Study smarter with Fiveable
Get study guides, practice questions, and cheatsheets for all your subjects. Join 500,000+ students with a 96% pass rate.
Philosophy isn't just abstract speculation—it's the foundation for every other discipline you'll encounter. When scientists debate whether quantum particles exist independently of observation, they're doing metaphysics. When ethicists argue about AI rights, they're wrestling with questions about consciousness and moral status. The fundamental questions you'll study here aren't separate topics to memorize; they're deeply interconnected inquiries that have shaped human thought for millennia and continue to drive debates in law, science, politics, and everyday life.
You're being tested on your ability to identify the core tensions within each question, compare competing positions, and trace the implications of different answers. Don't just memorize that Descartes was a dualist—understand why his position on the mind-body problem connects to questions about knowledge, identity, and free will. The best exam responses show you can move fluidly between questions, recognizing that an answer to one often constrains or shapes answers to others.
Metaphysics asks what kinds of things are real and how they relate to each other. These questions form the bedrock of philosophy—your answers here will ripple through every other area.
Compare: Idealism vs. physicalism—both are monist positions (one fundamental kind of stuff), but they disagree radically on what that stuff is. If an essay asks you to evaluate monism, you'll need to distinguish these sharply.
Epistemology investigates what knowledge is, how we get it, and what its limits are. Your position on these questions determines how confident you can be about answers to everything else.
Compare: The mind-body problem vs. the hard problem of consciousness—the first asks how mind and body relate; the second asks why there's subjective experience at all. The hard problem is specifically about qualia, not just mental causation.
These questions ask what it means to be a self that persists through time and acts in the world. Answers here have direct implications for moral responsibility and legal accountability.
Compare: Psychological vs. biological continuity—if you lost all memories but kept your body, are you the same person? These theories give opposite answers. FRQs love scenarios that force you to choose between them.
These questions ask what makes actions right, lives meaningful, and things valuable. They connect directly to practical decisions about how to live.
Compare: Consequentialism vs. deontology—both offer action-guiding theories, but they can demand opposite choices (e.g., is it right to lie to save a life?). Virtue ethics sidesteps this by asking "what would a virtuous person do?" rather than applying rules.
Language isn't just a tool for expressing pre-formed ideas—it may actively shape what we can think. This area connects epistemology, metaphysics, and philosophy of mind.
Compare: Language shaping thought vs. thought shaping language—this is a chicken-and-egg debate. Strong linguistic relativity says language determines thought; weaker versions say it merely influences it. Know where Wittgenstein and Sapir-Whorf fall on this spectrum.
| Concept | Best Examples |
|---|---|
| Metaphysical positions on reality | Realism, idealism, physicalism, dualism |
| Arguments for/against God | Cosmological argument, teleological argument, problem of evil |
| Theories of knowledge | JTB, a priori/a posteriori distinction, Gettier cases |
| Mind-body positions | Substance dualism, physicalism, property dualism |
| Free will positions | Hard determinism, libertarianism, compatibilism |
| Personal identity theories | Psychological continuity, biological continuity |
| Ethical frameworks | Consequentialism, deontology, virtue ethics |
| Meaning of life approaches | Existentialism, religious teleology, objective vs. subjective meaning |
How does your answer to the mind-body problem constrain your options for explaining consciousness? Compare how a physicalist and a dualist would each approach the hard problem.
Which two ethical frameworks would give opposite answers to the question "Is it right to lie to protect someone from harm?"—and why?
If psychological continuity is correct about personal identity, what happens to "you" in a scenario where your memories are duplicated into two bodies? How would a biological continuity theorist respond differently?
Compare compatibilism and hard determinism: they agree that determinism is true, so what exactly do they disagree about? Why does this matter for moral responsibility?
A Gettier case shows that justified true belief isn't sufficient for knowledge. Construct a brief example and explain what additional condition might be needed.