1. What keywords / terms have we used so far
What keywords / terms have we used so far? Write down at least 3 on your whiteboard

2. What keywords have we used so far?
Veil Of Perception
Secondary Qualities
External World
Scepticism
Idea (According to Locke or Berkeley)
Sensation
Insensible / Sensible
Sense Data
Perception
Solipsism
Primary Qualities
Veridical
If you are unsure of the definition of any of these terms (remember you need to be precise and clear) make a note of them and use the textbook later on in the lesson to look them up.

3. Alternative 3 Markers – Outlining a position or a claim…
From time to time examiners may ask you to outline a particular position or claim rather than a simple definition: What do direct realists / indirect realists / idealists believe about our perception of the world? This is not that different to a definition question, we are still looking for precision / clarity and no redundancy. Pick one of the three theories mentioned above and outline their position on your whiteboards.

4. Alternative 3 Markers – Outlining a position or a claim…
Direct Realism – Direct realism is a theory of perception that states that objects exist mind-independently, they have specific properties such as size and colour and we perceive these objects and their properties directly.
Indirect Realism – Indirect realism is a theory of perception that states that the immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects (sense- data) that are caused by and represent mind-independent objects.
Idealism - The immediate objects of perception are mind-dependent objects. These objects don’t represent reality, they are reality. There are no mind-independent objects (anti-realist view).

5. What arguments / criticisms have we covered?
Direct Realism
Indirect Realism
Idealism

6. What arguments / criticisms have we covered?
Direct Realism
Indirect Realism
Idealism
Arguments in support of DR (Common sense + Simplicity)
Argument from illusion (against DR) + response from PDR
Argument from perceptual variation (against DR) + response from PDR
Argument from hallucination (against DR) + response from PDR
Argument from time-lag (against DR) + response from PDR
Arguments from Berkeley against realist theories (master argument)
Arguments for sense data (criticisms of DR + Science)
Scepticism about the existence of the external world / mind-independent objects.
Responses including:
Involuntary nature of our experience
Coherence of senses
Best hypothesis
Arguments from Berkeley against realist theories (all)
Attack on the Primary and Secondary quality distinction (against indirect realism)
The likeness principle - mind-dependent ideas cannot be like mind-independent objects (against indirect realism)
Master argument (against all forms of realism)
Issues including:
Illusions / hallucinations + Responses
Solipsism + Responses
God’s role + Responses
Think carefully – are you happy with these arguments / criticisms / responses? If not, make a note of them to revise later.

7. What is missing in this outline of an argument? Why is this important?
Size, shape and motion (primary qualities) are as subject to the variability of perception as colour, smell or sound (secondary qualities).
Due to this variation we can’t say the object has one ‘real’ secondary quality that is independent of how we perceive it - these qualities are mind-dependent. …
C: Therefore, the primary qualities of objects are just as mind- dependent as secondary qualities.

8. What is missing in this outline of an argument? Why is this important?
When we perceive illusions (such as a stick appearing bent in water) our senses are being deceived in some way (the stick is not actually bent). Therefore when we perceive illusions we are not perceiving the world the way it really is. This shows that direct realism must be false.

9. What should each argument / criticism contain?
Direct realists state that we see the world directly as it really is. When we perceive illusions (such as a stick appearing bent in water) our senses are being deceived in some way (the stick is not actually bent). Therefore when we perceive illusions we are not perceiving the world the way it really is. This shows that direct realism must be false.

10. Quick-Test – Ensure you are being specific and precise!
Pick one of the following arguments, outline it fully on your whiteboards. This can be done in prose or in premise / conclusion form:
Argument from hallucination against DR
The involuntary nature of our perception against scepticism
The master argument
If you want to challenge yourself (and help your revision) pick one you are not 100% about.

11. Quick-Test – Ensure you are being specific and precise!
Argument from Hallucination
Involuntary Perception
Master Argument
(IDR is…) Indirect realism can lead us to question whether or not the external world exists.
Locke responds to this scepticism by stating that if our perceptions were not caused by the external world they would have to be caused by us.
Since we have no control over them in the way we do experiences that we know are caused by us (for example memories) we know they must be caused by something external.
For Locke this thing is the external world.
Direct realism states that the way we perceive things is the way they really are.
When we hallucinate we are seeing / hearing / perceiving something that is not really there.
Therefore when we perceive hallucinations we are not perceiving the world the way it really is.
Conclusion: Direct realism is false.
(Realists argue…) In order to determine whether it is possible for an object (e.g. a tree) to exist outside of the mind, we need to be able to think of an unconceived tree.
But as soon as we try to think about this tree, we have conceived it.
So we have failed and there is no good reason to believe that trees exist outside of the mind.
This can be expanded to all mind-independent objects, there is no good reason to assume they exist.

12. Alternative 5 Markers – Giving a longer more detailed definition…
You could also be asked to explain an idea / theory or claim in more detail OR a definition that is too long for the 3 marker questions.
Why does Russell claim that the existence of the external world is the best hypothesis?
How does Locke distinguish between primary and secondary qualities?
Once again, precision and clarity are the name of the game.

13. What kinds of things might you be asked in 12 markers?
Expanding on an argument or theory in a lot of detail
Comparing theories
An argument and criticism / response
Explaining the way a theory might respond to a particular problem (applied ethics)
The key in 12 markers is to pay attention to the language of the question, include everything it is asking without going overboard. DO NOT worry about evaluation, this is not the time for it.

14. Direct Realism Indirect Realism Idealism
Direct Realism
Indirect Realism
Idealism
What are objects?
What is it that we perceive?
What is sense data?
What is happening in an illusion?
If a tree falls in the woods with no-one around, does it make a noise?
Physical
Mind-independent
Exist in the external world
Physical
Mind-independent
Exist in the external world
Mental (non-physical)
Mind-dependent
Exist in minds
The physical objects
Sense data
Sense data (ideas)
Doesn’t exist
A mental representation of the physical object
The object itself
The stick is not bent, but it looks bent when in water because we are perceiving a stick-that-looks-bent
The stick is not bent, but the sense data that we perceive looks bent
The stick is really bent (it’s just an idea). We are perceiving correctly.
Yes
Yes / No
(it creates sound-waves, but not audio sense data) No
(but if there is no-one there then the tree isn’t there!)

15. Direct Realism
Indirect Realism
Idealism
Direct – nothing between the perceiver and the object. We perceive it as it is.
Indirect – there is something mediating between the perceiver and the object. We don’t perceive the object itself.
Realist – objects exist in the external world, independently of perceivers.
Anti-realist – objects don’t exist independently of perceivers.

16. Planning 12 Markers
Regardless of what is being asked you should plan 12 markers carefully:
Bullet point the key information you need to answer the question.
Identify any key points in arguments or criticisms (i.e. those that link to a further criticism or response).
Clarify to yourself the order in which you are going to present the information.

17. Whiteboard Plan
Outline the indirect realism view and the response from Berkeley that mind-dependent ideas cannot be like mind-independent objects.

18. Which of these two arguments is clearer? Why?
Clarity and Precision
Which of these two arguments is clearer? Why?
The argument from perceptual variation is against direct realism. Direct realists argue that we see the world directly with nothing getting in the way and no sense data. Perceptual variation occurs when we see things differently depending on the circumstances in which we are perceiving it (i.e. direction / distance). Since objects can appear differently in different circumstances, the direct realist either has to accept that they change depending on the perceiver or that direct realism is flawed. We know objects don’t change so we can conclude that direct realism is flawed.
Direct realists argue that we see the world directly as it really is (i.e. objects we perceive have the properties we perceive them to have). The argument from perceptual variation is a criticism of this view. Perceptual variation occurs when we see the properties of objects differently depending on the circumstances of our perception (i.e. distance / lighting). Due to this variation the direct realist either has to argue that the properties we perceive change constantly, or that the properties do not change and direct realism is false. We know objects don’t change so therefore direct realism is false.
Correct but messy – the order of the answer seems off and the language is not as clear as it could be. The conclusion is not entirely correct, if the argument is correct then DR is false, not just flawed.
Correct and much clearer – organisation seems better and they explicitly use the language given in their definition of DR to attack the theory (i.e. they discuss properties). The arguments conclusion is correctly written.

19. Key Tips:
Take time to think about your answers, even shorter questions. Rushing leads to redundancy, messiness and dropped marks.
In the case of 5 markers (or 12 markers), if you’re struggling to piece together the argument, start with the conclusion and work backwards. How does the thinker get to that conclusion given the information they have?
Make sure you know which theories and arguments are generally associated with which thinkers, it will often help you stay organised in your answers and your writing.
Remember some criticisms / arguments can support one theory but also be used as an attack on another (likeness principle supports idealism but is also an issue for IDR). This is useful in essays but also may come up as a 12 mark question.
REVISE THE STUFF!

20. Misunderstandings: