, 2009), pp. 34-74.
Jonathan Bennett, Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes, (Oxford, Clarendon, 1971),
Chapter VI.
Jonathan Dancy, Berkeley: An Introduction, (Oxford, Blackwell, 1987), Chapters 1-3.
Robert J. Fogelin, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Berkeley and the Principles of
Human Knowledge, (London, Routledge, 2001), Chapters 1-3.
Kenneth P. Winkler, Berkeley: An Interpretation, (Oxford, Clarendon, 1994), Chapter 6.

2. Does Berkeley prove that no object can exist unconceived?

Reading:
Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, 4-7; 22-23.
A. Gallois, Berkeleys Master Argument, The Philosophical Review, 83, 1974: 55-69, also
available online from JSTOR (www.jstor.org)--you will need to log in through EASE
(www.ease.ed.ac.uk) or use the library for access.
Alasdair Richmond, Berkeleys Principles of Human Knowledge: A Readers Guide,
(London, Continuum, 2009), pp. 57-66.
Lisa Downing, George Berkeley, Stanford Encyclopaedia of Philosophy (2004), Edward
N. Zalta (ed.), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/win2004/entries/berkeley/, Section 2.
Robert J. Fogelin, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Berkeley and the Principles of
Human Knowledge, (London, Routledge, 2001), Chapters 3-4.

3. What role does God play in Berkeleys system?
Reading:
Berkeley, Principles of Human Knowledge, 25-33; 135-156.
Alasdair Richmond, Berkeleys Principles of Human Knowledge: A Readers Guide,
(London, Continuum, 2009), pp. 66-74; 139-153.
Jonathan Bennett, Locke, Berkeley, Hume: Central Themes, (Oxford, Clarendon, 1971),
Chapter VII.
Jonathan Dancy, Berkeley: An Introduction, (Oxford, Blackwell, 1987), Chapters 4-5.
Robert J. Fogelin, Routledge Philosophy Guidebook to Berkeley and the Principles of
Human Knowledge, (London, Routledge, 2001), Chapter 5.
Kenneth P. Winkler, Berkeley: An Interpretation, (Oxford, Clarendon, 1994), Chapter 7.

Page | 19

11.2 Past Papers
The degree examination for Greats is a two-hour examination in two parts but its format is
different from those of other Philosophy exams. Past papers for Greats can be obtained
online via your MyEd log-in follow link at: http://www.ed.ac.uk/schools-
departments/information-services/library-museum-gallery/exam-papers

Sample Degree Exam Paper
In addition to online past papers, in order to help you with revision and to help familiarise
you with the Greats examination format, we have provided a sample version of a
Greats exam paper as below.

Part I is divided into four sections, A, B, C and D. In each section you will find two short
quotations from one of the four texts we are considering in this course. You must write a
comment on one quotation from each section, making four in total, one from each section.
You will be penalised if you comment on fewer than four or if you comment on two
quotations from the same section.

For each comment, you should try should try to explain what the quotation is about. You
could try to identify where the quotation is from in general terms, for example, from the
melting wax argument. You could provide some context for the quotation, for instance
what the author is arguing for in this part of the text. You could explain the argument in the
quotation and point out what flaws or merits it has in your opinion. In short, you should
aim to convince the examiner that you recognise the quotation, understand what it is
saying, understand the larger context in which it is set and can suggest flaws or merits in
what is being said.

You should plan to spend about 15 minutes on each comment, so keep your comments
brief and to the point. In total, the first part should take you about an hour.

Part II comprises eight questions similar to the essay questions given above. You must
choose only one question and write an essay answer for that question. You should plan to
spend an hour on the essay.

The examination will be similar to the following example:

Part I

Section A
1. How will you look for it, Socrates, when you do not know at all what it is? How will you
aim to search for something you do not know at all? If you should meet with it, how will you
know that this is the thing that you did not know?

2. That is why knowledge is prized higher than correct opinion, and knowledge differs from
correct opinion in being fixed.

Section B
3. It is absurd to suppose that purpose is not present because we do not observe the
agent deliberating. Art does not deliberate. If the ship-building art were in the wood, it
would produce the same results by nature. If, therefore, purpose is present in art, it is
Page | 20

present also in nature. The best illustration is a doctor doctoring himself: nature is like
that.

4. For cause is used in many senses and even within the same kind one may be prior to
another (e.g. the doctor and the expert are causes of health, the relation 2:1 and number
of the octave), and always what is inclusive to what is particular.

Section C
5. [Since] reason already persuades me that I ought no less carefully to withhold my
assent from matters which are not entirely certain and indubitable than from those which
appear to me manifestly to be false, if I am able to find in each one some reason to doubt,
this will suffice to justify my rejecting the whole.

6. What is a thing which thinks? It is a thing which doubts, understands, [conceives],
affirms, denies, wills, refuses, which also imagines and feels.

Section D
7. But say you, surely there is nothing easier than to imagine trees, for instance, in a park,
or books existing in a closet, and no body by to perceive them. I answer, you may so,
there is no difficulty in it: but what is all this, I beseech you, more than framing in your mind
certain ideas which you call books and trees, and at the same time omitting to frame the
idea of any one that may perceive them? But do not you yourself perceive or think of them
all the while?

8. We do at all times and in all places perceive manifest tokens of the divinity; everything
we see, hear, feel or any wise perceive by sense, being a sign or effect of the Power of
God.

Part II
9. Is successful teaching just a matter of making students conscious of what they already
know?

10. Does sense experience get in the way of the acquisition of knowledge?

11. To what extent, if any, is Aristotles discussion of final causes in Physics II inadequate
as an account of explanation?

12. If someone says that an event happened by chance, is that an explanation or the
refusal of an explanation?

13. To what extent, if any, is Descartes conception of a clear and distinct idea itself clear
and distinct?

14. Why does Descartes think we can be certain that God is not a deceiver? Is he right?

15. How does Berkeley try to establish Gods existence?

16. What happens to the tree in the quad if no human being perceives it?

Page | 21

12. Making the most of University
Support from your University Careers Service

Your University Careers Service is here to support you from Day 1, not just your final year.
We can assist you in finding semester-time, vacation and volunteering work to help you finance
and add value to your university experience, alongside your studies. And we are happy to help you
explore your future direction, whatever year youre in.
Whilst studying to gain the best degree you can is your priority, its also a good idea to take
advantage of the wide range of opportunities open to you as an undergraduate. These include,
volunteering, mentoring, taking on a role with a student society or club, study abroad, group
projects, part time work, summer jobs, delivering presentations, work shadowing, to name but a
few.
Getting involved with activities outwith your studies has many advantages. You can:
- Develop and demonstrate skills and attributes, such as teamwork, communication, time-
management, customer service etc. Future employers will be looking for evidence of relevant
skills from all areas of your life, not just your studies.
- Broaden your horizons new experiences can change your perspective, provide new
insights, alter your outlook, encourage you to consider different opportunities and directions.
- Discover your strengths what youre good at, what you enjoy, how you can use these
strengths to your advantage in the workplace
Careers Service support includes:
- Part time and vacation opportunities via our SAGE (Student and Graduate Employment)
database.
- Support with applications and interviews for part-time and vacation work
- Volunteering opportunities nationwide and abroad
- Talking through your immediate and future plans with a Careers Adviser.
- Information specifically for early-years students http://tinyurl.com/lrv7an9
Browse our website www.ed.ac.uk/careers for further information on all the above, or call in and
see us on the 3
rd
floor of the Main Library Building.

And specifically for Philosophy students:
- Your own careers blog http://pplscareersblog.wordpress.com/ - regular postings relevant to
PPLS students, to inform and inspire.
- regular drop-in sessions for quick career queries in DSB/7 George Sq, - look out for the emails
advertising these sessions
- dedicated Philosophy careers pages www.ppls.ed.ac.uk > philosophy > undergraduate. Be
inspired by:
- case studies of recent philosophy graduates,
- the Employability Guide for Philosophy students,
- your Options with a Philosophy degree . and more.

We look forward to working with you during your time at Edinburgh.
Page | 22

13. PPLS Undergraduate Student Handbook
The PPLS Undergraduate Student Handbook has more information on Student Support
and academic guidance; late coursework and plagiarism; illness and disability
adjustments, and useful sources of advice.

The Handbook can be found here:

http://www.ppls.ed.ac.uk/students/undergraduate/manage_your_courses.php

14. Feedback

You will get many feedback or feedforward opportunities in your courses. Feedback could be in the
form of an essay, a draft write-up, self-generated or peer feedback, small group discussions or
quizzes within lectures etc. Feedforward might include a discussion of how to write an essay, or
prepare for an exam.

Feedback is essential to learning and it takes many forms. We strongly encourage you to use all
forms of feedback, including:

Asking and answering questions in lectures or classes
Asking questions of your Course Organiser or lecturer in their office hours
Discussing your work with lecturers and examiners on Philosophy's dedicated Feedback
Days (Honours students)
Actively participating in your tutorials (pre-Honours students)
Actively participating in Autonomous Learning Groups (Honours students)
Talking about your ideas outside class with fellow Philosophy students
Taking your essay to PhilSoc essay surgeries
Participating in PhilSoc discussion groups and study-skills events
Participating in PhilSoc debates and talks: http://euphilsoc.weebly.com/
Participating in the British Undergraduate Philosophy Society, including undergraduate
conferences: http://www.bups.org

If you have any suggestions on how to improve feedback further, please contact either:

Your Tutor (pre-Honours students)
Your Course Organiser
Your Personal Tutor
Tamsin Welch, PPLS Student Support Officer ([email protected])
Dr Mark Sprevak, Director of Undergraduate Teaching ([email protected])