The big idea: Here's a question you've probably never been asked out loud: why should you obey the law?
Not just fear: Not 'or you'll be punished' — that's just fear. The real question is whether you have a genuine political obligation — a moral duty to obey — and if so, where it comes from.
Checkpoint — the duty: In one line: you owe the state obedience because you take its benefits and rely on others obeying — so it's only fair to keep your side. Hold that — but a duty isn't the same as 'obey no matter what'.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it with your first topic free to keep:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Start Studying Free Full access to Aimnova Pro · cancel anytime
A real duty to obey can still have limits — the hard question is where they fall.
Civil disobedience — breaking the law to fix it: Between meek obedience and violent revolution sits civil disobedience: you break an unjust law openly and peacefully, and you accept the punishment — precisely to show respect for law in general while protesting one unjust law. It's a way of saying 'this law is wrong' without tearing down the whole state.
Checkpoint — the limit: In one line: the duty to obey is real but conditional — a badly unjust law can be openly, peacefully disobeyed, with the bar set high to protect order.
Get feedback like a real examiner
Submit your answers and get instant feedback — what you did well, what's missing, and exactly what to write to score full marks.
Try AI Tutor FreeYour first topic is free to keep • No credit card required
Go further — higher-level insight: Notice how the whole topic connects. Where authority comes from (7.1.2) sets what makes it legitimate (7.1.3), which sets when we owe obedience (7.1.4).
Go further — show the chain: So an essay on obedience can reach back: if authority rests on a contract to protect us, then a state that stops protecting us loses both its legitimacy AND our duty to obey. Showing that chain is a top-band move.
The move that scores: In Paper 1 Section B you don't pick the 'right' answer. You argue for and against a claim, weigh the views, and reach a reasoned conclusion. That doing philosophy is what the markbands reward.
How Section B works: Section B gives you a set of essay questions on the optional themes; you pick ONE and write an essay [25]. There's no stimulus — just a claim to evaluate.
Why prepare this theme: Political philosophy is one of the strongest themes to prepare, and 'do we owe the state obedience?' is right at its heart. Use the same 5-step method as Section A.
IB-style questionEvaluate[25 marks]
Evaluate the claim that we always have a duty to obey the law.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes: 1. Describing views instead of arguing. 2. Ignoring 'always' — the claim's strong word is the whole target. 3. Only one side — top bands need tension. 4. No conclusion — decide, with a reason. 5. Name-dropping — a name earns nothing without its argument.