Philosophy Consultation Draft - Department of Education · 2019-09-16 · Each inquiry considers the 21 st Century or personal relevance of the discipline of philosophy, such as the

PHILOSOPHY COURSE CODE: [TASC ASSIGNS CODE]

LEVEL 3 / SIZE VALUE 15

TASC Course Document Template 16 September 2019

i

CONTENTS

Rationale .................................................................................................................................................................................... 1

Aims ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 1

Learning Outcomes .............................................................................................................................................................. 2

Pathways.................................................................................................................................................................................... 2

Course Size and Complexity ............................................................................................................................................ 2

Course Description ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Relationship to the Australian Curriculum General Capabilities ........................................................... 3

Course Requirements .......................................................................................................................................................... 4

Course Delivery................................................................................................................................................................ 7

Course Content....................................................................................................................................................................... 7

Work Requirements .......................................................................................................................................................... 22

Assessment ............................................................................................................................................................................ 23

Quality Assurance Processes ........................................................................................................................................ 23

External Assessment Requirements ......................................................................................................................... 24

Criteria ..................................................................................................................................................................................... 24

Standards ............................................................................................................................................................................... 25

Qualifications Available .................................................................................................................................................. 32

Award Requirements ....................................................................................................................................................... 32

Course Evaluation .............................................................................................................................................................. 33

Expectations Defined by National Standards ..................................................................................................... 33

Accreditation ........................................................................................................................................................................ 34

Version History .................................................................................................................................................................... 34

Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................................ 34

Appendix 1 - Line of Sight ............................................................................................................................................ 34

Appendix 2 - Glossary ..................................................................................................................................................... 37

1

Philosophy

RATIONALE

The value of philosophy is that it teaches not what to think, but how to think. The

academic discipline of Philosophy includes the study of the principles underlying

conduct, thought, existence and knowledge. The skills it develops are the ability to

analyse arguments, to engage with and to question prevailing views, and to express

thoughts clearly and precisely. It encourages critical thinking and creative problem

solving through open minded intellectual inquiry.

Philosophy promotes respect for intellectual integrity and builds learners’ capacity to be

independent thinkers who can articulate and justify positions on issues of significance to

themselves and to 21st Century society.

The course enables learners to develop responses to questions without definitive

answers, thus helping them to become comfortable with difficult intellectual challenges.

The emphasis on the analysis and formation of arguments allows students to identify

faulty or weak reasoning and understand the limits of knowledge.

This study of philosophy provides learners with an excellent introduction to

philosophical language and methodology, and to four key areas of philosophical study:

epistemology, metaphysics, ethics and political philosophy. Philosophy encourages

open-minded debate and an empathetic and tolerant response to the arguments of

others. It is intellectually challenging but is also of great relevance to learners in today’s

society.

AIMS

The Philosophy Level 3 course aims to develop learner’s:

knowledge and understanding of the tools of philosophical reasoning, analysis

and inquiry, including its terminology and its methods

capacity to identify develop and communicate philosophical questions and

arguments

skills in understanding and analysing significant philosophical ideas, viewpoints

and arguments in their relevant contexts

capacity to undertake inquiry, including skills in research, evaluation of sources,

synthesis of evidence, and analysis and communication of arguments

capacity to be informed citizens with skills in critical thinking and open-

mindedness: reflecting on their own thinking and that of others, and exploring

alternative approaches to philosophical questions

2

capacity to explore ideas and participate in philosophical debate, responding to

central philosophical questions, viewpoints and arguments with clarity and

precision

capacity to apply philosophical knowledge, skills and understanding to

contemporary and individual issues

open-mindedness: reflecting critically on their own thinking and that of others,

and exploring alternative approaches to philosophical questions.

LEARNING OUTCOMES

On successful completion of this course, learners will be able to:

use philosophical terms and methods in analysing and communicating

philosophical ideas, issues, arguments and positions

communicate ideas, issues, arguments and positions clearly and effectively

articulate the philosophical underpinnings of ideas, issues, arguments and

positions

describe and explain philosophical ideas, issues, arguments and positions

analyse, evaluate, articulate and justify arguments on various philosophical issues

identify strengths, weaknesses, assumptions and implications of philosophical

arguments

identify, formulate and evaluate evidence supporting or refuting philosophical

arguments

explain and evaluate the significance of philosophical ideas, issues, arguments

and positions to contemporary social and individual issues

utilise organisational and time management skills.

PATHWAYS

Exploring Issues in Society Level 2, Making Moral Decisions Level 2, Religion and Society

Level 2 and Studies of Religion Level 3 provide pathways to this course.

Successful completion of Philosophy Level 3 prepares learners for tertiary study in a

range of areas including: history, politics, law, religion, ethics and philosophy, business,

sociology, psychology, natural sciences, journalism, nursing, medicine and the creative

arts.

COURSE SIZE AND COMPLEXITY

This course has a complexity level of 3.

At Level 3, the learner is expected to acquire a combination of theoretical and/or

technical and factual knowledge and skills and use judgment when varying procedures

3

to deal with unusual or unexpected aspects that may arise. Some skills in organising self

and others are expected. Level 3 is a standard suitable to prepare learners for further

study at tertiary level. VET competencies at this level are often those characteristic of an

AQF Certificate III.

This course has a size value of 15.

COURSE DESCRIPTION

Philosophy Level 3 explores four of the main fields of philosophy; epistemology,

metaphysics, ethics and political philosophy. A foundation for inquiry is built through a

philosophical tool box and guided investigations into part of the existing corpus of

philosophical scholarship in each field. An additional focus on analysing and evaluating

arguments provides sound preparation for independent inquiries that apply all learning

from the course to issues of ‘living’ in the 21st century.

RELATIONSHIP TO THE AUSTRALIAN CURRICULUM GENERAL CAPABILITIES

Literacy

Learners engage in a wide range of learning activities in this course with significant

literacy demands. For example; they are required to compose and analyse arguments,

assess and use supporting evidence, and draft and complete extensive philosophical

inquiries.

Numeracy

Numeracy skills are developed and applied in the formal analysis of arguments

throughout this course. For example, in basic logic and argument learners develop skills

in analysing pattern and relationships in argument, and also learn to assess the structure

of arguments by mapping them against logical formulae. These skills are then applied

during the investigations and inquiries through each of the modules. In addition, various

philosophical theories that learners may study will involve the teaching, development

and application of additional numeracy capability; such as with the Hedonic Calculus in

the study of Utilitarianism in module 4.

Information and communications technology

Learners routinely develop their information and communications technology capability

during research investigations, and when they consume or produce diverse media such

as blogs, online discussion forums, and educational video and audio.

Critical and creative thinking

Critical and creative thinking is the aim and purpose of studying philosophy. Critically

analysing the arguments of others and creating and reflecting on their own arguments

are the central tasks for learners of this course. Learners develop and test their critical

thinking skills in the tool box and investigations strands of the course. In the inquiry

strand they apply these skills and both develop and apply their creative thinking skills.

4

Personal and social

Personal and social capability skills are developed as a result of learners working

independently and at other times in small groups. Learners should be given

opportunities to work collaboratively in groups and also independently as part of their

learning and research in this course. For example, each investigation in the course

provides learners with the opportunity to work with others in developing and testing

methods for the analysis of philosophical arguments. Teaches are likewise presented

with the opportunity to explicitly teach skills associated with co-construction and critical

friendship. In addition, inquiries in the course are student directed, where learners

generate inquiry questions from their own interests, and develop their self-direction and

self-management skills.

Ethical understanding

Ethics is a field of study in Philosophy. This course contains one module on ethics and a

second political philosophy module on value theory. Learners will develop the tools of

ethical decision making and engage with ethical theories and ethical issues in the ethics

module. They will further develop their ethical understanding through studying a

diversity of ethical thinkers, and engaging in personal ethical decision making in

compulsory philosophical inquiries.

Intercultural understanding

Intercultural understanding is a driver of content selection in the teacher support

material provided with this course. The course document itself ensures that learners

engage with philosophers from a variety of backgrounds, whilst the support material

provides a more extensive array of resources designed to develop intercultural

understanding and knowledge of different perspectives. In addition learners engage

extensively with Ancient, Medieval, Continental and Contemporary traditions within

philosophy; identifying and comparing their different interests and influence.

COURSE REQUIREMENTS

Philosophy 3 has five modules: Epistemology and reasoning (30 hours), Metaphysics A:

Existence (30 hours), Metaphysics B: Being (30 hours), Ethics (30 hours) and Political

Philosophy (30 hours). All modules are compulsory.

Modules consist of three components. All components are compulsory.

All components, other than the ‘basic logic and argument’’ component of module 1,

belong to one of three learning strands in the course: a ‘tool box’ (strand 1), an

investigation (strand 2), or an inquiry (strand 3).

5

Course content and requirements

Module 1

Epistemology

and reasoning

approximately

30 hours

Module 2

Metaphysics:A

-existence

approximately

30 hours

Module 3

Metaphysics:B

– being

approximately

30 hours

Module 4

Ethics

approximately

30 hours

Module 5

Political

Philosophy

approximately

30 hours

Introduction

to basic logic

and argument

(module 1 only)

To

ol B

ox

Stra

nd

tool box

component

epistemology

tool box

component

What can exist

tool box

component

Being (identity

and causality)

tool box

component

ethics

tool box

component

political

philosophy

Investig

atio

n S

tran

d

Investigation

component

scepticism

investigation

component

mind/body

investigation

component

free will

Investigation

component

normative

ethical theories

Investigation

component

the just state

Inq

uiry

Stra

nd

inquiry

component

learning

inquiry skills

through a

guided inquiry

inquiry

component

externally

assessed

12.5 hours

recommended

inquiry

component

externally

assessed

12.5 hours

recommended

inquiry

component

externally

assessed

12.5 hours

recommended

Tool Box strand – engaging with the ‘tools’ of the discipline –Each ‘tool box’

consists of key terminology and an introduction to key questions, issues and theories

from the relevant field of philosophy.

This introductory strand in each unit is not concerned with arguments and detailed

investigation, these come later. The tool box is designed to equip students with the

terminology and understanding of key questions and issues to enable them to:

6

1. use appropriate language and methodology in communicating about

philosophical investigations and undertaking philosophical inquiry

2. identify the philosophical context of arguments, investigations and inquiry, (e.g.

their philosophical field, topic, position or relevance).

Investigation strand – engaging with the existing body of work in the discipline.

Each investigation considers philosophical works and arguments from a topic within that

field of philosophy. Particular attention should be paid to: the philosophical context of

the discussion; the structure and strength of the arguments; their underlying

assumptions, implications, evidence and support; and the points of difference with

opposing arguments.

Investigations in to some major discussions from the relevant field of philosophy are

designed to equip students with an understanding of significant thinkers, issues and

arguments in that field, and enable them to:

1. develop and articulate a deep understanding of major philosophical ideas, issues

and debates

2. analyse the intentions, evidence and strength of philosophical arguments

3. confidently begin a philosophical inquiry in that field.

Inquiry strand – further developing and applying philosophical understanding

Each inquiry considers the 21st Century or personal relevance of the discipline of

philosophy, such as the following questions: Are the problems and arguments of

philosophy still relevant in the 21st Century? How have you come to understand yourself

and your world better through the study of philosophy? Does the study of

epistemology, metaphysics, ethics and politics offer something to 21st Century

problems? What is the purpose of philosophy in the 21st Century?

Inquiries will be based upon set topics inviting students to develop an inquiry question

in order to further explore a topic of interest to them and apply their philosophical ‘tool

box’ and investigation skills and understandings to 21st Century and individual issues.

Inquiries will equip them to:

1. apply their learning to issues of societal and personal significance

2. participate in philosophical debates

3. contribute confidently to meaningful discussions on topics of 21st Century and

individual significance.

7

COURSE DELIVERY

Module 1 Epistemology and reasoning will be delivered first. It is recommended that the

other components and modules be delivered in sequence.

COURSE CONTENT

MODULE 1

EPISTEMOLOGY AND REASONING (30 hours)

Reasoning

Analysing and articulating arguments is central to the discipline of philosophy. The first

module of this unit will familiarise learners with the basic features of logical argument

and equip them with the skills to analyse and articulate philosophical arguments.

Basic logic and argument

This component should encompass 10 of the 30 hours allocated to the epistemology

and reasoning module. The tools learnt from this module will underpin learners’

argumentation in all other modules of the course.

Content will include the following:

basic logic

o propositions

o conditional statements

o standard form and syllogisms

types of argument

o deductive arguments

o inductive arguments

strength of arguments

o validity, soundness and cogency

o formal logical fallacies, including but not limited to affirming the

consequent and denying the antecedent

o informal fallacies, including but not limited to ad hominem attacks, causal

fallacies and slippery slope arguments.

8

Learners will be expected to be able to:

identify, analyse and use logical structure in arguments

analyse arguments according to their inconsistency, including the identification

of common fallacies

assess the strength of arguments based upon their structure and inconsistencies.

Epistemology

Epistemology is the study of the nature of knowledge and how it may be acquired.

These two components will enable learners to engage with questions concerned with

knowledge: what we can know and how we can know it?

A key distinction for learners to understand is the epistemological distinction between

the ‘internal world’ of the knower and the ‘external world’ of the known.

In the epistemological components of this module, learners will investigate the

relationship between knowledge and the world, as well as considering ways of justifying

knowledge claims and testing their reliability.

Epistemology tool box

The purpose of the ‘tool box’ is to introduce learners to the language and methods of

the discipline in order to enable them to communicate philosophically. The questions

mentioned in this strand are not inviting an exploration of the arguments involved; that

comes later. They are a brief definition and illustration of some major issues from the

relevant field of philosophy. The focus is therefore on the terminology rather than

arguments. It is expected that teacher direction of learning will be highest in this strand.

Content will include an introduction to the following:

definitions of epistemology – learners should examine three different definitions

of epistemology, noting their similarities and differences in order to develop an

individual definition

terminology – students should develop an understanding of and be able to

define the key epistemological terms from the course glossary. Note that learners

will define the key highlighted terminology from the glossary and may choose to

define the related non-highlighted terminology

What is knowledge?

o definitions of knowledge - Plato’s tripartite account of knowledge and at

least one other definition of knowledge

o correspondence theory of meaning.

9

How can we know?

o how are beliefs justified as true? - foundationalism and at least one other

theory of epistemic justification (such as coherentism, evidentialism,

pragmatism or reliabilism)

o sources of knowledge (senses, evidence, reason, intuition, imagination,

testimony/research, perception/experience)

Truth and meaning

o the epistemological distinction between the internal world of the knower,

and the external world of the known, including a brief consideration of

one philosophical discussion of this distinction.

o the distinctions between objective and subjective truth, and universal and

relative truth.


use basic appropriate terminology when communicating about epistemology

identify the philosophical context of epistemological ideas, issues and arguments.

Investigation – epistemological scepticism

The purpose of an investigation in this course is to engage with significant discussions

in a particular field of philosophy, and to develop skills in analysing and communicating

arguments. Teacher direction will be required but students should also have

opportunities for guided work together and individually.


scepticism – can we be certain of anything?

o scepticism according to the senses

o the problem of induction

o responses to scepticism

analysis of arguments on scepticism

o identification of topic/context

o specific works and arguments, including as evidence and support

o structure and strength of arguments

o underlying assumptions, implications or points of difference.


10

explain, analyse and evaluate an argument for and an argument against

scepticism according to the senses

explain, analyse and evaluate an argument for and an argument against the limits

of reason

articulate an informed evidence-based position on epistemological scepticism.

MODULE 2

METAPHYSICS A - existence

Metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality, existence and being. The metaphysics

modules will enable learners to engage with questions that include those concerned

with mind and matter, being and identity, and causality.

A key distinction in this module is the metaphysical distinction between physical matter

and immaterial or non-physical entities.

In this module, learners will investigate the fundamental nature of persons and of the

Universe. They will examine the concepts of physical and non-physical or immaterial

entities and the role these concepts play in philosophical investigations. They will also

investigate what it might mean to exist, and how answers to this question impact

conclusions about what can exist, or not.

Tool box – metaphysics - existence


the discipline in order to enable them to contextualise philosophical discussions and

communicate philosophically. Questions in this strand are not investigations but rather a

brief definition and illustration of some issues in the area. The focus is therefore on the

terminology rather than arguments. It is expected that teacher direction of learning will

be highest in this strand.


definitions of metaphysics – learners should examine three different definitions of

metaphysics, noting their similarities and differences, in order to develop an

individual definition


define the key metaphysical terms from the course glossary. Note that learners

will define the key highlighted terminology from the glossary and may choose to


11

metaphysical monism v pluralism

o materialism – the monist view that only matter exists (and its movements

and properties)

o idealism – the monist view that only the spiritual or ideas in the mind exist.

o pluralism (dualism)- the view that there is more than one kind of reality or

existence (most often in metaphysics of mind we see the dualist view that

both physical matter and the spiritual or mental ideas exist)

metaphysical reduction – often considered part of scientific reduction – i.e. the

claim, in support of materialism, that all supposedly non-physical phenomena can

be reduced to physical phenomena

potentially irreducible phenomena

o consciousness

o God

o will.


use basic appropriate terminology when communicating about metaphysics

identify the philosophical context of metaphysical ideas, issues and arguments.

Investigation – mind/body

The purpose of an investigation in this course is for learners to engage with significant

discussions in a particular field of philosophy, and to develop their skills in analysing and

communicating arguments. Teacher direction will be required but students should also

have opportunities for guided work together and individually.

Investigations in this module focus on arguments about the metaphysics of a person;

there is opportunity in the inquiries for a broader application of metaphysical

understandings.


the mind/body problem

o metaphysical monism and dualism

o substance dualism and property dualism

o physicalism and functionalism

o the problem of interaction

12

analysis of mind/body arguments






explain, analyse and evaluate a dualist argument in detail

explain, analyse and evaluate a physicalist argument in detail

articulate an informed evidence-based position on mind/body arguments.

Guided inquiry – can neuroscience explain consciousness, or can a machine ever

have a mind

The inquiry strand of the module should encompass approximately 12.5 hours of the 30

hours allocated to the module. The purpose of an inquiry in this course is for learners to

apply their developing philosophical knowledge and understanding to philosophical

inquiries into socially and personally relevant 21st century issues. The usual teacher role

in this learning strand is one of guidance and support.

There is a greater need for teacher input and direction in this guided inquiry into

metaphysical thought experiments, as it is designed to introduce students to

philosophical inquiry as understood in this course and the skills they will need in later

independent inquiries.

Content will include an inquiry based upon one (1) of the following topics:

Can neuroscience fully explain consciousness?

Can a machine ever have a mind?


draft and refine a philosophical inquiry that meets the assessment requirements

for this module of the course

articulate an evidence based position on the knowledge argument in

metaphysics.

13

Work requirement

Inquiry 1 – A guided inquiry into metaphysics

Learners will complete a 1500 word guided inquiry into a question based upon one of

the inquiry topics listed in this unit. This inquiry will respond to a question developed by

the teacher and learner in response to a stimulus they have selected. The inquiry will be

no more than 1500 words in length.

MODULE 3

METAPHYSICS B - being

Metaphysics is the study of the nature of reality, existence and being. The metaphysics

modules will enable learners to engage with questions that include those concerned

with mind and matter, being and identity, and causality?

In this module, learners will investigate the fundamental nature of being. They will

examine the concepts of free will and determinism, and the role these concepts play in

decision making. They will also engage with what it might mean to be an individual and

a person, and how answers to all these question impact conclusions about how they live

their lives.

Tool box – metaphysics (being)








definitions of person, personhood, identity, determinism, free will

fundamental characteristics of physical matter

o existence in time and space (i.e. extension and temporality)

o the law of identity – that every ‘thing’ is identical to itself and different to

other things

o the principle of causality – that every event has a cause (often known as

the identity principle in action)

14

personal identity - (necessary and sufficient conditions of the persistence of

personal identity over time)

o personal identity over time, including connections to assumptions about

what a person is (eg. a collection of matter or a body and a soul)

o ‘substance’ and ‘consciousness’/’memory’ theories of personal identity

group identity

o What is a person? (or a cat or a chair etc)

o Can only humans be persons?

o personhood implications for value theory- is what makes ‘me’ me, also

what makes ‘me’ deserving?


use basic appropriate terminology when communicating about metaphysics

identify the philosophical context of metaphysical ideas, issues and arguments.

Investigation – free will





Investigations in this module focus on arguments about the metaphysics of a person;

there is opportunity in the inquiries for a broader application of metaphysical

understandings.


the free will debate

o definitions of free will and the principle of causal determinism

o libertarianism, hard determinism and soft determinism/compatibilism

o the impact of indeterminism on the debate

analysis of free will arguments





15


explain, analyse and evaluate a libertarian argument

explain, analyse and evaluate a hard-determinist argument

explain, analyse and evaluate a compatibilist argument

articulate an informed evidence-based position on free will.

Inquiry

The inquiry component of this metaphysics module should encompass approximately

12.5 hours of the 30 hours allocated to the module. The purpose of an inquiry in this

course is for learners to apply their developing philosophical knowledge and

understanding to philosophical inquiries into socially and personally relevant 21st

century issues. The teacher role in this learning strand is one of guidance and support.

Content will include an inquiry into one (1) of the following topics:

How do metaphysical issues relate to moral responsibility?

What is the basis of identity?

Can the existence of God be proven?




articulate an evidence based position on one of the metaphysics inquiry

questions.

Work requirement

Inquiry 2 – An inquiry into metaphysics

See the Work Requirements section for details regarding the inquiry structure and size

16

MODULE 4

ETHICS

Ethics is the study of moral principles and how we ought to behave. This module will

enable learners to engage with questions that include those concerned with behaviour,

obligations to others, moral truth, and how we might know what is right.

In this module, learners will investigate the fundamental assumptions underlying ethical

theories. They will examine the core principles of theories about ethical behaviour, the

possible importance of intentions and consequences, and the impact that ethical

theories might have on 21st Century issues and their own lives.

Tool box








definitions of ethics – learners should examine three different definitions of

ethics, noting their similarities and differences, in order to develop a personal

definition


define the key ethical terms from the course glossary. Note that learners will

define the key highlighted terminology from the glossary and may choose to


the distinction between meta ethics, normative ethics and applied ethics

o meta ethics - such as - what type of statements are ethical statements

(factual, preference…), and what might ethical words like good, bad, right

and wrong mean?

o setting norms of ethical behaviour, such as following rules, considering

consequences and cultivating virtue

o examples of 21st century moral challenges and issues

17

questions about moral agents, persons and obligations

o an individual’s interest and preference, what are they and how do they

differ?

o notions of obligation – what is obligation, who or what might it be to?

o the moral value of intention and motivation – how do they impact upon

the morality of an action?

links with related fields of philosophy

o epistemological links with ethics – questions related to objectivity,

relativity and nihilism

o metaphysical links with ethics – considerations of free will, God and

immortality

o links with value theory - considerations of a ‘good life’, such as the pursuit

of knowledge or perfection, cultivation of virtue or art, hedonism,

eudaimonia, existentialism, absurdism, altruism.


use basic appropriate terminology when communicating about ethics

identify the philosophical context of ethical ideas, issues and arguments.

Investigation – normative ethical theories





The investigation in this module will focus on differing approaches to normative ethics.

Learners will investigate at least two theories, each from a different list.

Content will include at least two (2) theories selected from different lists below.

List A –

deontological

theories

List B – teleological

theories

List C – different

approaches to normative

ethics

18

Immanuel Kant’s

categorical

imperative

Natural Law

Paul Taylor’s

bioegalitarian

deontology

classical utilitarianism

preference

utilitarianism

Buddhist rule-

consequentialism

Simone de Beauvoir’s

existentialist ethics

Nel Noddings’ care ethics

Martha Nussbaum’s

capabilities approach

Confucian virtue ethics


explain, analyse and evaluate two ethical theories

compare and contrast two different ethical theories

articulate an informed evidence-based position on the advantages and

disadvantages of two different approaches to ethics.

Inquiry

The inquiry strand of this module should encompass approximately 12.5 hours of the 30



inquiries into socially and personally relevant 21st century issues. The teacher role in this

learning strand is one of guidance and support.


Can normative ethics diagnose appropriate responses to 21st century sex/gender

or environmental issues?

Personhood and ethics – who is valuable in the 21st century?

What are the constituents of a good life in the 21st century?


19



articulate an evidence based position on one of the ethical inquiry questions

presented to them.

Work requirement

Inquiry 3 – An inquiry into ethics


MODULE 5

POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY

Political Philosophy is the study of how to arrange and organise society. It is particularly

concerned with notions of justice, law, authority, liberty, property and rights - and the

management of conflict between these competing notions, and between competing

individuals and groups.

In this module, learners will investigate the nature and purpose of the state and of

government. They will examine the notions of human rights and justice; and investigate

different views about the best form of government. In addition, learners will inquire into

issues around the role of 21st century government in people’s lives, and the obligations

individuals might have to a 21st century state.

Tool box








definitions of political philosophy – learners should examine three different

definitions of political philosophy, noting their similarities and differences, in

order to develop a personal definition

20


define the key political philosophy terms from the course glossary. Note that

learners will define the key highlighted terminology from the glossary and may

choose to define the related non-highlighted terminology

society and government

o the distinction between state and government

o the purpose and legitimacy of the state

o the best form of a state – political ideology and forms of government

how individuals should act in society

o rights – what are they and what is their source

o obligations – to whom and why

o liberty – what is it and how important is it?

individual rights and the state

o why relinquish some rights to the state? (e.g. the idea of Social Contract)

o justice and competing rights

o allegiance and disobedience


use basic appropriate terminology when communicating about political

philosophy

identify the philosophical context of ideas, issues and arguments in political

philosophy.

Investigation – the just state





The investigation in this unit will focus on different views on the central feature or

features of a just state. Learners will compare contrasting approaches to justice in the

state.

Content will include two (2) of the following:

Plato (justice as harmony)

Karl Marx (justice as radical equality)

21

John Rawls (justice as fairness)

Robert Nozick (justice as entitlement)

Susan Moller Okin (justice as gender equality)

Martha Nussbaum (justice as securing human capabilities)

Learners will be expected to be able to;

explain, analyse and evaluate two approaches to a key consideration of just states

explain, analyse and evaluate key differences between two contrasting theories

on political justice

articulate an informed evidence-based position on justice in the state.

Inquiry

The inquiry strand of this module should encompass approximately 12.5 hours of the 30



inquiries into socially and personally relevant 21st century issues. The teacher role in this

learning strand is one of guidance and support.


What, if any, are our rights in the 21st century?

What is the purpose of the 21st century state?

How is the 21st century state best organised?




articulate an evidence-based position on one of the political philosophy inquiry

questions presented to them.

Work requirement

Inquiry 4 – An inquiry into political philosophy


22

WORK REQUIREMENTS

Inquiry guidelines

Time allocation: from the 30 hours for each unit 2-5 it is recommended that 12.5 hours

be allocated for each inquiry; 10 hours for the initial development of the inquiry and 2.5

hours for refinement and external assessment preparation.

For each inquiry required, learners will complete a 1400-1600 word inquiry into a

question based upon one of the inquiry topics listed in the specific unit. The inquiry will

respond to a question developed by the learner in response to a stimulus they have

selected.

Guidelines select a stimulus of no more than 150 words in length that

raises a philosophical issue in a 21st century context

develop an inquiry question from the stimulus

explain, analyse and evaluate at least two (2) alternate

philosophical views relevant to the inquiry question

explain and support with evidence the implications of

applying these philosophical views to the inquiry question

explain the implications of the inquiry for the issue raised

in the stimulus

address the value, influence or relevance of the study of

philosophy in the 21st century

Presentation word-processed inquiry totalling between 1400 and 1600

words

the inquiry should be in essay form

the stimulus must be included in an appendix and is to be

the only appendices

the inquiry must abide by TASC’s Academic Integrity

Guidelines

Work requirements summary

Module Work Requirement

2 Inquiry 1 – A guided inquiry into metaphysics

3 Inquiry 2 – An inquiry into metaphysics

4 Inquiry 3 – An inquiry into ethics

5 Inquiry 4 – An inquiry into political philosophy

23

ASSESSMENT

Criterion-based assessment is a form of outcomes assessment that identifies the extent

of learner achievement at an appropriate end-point of study. Although assessment – as

part of the learning program – is continuous, much of it is formative, and is done to help

learners identify what they need to do to attain the maximum benefit from their study of

the course. Therefore, assessment for summative reporting to TASC will focus on what

both teacher and learner understand to reflect end-point achievement.

The standard of achievement each learner attains on each criterion is recorded as a

rating ‘A’, ‘B’, or ‘C’, according to the outcomes specified in the standards section of the

course.

A ‘t’ notation must be used where a learner demonstrates any achievement against a

criterion less than the standard specified for the ‘C’ rating.

A ‘z’ notation is to be used where a learner provides no evidence of achievement at all.

Providers offering this course must participate in quality assurance processes specified

by TASC to ensure provider validity and comparability of standards across all awards.

Further information on quality assurance processes, as well as on assessment, is on the

TASC website: http://www.tasc.tas.gov.au

Internal assessment of all criteria will be made by the provider. Providers will report the

learner’s rating for each criterion to TASC.

TASC will supervise the external assessment of designated criteria which will be

indicated by an asterisk (*). The ratings obtained from the external assessments will be

used in addition to internal ratings from the provider to determine the final award.

QUALITY ASSURANCE PROCESSES

The following processes will be facilitated by TASC to ensure there is:

a match between the standards of achievement specified in the course and the skills

and knowledge demonstrated by learners

community confidence in the integrity and meaning of the qualification.

24

TASC gives course providers feedback about any systematic differences in the

relationship of their internal and external assessments and, where appropriate, seeks

further evidence through audit and requires corrective action in the future.

EXTERNAL ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS

The external assessment for this course will comprise:

A folio consisting of three philosophical inquiries assessing criteria 1, 3, 4, 5 and 6

For further information see the current external assessment specifications and

guidelines for this course available on the TASC website.

CRITERIA

The assessment for Philosophy Level 3 will be based on the degree to which the learner

can:

1. Communicate philosophical knowledge and understanding*

2. Articulate knowledge of philosophical ideas, issues and arguments

3. Analyse philosophical arguments*

4. Analyse and use evidence in support of philosophical arguments*

5. Apply philosophical ideas, concepts, arguments and methods to 21st century

issues*

6. Undertake philosophical research*

7. Use resources and organisational strategies

* = denotes criteria that are both internally and externally assessed]

25

STANDARDS

CRITERION 1: COMMUNICATE PHILOSOPHICAL KNOWLEDGE AND

UNDERSTANDING*

This criterion is both internally and externally assessed

RATING ‘A’ RATING ‘B’ RATING ‘C’

The learner: The learner:

The learner:

structures ideas to

communicate coherent

and cohesive

philosophical

arguments

structures ideas to

communicate coherent

philosophical

arguments

structures main ideas

to communicate basic

philosophical

argument

uses a wide range of

relevant philosophical

terminology to clarify

meaning and support

philosophical discussion

correctly uses a range of


terminology to support

philosophical discussion

uses a limited range of

philosophical

terminology to support

philosophical

discussion

accurately uses complex

grammatical and

philosophical

conventions in clear and

nuanced

communication

accurately uses

grammatical and

philosophical

conventions to achieve

clarity in

communication

uses grammatical and

philosophical

conventions to

improve clarity of

communication

identifies relevant and

pertinent philosophical

context* of discussions

identifies relevant and

pertinent philosophical

context* of discussions

identifies the

philosophical context*

of discussions

* such as their philosophical field, topic, position or significance

26

CRITERION 2: ARTICULATE KNOWLEDGE OF PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS, ISSUES AND

ARGUMENTS



The learner:

presents a detailed

explanation of the ideas,

issues and debates

within philosophical

discussions

explains relevant

philosophical ideas,

issues and debates

within philosophical

discussions

identifies ideas, issues

and debates within

philosophical

discussions

demonstrates a

comprehensive and

nuanced understanding

of philosophical ideas,

issues and debates in

own explanations

correctly uses relevant


issues and arguments in

own explanations

uses a limited range of


ideas, issues and

arguments in own

explanations

articulates a wide-range

of pertinent and

nuanced philosophical

ideas, issues and

arguments in response

to philosophical

questions

explains relevant


issues and arguments in

response to

philosophical questions

outlines appropriate


issues and arguments

in response to


accurately describes

connections between


concepts and issues

describes connections

between philosophical

ideas, concepts and

issues

outlines connections

between philosophical

ideas, concepts and

issues

27

CRITERION 3: ANALYSE PHILOSOPHICAL ARGUMENTS




The learner:

analyses the intentions,

assumptions,

perspective and

rationale of

philosophical

arguments

explains the intentions,

assumptions,

perspective or rationale

of philosophical

arguments

identifies the

intentions,

assumptions,

perspective or rationale

of philosophical

arguments

analyses and evaluates

relative strengths and

weaknesses of

philosophical

arguments

describes and evaluates

relative strengths and

weaknesses of

philosophical

arguments

outlines basic strengths

and weaknesses of

philosophical

arguments

uses pertinent structural

and coherence features

of philosophical

arguments

correctly describes

structural or coherence

features of

philosophical

arguments

identifies structural or

coherence features of

philosophical

arguments

explains the relative

significance of various

components of

philosophical

arguments

describes the

significance of various

components of

philosophical

arguments

identifies the

significance of

components of

philosophical

arguments

28

CRITERION 4 : ANALYSE AND USE EVIDENCE IN SUPPORT OF PHILOSOPHICAL

ARGUMENTS




The learner:

analyses and interprets

the evidence used to

support philosophical

arguments and

positions

explains evidence used

to support philosophical

arguments or positions

identifies evidence

used in support of

philosophical

arguments or positions

evaluates the

pertinence and

effectiveness of

evidence used to


positions and

arguments

describes relevance,

pertinence or

effectiveness of

evidence used to


positions and

arguments

effectively uses a range

of pertinent evidence to


argument

effectively uses relevant

evidence to support

philosophical argument

uses appropriate

evidence in support of

philosophical

argument

presents a rational and

coherent evidence-

based position on

philosophical issues

presents a coherent

evidence-based position

on philosophical issues

presents an evidence-

based position on

philosophical issues

29

CRITERION 5: APPLY PHILOSOPHICAL IDEAS, CONCEPTS, ARGUMENTS AND

METHODS TO CONTEMPORARY ISSUES




The learner:

analyses and assesses

the implications and

consequences of

philosophical ideas

correctly explains

implications and

consequences of

philosophical ideas

describes implications

and consequences of

philosophical ideas


the implications of

philosophical positions

on 21st century issues

plausibly explains the

implications of



describes the

implications of



critically assesses the

value of philosophical

thinking to living in the

21st century

explains the relevance

of philosophical


21st century

describes the relevance

of philosophical


21st century


how the study of

philosophy can

influence one’s life

describes and explains

how the study of

philosophy can

influence one’s life

describes how the

study of philosophy

can influence one’s life

formulates nuanced

contemporary


formulates rational

contemporary


formulates

contemporary


30

CRITERION 6: UNDERTAKE PHILOSOPHICAL RESEARCH




The learner:

locates a wide range of

relevant primary and

secondary sources

locates a range of

relevant primary and

secondary sources

locates a limited range

of relevant primary and

secondary sources


relevance and relative

significance of

information that is

used in philosophical

discussions

analyses relevance and

relative significance of

information that is

used in philosophical

discussions

selects and uses

information relevant to

philosophical

discussions


reliability of

information for use in

philosophical

discussions

analyses reliability of

information for use in

philosophical

discussions

selects and uses

reliable information

for philosophical

discussions

clearly differentiates

the ideas of others

from the learner’s own

clearly differentiates

the ideas of others

from the learner’s own

differentiates the ideas

of others from the

learner’s own

referencing conventions

and methodologies are

followed with a high

degree of accuracy

referencing conventions

and methodologies are

followed correctly

referencing

conventions and

methodologies are

generally followed

correctly

creates appropriate

well-structured

reference

lists/bibliographies

creates appropriate

structured reference


creates appropriate

reference


31

CRITERION 7: USE RESOURCES AND ORGANISATIONAL STRATEGIES


The learner: The learner: The learner:

effectively manages

time, resources and

equipment needed to

undertake a wide

range of philosophical

investigations and

inquiries

manages time,

resources and

equipment needed to

undertake a range

philosophical

investigations and

inquiries

identifies time,

resources and

equipment needed to

undertake

investigations and

inquiries

develops and employs

highly effective and

coherent research plans

develops and uses

appropriate research

plans

uses appropriate

research plans

proposes and

negotiates complex,

measurable, achievable

and realistic goals

proposes and

negotiates measurable,

achievable and realistic

goals

proposes and

negotiates with

support measurable,

achievable and realistic

goals

critically evaluates

progress using oral and

written communication,

and assesses impact on

goals and plans

reflects on progress

using oral and written

communication, and

assesses impact on

goals and plans

reflects on progress

towards meeting goals

using oral and written

communication, and

uses prescribed

strategies to meet goals

plans future actions,

effectively adjusting

goals and plans where

necessary

plans future actions,

adjusting goals and

plans where necessary

uses prescribed

strategies to adjust

goals and plans where

necessary

uses technology and a

range of critical thinking

strategies to find

innovative solutions to

questions and problems

uses technology and

critical thinking

strategies to find

solutions to questions

and problems

uses technology and

prescribed strategies to

find solutions to

questions and problems

effectively manages and

completes a range of

inquiries and responses

within proposed

timelines.

effectively manages and

completes inquiries and

responses within

proposed timelines.

manages and completes

inquiries and responses

within proposed

timelines.

32

QUALIFICATIONS AVAILABLE

Philosophy Level 3 (with the award of):

EXCEPTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT

HIGH ACHIEVEMENT

COMMENDABLE ACHIEVEMENT

SATISFACTORY ACHIEVEMENT

PRELIMINARY ACHIEVEMENT

AWARD REQUIREMENTS The final award will be determined by the Office of

Tasmanian Assessment, Standards and Certification from thirteen ratings seven from the

internal assessment, six from external assessment).

The minimum requirements for an award in Philosophy Level 3 are as follows:

EXCEPTIONAL ACHIEVEMENT (EA)

10 ‘A’ ratings, 2 ‘B’ ratings (4 ‘A’ ratings, 1 ‘B’ rating from external assessment)

HIGH ACHIEVEMENT (HA)

4 ‘A’ ratings, 5 ‘B’ ratings, 3 ‘C’ ratings (2 ‘A’ ratings, 2 ‘B’ ratings and 1 ‘C’ rating

from external assessment)

COMMENDABLE ACHIEVEMENT (CA)

6 ‘B’ ratings, 5 ‘C’ ratings (2 ‘B’ ratings, 3 ‘C’ ratings from external assessment)

SATISFACTORY ACHIEVEMENT (SA)

10 ‘C’ ratings (3 ‘C’ ratings from external assessment)

PRELIMINARY ACHIEVEMENT (PA)

6 ‘C’ ratings

A learner who otherwise achieves the ratings for a CA (Commendable Achievement) or

SA (Satisfactory Achievement) award but who fails to show any evidence of achievement

in one or more criteria (‘z’ notation) will be issued with a PA (Preliminary Achievement)

award.

33

COURSE EVALUATION

The Department of Education’s Curriculum Services will develop and regularly revise the

curriculum. This evaluation will be informed by the experience of the course’s

implementation, delivery and assessment.

In addition, stakeholders may request Curriculum Services to review a particular aspect

of an accredited course.

Requests for amendments to an accredited course will be forward by Curriculum

Services to the Office of TASC for formal consideration.

Such requests for amendment will be considered in terms of the likely improvements to

the outcomes for learners, possible consequences for delivery and assessment of the

course, and alignment with Australian Curriculum materials.

A course is formally analysed prior to the expiry of its accreditation as part of the

process to develop specifications to guide the development of any replacement course.

COURSE DEVELOPER

The Department of Education acknowledges the significant leadership of [insert relevant

names here] in the development of this course.

EXPECTATIONS DEFINED BY NATIONAL STANDARDS

There are no statements of national standards relevant to this course.

34

ACCREDITATION

The accreditation period for this course is from [text to be inserted by TASC].

VERSION HISTORY

Version 1 – Accredited on [TASC will insert accreditation date] for use from [TASC will

insert date]. This course replaces Philosophy (PHL315118) that expired on [insert date].

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 - LINE OF SIGHT

Learning

Outcome

Illustrations of learning

outcome

Content Criterion and

elements

use philosophical

terms and

methods in

analysing and

communicating

philosophical

ideas, issues,

arguments and

positions

Identify, analyse and use

logical structure in arguments

Use basic appropriate

terminology

Draft and refine a

philosophical inquiry

All

modules

1. Communicate

philosophical

knowledge and

understanding

Elements 2, 3 and 4

communicate

ideas, issues,

arguments and

positions clearly

and effectively




terminology

Identify the philosophical

context of ideas, issues and

arguments

Draft and refine a


All

modules

1. Communicate

philosophical

knowledge and

understanding

All elements

2. Articulate

knowledge of



All elements

35

articulate the

philosophical

underpinnings of

ideas, issues,

arguments and

positions


terminology

Identify the philosophical

context of ideas, issues and

arguments

All

modules

1. Communicate

philosophical

knowledge and

understanding

Elements 2 and 4

2. Articulate

knowledge of



Elements 1, 2 and 3

3. Analyse

philosophical

arguments

Elements 1 and 3

describe and

explain

philosophical

ideas, issues,

arguments and

positions

Explain, analyse and evaluate

arguments for and against

All

modules

2. Articulate

knowledge of



All elements

6. Undertake

philosophical

research

All elements

analyse, evaluate,

articulate and

justify arguments

on various

philosophical

issues



Analyse arguments according

to their inconsistency,

including the identification of

common fallacies

Assess the strength of

arguments based upon their

structure and inconsistencies

All

modules

3. Analyse

philosophical

arguments

All elements

2. Articulate

knowledge of



36


arguments

Articulate an informed


Element 4

identify strengths,

weaknesses,

assumptions and

implications of

philosophical

arguments


arguments

Draft and refine a


Articulate an evidence based

position on an inquiry topic

All

modules

3. Analyse

philosophical

arguments

Elements 1, 2 and 4

5. Apply philosophical

ideas, concepts,

arguments and

methods to 21st

century issue

Elements 1 and 2

identify,

formulate and

evaluate evidence

supporting or

refuting

philosophical

arguments

Articulate an informed


Draft and refine a




All

modules

4. Analyse and use

evidence in support

of philosophical

arguments

All elements

explain and

evaluate the

significance of

philosophical

ideas, issues,

arguments and

positions to

contemporary

social and

individual issues


arguments

Draft and refine a




Inquiries

in

modules

2-5

5. Apply philosophical

ideas, concepts,

arguments and

methods to 21st

century issue

All elements

6. Undertake

philosophical

research

Element 2

utilise

organisational

and time

management

skills

Draft and refine a

philosophical inquiry that

meets assessment

requirements

All

modules

7. Use resources and

organisational

strategies

All elements

37

APPENDIX 2 - GLOSSARY

This glossary is a preliminary step in defining key terms for this course. Learners are

advised to undertake further investigation. Learners should note that terms may have

different applications in other fields within or outside of philosophy. Learners should

also note that terminology in philosophy is often understood differently by philosophers

with contrasting views.

Module 1 Epistemology and reasoning

Learners should note that terms may have different applications in other fields within or

outside of philosophy. Learners should also note that terminology in philosophy is often

understood differently by philosophers with contrasting views.

Term Definition

analytic statement -truth can be determined by linguistic meaning (see synthetic)

a posteriori – knowledge that is justified through experience

a priori - knowledge that is justified independently of experience

argument – a set of premises leading to a conclusion

belief – information or a proposition where someone is more certain than not of its

truth

coherentism – view that epistemic justification relies upon the coherence of beliefs

conditional statements – statements of the logical form “if → then”

contingent – a contingent proposition may be true or false depending on circumstances

deductive argument –one where the premises are intended to guarantee the

conclusion

empirical evidence – evidence obtained via the senses

empiricism – the view that all knowledge is based upon sensory experience

evidentialism – a view that epistemic justification is based upon evidence

experience – source of knowledge that includes perception, memory, imagination etc.

fallacies – errors in reasoning

fallibilism – view that no knowledge claims can ever be fully justified

38

foundationalism – view that knowledge justification rests on foundational beliefs

inductive argument – one where the premises provide good reason for the conclusion

logic – branch of philosophy concerned with the processes of reasoning

necessary truth – truth value is set regardless of circumstances (see contingent)

objective truth – truth that is independent of the knower (see subjective)

perception – knowing or collecting data through the use of senses

pragmatism – the view that epistemic justification rests upon practicality

premise – a step in an argument, formally a proposition supporting a conclusion

proposition– a representation that may be true or false

rationalism – view that reason is the ultimate source of knowledge (see empiricism)

reason – applying logic, understanding and making sense of information

relative truth – that truth can vary in different circumstances

relativism – the view that there are no absolute or universal truths

reliabilism – view that epistemic justification rests upon the process of obtaining

knowledge

scepticism – the attitude of doubting knowledge claims

scientific method – using observation and experiment to form, test and modify

hypotheses

syllogism – a particular formal arrangement of premises and conclusion in an argument

synthetic statement – truth determined by how it relates to the world (see analytic)

subjective truth – based upon perspective, feelings, opinions etc. (see objective)

truth value – truth or falsity of a proposition

veil of perception – may exist between perception and its objects

universal truth – truth that is true everywhere and at all times

Modules 2 and 3 Metaphysics




39

Term Definition

behaviourism – physicalist view that so called mental events are types of behaviour

causality– relation of events when one or more causes bring about one or more effects

compatibilism – view that free will and determinism are compatible

consciousness – awareness of knowledge or perception

corporeal – having physical form or extension

cosmogony – the study of the origin of the universe

cosmology – the study of the physical universe, including its origin and evolution

determinism – view that all events are completely determined by prior events

dualism – pluralist view that there are two kinds of reality: mental and physical

existence – ontological state of being, part of reality

eliminativism – version of materialism that denies mental states exist

epiphenomenalism – view that mental events cause physical ones but not vice versa

free will - power or capacity to choose between alternatives

functionalism – view that mental states are identified by what they do not what they

are

idealism – monist view that reality is mental, made of ideas or thoughts

identity – quantitative uniqueness of an individual and/or qualitative uniqueness of type

identity theory – materialist view identifying ‘mind and mental’ with brain and brain

activity

immaterial – has no extension or weight

incorporeal – without physical body or form

interaction problem – how do distinct mental and physical substances causally interact

interactionism – dualist view that matter and mind are real and have mutual causal

impact

libertarianism – view that free will exists and causal determinism is false

materialism – monist view that matter is the fundamental substance of reality

matter – physical substance

40

mind – mental events, functions, properties and the seat of consciousness

monism – view that there is only one type of substance

objects – material things

ontology – branch of metaphysics concerning the study of being

parallelism – view that mental and physical events are coordinated not inter-causal

physicalism – view that everything is physical

properties – characteristics of objects

qualia – the ‘what it feels like’ of subjective conscious experience

reductionism – view that one kind of entity (e.g. mental) is reducible to another

(physical)

solipsism – view that nothing exists but your own mind (see subjective idealism)

Module 4: Value Theory: Ethics




absolutism – view that there are moral standards that are always right or wrong

altruism – view that the moral worth of actions is measured by the impact upon others

applied ethics – the practical application of ethics

character – personal moral qualities of an individual

consequentialist – view that the worth of actions is determined by their consequences

deontological – view that moral behaviour involves adhering to rules or principles

divine command theory – view that God has prescribed what is right and wrong

environmental ethics – re the moral status of the environment and human obligation to

it

feminist ethics – revising and rethinking ethics that has devalued women’s experience

41

imperative – an unconditional duty

intention – aim or plan for an action

meta-ethics – concerning the meaning of ethical words, properties, assumptions and

values

morality – concerning right and wrong behaviour, very similar to ethics in this course

moral realism – view that objective moral facts exist independent of belief or opinion

moral theory – a theory concerned with right and wrong, good and bad

motivation – causes or reasons for an action

nihilism – the view that rejects all values

normative ethics – concerned with moral standards of behaviour

objectivity – right or wrong independent of any individual’s perceptions

obligation – a non-legal requirement

ought – denotes a duty or requirement to follow a course of action

personhood – the status of being a ‘person’ with consequent rights and considerations

preference – highest or higher ranked option, course or alternative

relativism – view that moral standards depend upon context and are not absolute

subjectivity – view that moral value depends upon individual perspectives or opinions

teleological – view that moral behaviour is judged according to its purpose or end

the good life – questions and views about what gives value, purpose or meaning to life

utilitarianism – ethical view based upon the usefulness of an action

virtue – moral excellence

virtue ethics – normative theories emphasising character or virtue

Module 5: Value Theory: Political Philosophy




Term Definition

42

allegiance – loyalty and commitment

anarchy – without an acknowledged government

aristocracy – government by the nobility

capabilities – a person’s opportunities and ability to produce valued outcomes

capitalism – economic system with private ownership of goods, services and production

citizen – a legally recognised member of a state with rights and duties

democracy – government by the people

equality – equal in treatment, status, rights and responsibilities

equity – situation of fairness and impartiality

fairness – without favouritism, injustice or discrimination

government – exercising ongoing authority over a state

harmony – right or suitable balance; pleasing arrangement of parts

ideology – purposeful and coherent set of ideas, beliefs and values

justice – rational, right and proper treatment or consequences

law – formal codified system and set of rules

legitimacy – conforming to the law or rules

liberty – the state of being free from undue interference

monarchy – government by a monarch

nation – independent community of people with a common territory and government

oligarchy – government by a small elite group

property – belongings such as land, buildings, wealth and goods

republic – government where the state is considered a public concern not a private one

rights - entitlements

socialism – economic system with social ownership of goods services and production

state – political entity, consisting of the people and territory under a government

totalitarian – absolute, centralised and dictatorial form of government

utility - usefulness

43

Terminology used in the standard elements

Term Definition

analyse - to examine, scrutinise, explore, review, consider in detail for the purpose of

finding meaning or relationships, and identifying patterns, similarities and differences

appropriate – in Philosophy this means belonging to the field of philosophy under

consideration

assess - to make a judgement about, to rate, to weigh up, to form an opinion

coherence features – in this course the coherence features of an argument include those

features related to the order, fit and consistency of meaning of the argument. For

instance informal fallacies, and the selection of evidence are coherence features of an

argument.

coherent – orderly with internally consistent relation of parts, (primarily concerned with

meaning). In this course a coherent argument will always be cohesive.

cohesive – consists of parts that fit together well and form a united whole (primarily

concerned with structure). In this course a cohesive argument may or may not be

coherent.

comprehensive – detailed and thorough; inclusive of a broad range of ideas and

information

critically analyse - to closely examine, analyse in detail, focus on essence, examine

component parts of an issue or information (for example identifying the premise of an

argument or ideology, and its plausibility, illogical reasoning or faulty conclusions)

critically assess – examine the component parts in order to make a judgement about (to

rate, to weigh up, to form an opinion about) value, significance or extent

describe - to recount, tell of/about, chronicle, comment on, give an account of

characteristics or features

evaluate - to appraise, measure, judge, provide a detailed examination and

substantiated judgement concerning the merit, significance or value of something

explain - to make plain, clear, intelligible, to describe in detail, revealing relevant facts

identify - to point out, name, list, distinguish, recognise, establish or indicate who or

what someone or something is

nuanced – including subtle shades of meaning

44

outline – use general terms to indicate the main features

perspective – a particular point of view that may influence an individual or group in their

interpretation of ideas, issues or arguments

pertinent – relevant and fit for the task and the author’s purpose

rationale – set of reasons for, purpose or basis of an argument

relevant – belonging to the specific argument, topic or discussion under consideration

structural features – in this course structural features of arguments refer to those

features to do with the consistency, order, fit and unity of the structure of the argument.

For instance, issues of validity and/or informal fallacies are structural features of an

argument.

Office of Tasmanian Assessment,

Standards and Certification

Level 6, 39 Murray Street Hobart

TAS 7000 Australia

GPO Box 333 Hobart

TAS 7001 Australia

Phone: (03) 6165 6000

Email: [email protected]

Web: www.tasc.tas.gov.au

Documents

Philosophy Consultation Draft - Department of Education · 2019-09-16 · Each inquiry considers the 21 st Century or personal relevance of the discipline of philosophy, such as the