1. EITHER: a) ‘In the ‘Collationes’ Abelard shows that it can be rational to
follow a revealed religion.’ Discuss.
OR: b) How does Abelard relate goodness to the virtues in the
‘Collationes’?
2. EITHER: a) Examine Ibn Tufayl’s attitude to Avicenna in ‘Hayy ibn
Yaqzan’.
OR: b) Discuss the extent to which ‘Hayy ibn Yaqzan’ puts forward an
elitist conception of access to knowledge and the extent to which Ibn
Tufayl justifies it.
3. Compare Abelard’s ‘Collationes’ and Ibn Tufayl’s ‘Hayy ibn Yaqzan’
either (a) in their presentation of the powers and limits of human
reason, or (b) in their use of literary form to explore philosophical
problems.
4. According to the ‘Meditations’, under what conditions should we assent
to a judgement? Examine both how Descartes justifies his criterion
and the extent to which his own practice in the work is in accord with it.
5. Why does Descartes believe that he is not a Platonic dualist? Was this
belief consistent with his understanding of minds and body?
6. Does Leibniz solve the mind-body problem?
7. Assess Locke’s way of distinguishing between real and nominal
essences.
8. Are secondary qualities secondary? Discuss with reference to Locke.
9. Does Berkeley succeed in refuting atheism?
10.EITHER: a) Can Berkeley convincingly distinguish between reality and
appearance?
OR: b) What role does Berkeley’s criticism of abstraction play in his
rejection of materialism?
11.To what extent is Hume a sceptic about personal identity?
12.What is space for Leibniz and/or Hume?
PHT1/5
– 3 –
13.EITHER: a) Is Hume’s account of causation consistent?
OR: b) Is Hume’s account of causation convincing?
14.Compare and contrast the accounts of our knowledge of the external
world of two among Descartes, Locke, Leibniz, Berkeley, Hume.
15.Compare the extent to which two of the following rely on Scholastic
accounts of substance: Descartes, Locke, Leibniz.