A-LEVEL PHILOSOPHY · AQA 7172 · PAPER 1Harlington School · Philosophy · Epistemology

Perception

One engine runs every argument: how a thing LOOKS changes; the thing itself does not.

The
big
question

Are the immediate objects of perception mind-independent objects, or something mind-dependent?

How it is examined: five questions — 3 · 5 · 5 · 12 · 25 marks. The Year 12 December test is Q01–Q04; the 25-mark essay is the Year 13 stretch. This unit's ladder ↓
02

The mind-independence line

The unit's positions, lined up. Tap a position to see what it claims and where it is strong or weak. If you can order them, you understand them.

MOST outside the mind · the world itselfLEAST outside the mind · ideas only

Tap a circle — or use Tab and Enter — to explore each position.

The thread that ties it together

Epistemology is one question in three sizes: what knowledge IS, where it COMES FROM (seeing, then reasoning), and how FAR it reaches.

◀ Refer back · The definition of knowledge
What must be true of a belief before it counts as knowledge?

Last unit's film-set driver formed a true belief by LOOKING — and it was still luck. Today we ask what looking gives you in the first place.

Retrieve: Write the film-set case in one sentence. Underline the word that says what the driver was aware of.
The big idea

Going left to right, a veil drops between you and the world — and then the world behind it is taken away. Each step explains more cases, and pays for it with something new to believe in: pictures, then God. In the essay, you decide which bill is cheapest.

Look ahead · Reason as a source of knowledge ▶
Can we know anything about the world without perceiving it at all?

If seeing only gives you pictures, knowledge from the senses has a problem. Next: rationalists say some knowledge never needed the senses at all.

Prime: Note one thing from today you think you know WITHOUT having seen, heard or touched it. Keep it for next lesson.
01

The lessons in this unit

5 lessons, taught in this order. The first is the map of the whole unit — this page mirrors it — and each lesson after it takes one part deeper. Timetabled for Track A · Autumn 1–2 · weeks 5–8. See the whole year plan ↗

Lesson 1 · week 5

The map: what does perception give us?

Direct realism, indirect realism and idealism as three answers to one question.

Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪
Lesson 2 · week 5–6

Direct realism and its four issues

The immediate object of perception; illusion, perceptual variation, hallucination, time-lag — and the replies.

Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪
Lesson 3 · week 6–7

Indirect realism: Locke and the veil

Sense-data; primary and secondary qualities; scepticism about the external world; Locke's and Russell's responses.

Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪
Lesson 4 · week 7

Berkeley's idealism

The attack on primary/secondary; the master argument; God as the permanent perceiver.

Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪
Lesson 5 · week 8

Issues with idealism

Illusion and hallucination, solipsism, the role of God — and the ladder.

Lesson deck ↗ Booklet ↗ Podcast ♪
03

Three views, side by side

Why is 'we see the world as it is' even a question? But they disagree about one word: 'directly'. Common sense says you see the table ITSELF. The others say no. How a thing looks changes with the light, the angle and the person looking — and the thing itself does not change. So what you meet first may not be the thing. The lesson teaches three answers. Direct realism: you are aware of the thing itself. Indirect realism: you are aware of a PICTURE in your mind (sense-data), made by the thing. Idealism: you are aware of ideas — and there is nothing behind them at all.

Realism

Direct realism

You are aware of the thing itself — the straw, the table — with nothing in between.
1No go-between: when you see the table, you are aware of the table, not a picture of it.
2Illusion and variation (the straw, the table): it looks different from how it is. Reply: 'looking bent from here' is a real feature of the straw, not a thing in the mind.
3Hallucination (the dagger): nothing is there, yet something is seen. Reply: seeing and hallucinating are two different kinds of state that only feel alike from inside.
4The time-lag (the dead star): you see the past. Reply: you see the star as it WAS. Seeing late is not the same as seeing a copy.
Strength It is simple, and it matches how seeing feels. It never has to explain how we get past a veil, because there is no veil. And the reply 'it looks bent FROM HERE' handles the straw and the table without inventing pictures in the mind.
Weakness The dagger is the hard case. If a hallucination can feel exactly like seeing, with nothing there, then what you are aware of cannot be the thing. Saying 'they are different kinds of state' only works if you deny what seems obvious from the inside. The dead star makes the same point with the whole night sky.
Realism

Indirect realism

You are aware of pictures in your mind (sense-data), made by real things outside it.
1What you are aware of is a picture (sense-data), made by a real thing and standing for it. The four cases are pictures coming apart from their causes.
2Shape, size, motion, number are IN the thing; our pictures of them are like it. Colour, sound, taste are only powers; our pictures of them are like nothing out there.
3PROBLEM 1 — what is the world LIKE? You cannot compare the picture with the thing. Reply: the shapes in the picture are like the thing; science works in shapes and sizes.
4PROBLEM 2 — is there a world at all? Replies: Locke — you cannot choose what you see; the senses agree. Cockburn — the senses change together. Russell — the best guess.
Strength One idea explains every case: the straw, the table, the dagger and the star are all pictures that come apart from what made them. It keeps a real world for science to describe. And it has three separate replies to the veil — you cannot choose what you see, the senses agree, the world is the best guess — which back each other up.
Weakness It locks you in the CCTV room. If you only ever meet the pictures, you can never step outside to check that they are pictures OF anything. Every reply uses more pictures to prove there is something beyond the pictures. Berkeley says: then be honest, and drop the world behind them.
Anti-realism

Berkeley's idealism

You are aware of ideas in your mind — and there is nothing behind them. To be is to be perceived.
1Against Locke's split: shape and size change with distance, as colour changes with light. If change puts colour in the mind, it puts shape there too.
2The likeness principle: an idea can only be like another idea. So our pictures of shape cannot be like anything outside the mind — and Locke's split collapses.
3The master argument: try to think of a thing that no mind is thinking of. You cannot — thinking of it puts it in a mind. So 'a thing outside every mind' makes no sense.
4PROBLEMS: illusions; things no one is looking at; why experience is regular; am I alone? Answer: real ideas are vivid, forced on us and orderly — and God perceives all.
Strength It takes the veil away completely. There is nothing behind the pictures to be wrong about, so scepticism about the outside world vanishes. And it follows the 'it changes, so it is in the mind' argument all the way — where Locke stopped halfway.
Weakness The master argument mixes up two things: thinking of a tree, and thinking of a tree AS thought of. And every hard question — the fire that burns down unwatched, the regular order of experience — is answered only by God. If God goes, the view has no answer left.
04

Six ordinary cases — one awkward pattern

Every position in this unit is tested on cases. Read each one, decide what you would say, then tap for the question the examiners would ask.

05

Talk it through — four moves

Say it before you write it. Four moves, with the sentence stems the examiners are listening for in your essay — connect, challenge, weigh, reason from cases.

Connect
“This connects to … because …”
“That is the same move as … made in …”
This unit · Put the bent straw next to the CCTV room. In both, something comes between you and the thing. Say what is DIFFERENT: which view does each case break, and what does each view lose?
Challenge
“The weakest step is … because …”
“That only follows if … — and it might not.”
This unit · Take the direct realist's reply: 'the straw only looks bent FROM HERE'. Say, in one sentence, why that reply cannot be used for the dagger. Do not use the word 'obviously'.
Weigh
“Even granting …, … — so on balance …”
“The cost of that reply is …”
This unit · Give Berkeley his likeness principle: an idea can only be like another idea. Now say what indirect realism loses, what it can keep, and whether Russell's 'best guess' still stands.
Reason from cases
“In case A …; in B …; so in general …”
“The case that breaks the pattern is …”
This unit · Run the six cases. For each one say: is the LOOK different from the THING — or is there no thing at all? Find the rule. Then find the case that breaks the view you were about to pick.
Protocol Pairs 2 min → fours 3 min → two speakers to the front. Roles: Proposer · Challenger · Judge · Reporter. Rule: every reply begins by restating what you heard. · 8 min
06

The exam ladder — this unit's mock

Five rungs, one per question type. Open a rung for the shape a full answer takes and this unit's plan, then write. Everyone climbs Q01–Q04; Q05 is the stretch.

Q013 marks · Define
What is meant by 'sense-data'?SHAPE One precise sentence a philosopher would accept
The shape of a full answer
  1. One precise sentence
  2. A contrast or example if it earns clarity
  3. No evaluation, no history — stop
Your plan — this unit
  1. Mind-dependent
  2. The immediate object of awareness
  3. Has exactly the properties it appears to have.
Write it — about 2 lines
0 words · nothing here is saved — copy it into your book
Q025 marks · Outline
Outline Locke's distinction between primary and secondary qualities.SHAPE Every part the specification names, in order
The shape of a full answer
  1. State the view or distinction in full
  2. Use the technical vocabulary exactly
  3. Order it: claim → the parts → what follows
Your plan — this unit
  1. Name both
  2. Give two examples of each
  3. State the resemblance claim for each.
Write it — about 4 lines
0 words · nothing here is saved — copy it into your book
Q035 marks · Explain
Explain the argument from hallucination against direct realism.SHAPE Set-up → premises → conclusion
The shape of a full answer
  1. Set-up: name the target — which view, which claim
  2. Premises: state them in order, numbered
  3. Conclusion: show it follows, and what it costs
Your plan — this unit
  1. Premise: hallucination can be indistinguishable from perception
  2. Premise: in hallucination there is no object
  3. So the immediate object is not the object.
Write it — about 5 lines
0 words · nothing here is saved — copy it into your book
Q0412 marks · Explain
Explain Berkeley's master argument and one criticism of it.SHAPE Two linked explanations, both full
The shape of a full answer
  1. Part A: the view or argument, in full
  2. Part B: the issue or reply, with its own premises and conclusion
  3. The link: one sentence on what B does to A
  4. Mostly AO1 — explain, do not judge; the verdict waits for the essay
Your plan — this unit
  1. The challenge
  2. The conclusion (no unconceived objects)
  3. The criticism (conceiving vs conceiving-as-conceived)
  4. What Berkeley would need to reply.
Write it — about 8 lines
0 words · nothing here is saved — copy it into your book
Q0525 marks · Evaluate
Are the immediate objects of perception mind-independent objects?SHAPE A sustained argument to a judgement
The shape of a full answer
  1. Introduction: define the term, state your thesis, name the positions you will test
  2. Each paragraph: state the argument · test it with the strongest objection · reply · WEIGH
  3. One shared case, run through every position
  4. Judgement: what survives, and what the losing views cannot explain
Your plan — this unit
  1. Thesis
  2. Direct realism and one issue tested
  3. Indirect realism and the veil
  4. Berkeley's move
  5. Judgement that names what the losing views cannot explain.
Write it — about 10 lines to plan, then the essay in your book
0 words · nothing here is saved — copy it into your book
Beyond the ladder: Find one case that direct realism, indirect realism AND idealism all handle badly. If there is none, which view handled every case — and at what cost?
07

Your resources

Everything for the unit, in one place. The lesson, the booklet and the podcast belong to this unit; the Epistemology Companion runs across the whole series.

Teacher setup: links aren't set yet. Open this file, find the LINKS list near the bottom, and paste each SharePoint share link once. Buttons with no link show as "Link not set".
✓Revise & mock — per lesson: the episode, three games, and every past-paper question with the shape of a full answer↗🎮The Arena — six games on the words, positions, arguments and verdicts of this unit: Bronze, Silver, Gold; objective and evaluative tracks↗✓Your Companion — tick what you understand, see what you have done in the Arena, place yourself and choose your next move; print it for your teacher↗▲Intervention — E–D to C, C to B, B to A*: the four moves for your tier, with drills, model answers at every level and Coach Owl↗ ▣Lesson deck — the slides, with the four positions, the cases and the ladder↗ ✎Completion booklet — greyscale, mirrors the lesson — fill it as you go↗ ♪Lesson podcast — a teacher and a student argue the unit through to a judgement↗ ≡Podcast transcript — read along, or read instead↗ 🦉Epistemology Companion — checklist, key words, review workbook and the Q01–Q05 planner↗ ♪Overview podcast — the whole series as one argument (team teach)↗ ◎NotebookLM pack — make your own podcast from the unit's sources↗ ▤Printable flashcards — fold-over cards to cut out↗ ▶Revision playlist — the YouTube playlist for the course↗
08

How to revise this unit

Use the resources in this order. The Epistemology Companion is where you learn to plan all five question types.

Listen to the podcast, then read the transcript

A teacher and a student argue every position through to a judgement. Pause at each position and say what it claims before they do.

Complete the booklet

Given text on the left, your words on the right. Decide the strength and the weakness YOU would give each position.

Flip the flashcards until every term is one sentence

Key terms first, then the positions. A term you cannot define in one sentence is a Q01 you cannot yet answer.

Climb the ladder: Q01 to Q04 from a plan

Precision questions. Open each rung, plan from the shape, write, then check every part the specification names is there.

Plan Q05 with one shared case

In the Companion: Part 4, the Q05 planning frame. Plan 'Are the immediate objects of perception mind-independent objects?' — thesis, one issue per view, judgement.

Q01–Q04 · 3, 5, 5 and 12 marks · precision
Q01 Define — one precise sentence a philosopher would accept. No evaluation, no history.
Q02 Outline — every part the specification names, in order, in the technical vocabulary.
Q03 Explain — set-up, premises in order, conclusion — and what it costs the target.
Q04 Explain … and … — two full explanations and the one sentence that links them. Still AO1: explain, do not judge.
Q05 · 25 marks · AO2 is 20 of them
What it is — a sustained argument to a judgement. Every paragraph states an argument, tests it, replies, and WEIGHS.
Aim — AO1 is saying what the view claims, clearly. AO2 is asking: does the case really break it — and why? Never just say 'so it is not direct' — show why.
09

Watch

Indirect realism (AQA) — watch for the three theories as answers to one question — Sally Latham, 15:09

▶Indirect realism (AQA) · 15 min
Watch for: the three theories as answers to one question — Sally Latham, 15:09↗▶Direct vs indirect realism · 8 min
Watch for: direct against indirect realism in eight minutes — Philosophy Vibe, 8:30↗▶George Berkeley's Idealism (Philosophy Vibe) · 9 min
Watch for: the master argument and the role of God — note where the video's criticism differs from the lesson's.↗▶The course playlist (AQA)
Watch for: the whole course, episode by episode; use it when a lesson's own videos are not enough.↗
10

Flashcards — test yourself

Flip a card to check yourself. Switch between key terms (term → meaning) and positions (position → claim, strength & weakness).

Tap any card to flip ·
11

Exit ticket

Three things to recall, one to argue. Answer them in your book before you leave the unit.

Recall

  1. Say the difference between an illusion and a hallucination.
  2. Say why Locke thinks the warmth you feel is not in the water.
  3. Give one strength AND one weakness of indirect realism.

Challenge

Argue: Which view would you defend in a 25-mark answer — and what is the strongest objection you would have to answer?

AO1 vs AO2 AO1 is saying what the view claims, clearly. AO2 is asking: does the case really break it — and why? Never just say 'so it is not direct' — show why.