MATSEC IM Philosophy study plan

Map the full Intermediate Level syllabus into a topic checklist and rate your confidence (1-5) on each item before studying anything else

Define the core vocabulary of philosophy (argument, premise, conclusion, validity, soundness, inference, proposition) and write your own one-sentence definition of each from memory

Distinguish deductive from inductive reasoning by constructing three original examples of each and labelling which are valid, sound, strong, or cogent

Identify and name five common informal fallacies in short passages you write yourself, explaining precisely why each fails

Reconstruct the main positions in epistemology (rationalism, empiricism, scepticism, and the justified-true-belief account of knowledge) and state the strongest objection to each

Explain the Gettier-style problem in your own words without copying any published example, and evaluate whether it defeats the JTB analysis

Compare coherentist, foundationalist, and reliabilist accounts of justification and argue for one

Apply the distinction between a priori and a posteriori knowledge to four original cases and justify each classification

Outline the central problems of metaphysics (substance, identity over time, causation, free will versus determinism) and state what makes each a philosophical rather than empirical question

Contrast compatibilist and libertarian responses to determinism and identify the premise each rejects or reinterprets

Explain the problem of personal identity using a thought experiment you design yourself, and assess the psychological-continuity and bodily-continuity answers

Distinguish necessary from contingent truths and apply the distinction to at least three metaphysical claims

Reconstruct the major arguments for and against the existence of God (ontological, cosmological, teleological, problem of evil) and state each argument's strongest premise

Evaluate one argument in full essay form, anticipating and rebutting a counterargument

Explain the difference between a defence and a theodicy in responding to evil

Summarise under timed conditions (25 minutes) the structure of two arguments you have studied

Distinguish descriptive from normative ethics and map consequentialist, deontological, and virtue-ethical approaches onto the same original moral dilemma

State Kant's categorical imperative in both formulations and apply each to a case

Explain act and rule utilitarianism and identify the standard objections to each

Define key metaethical positions (moral realism, emotivism, error theory) and classify three moral statements under each

Outline the main questions of political philosophy (legitimacy, justice, liberty, equality) and contrast Rawls's and Nozick's positions on distributive justice

Explain the social contract tradition and the difference between Hobbesian and Lockean versions

Analyse the concepts of positive and negative freedom using an original example

Connect one political-philosophy debate to a contemporary issue and identify the assumptions on each side

Synthesise the syllabus by writing full essay plans (thesis, premises, objection, reply, conclusion) for six likely exam questions across different areas

Practise unseen question analysis: in 10 minutes, unpack a prompt into its key terms and required structure, for five prompts

Identify and correct your three weakest syllabus items from the week 1 checklist

Recite from memory the definitions of ten core terms and check them against your glossary

Complete at least two full past-paper-style essays under exam time limits without notes

Self-mark each timed essay against a criteria checklist (accuracy, argument structure, use of examples, evaluation, clarity) and record specific fixes

Review all earlier deliverables and consolidate a single one-page summary sheet of positions, arguments, and objections

Rehearse concise verbal explanations of eight core arguments to test recall under pressure