Key Idea: Topic 6.2 turns science on yourself. If you are ultimately just brain chemistry running on physical laws, what happens to the 'you' who chooses, remembers and lives a life? This is the optional theme Philosophy of science, examined in Paper 1 Section B: a 25-mark essay, usually 'Evaluate the claim that…', with no stimulus — just a question you argue.
🧠 The three big questions, one card each
Topic 6.2 at a glance
- 6.2.1 · Can science explain the self? — Reductionism promises to explain the mind fully as brain chemistry. But this may leave a gap: the felt quality of experience, meaning and the first-person point of view seem hard to capture in purely physical terms.
- 6.2.2 · The minimal self vs the narrative self — Two things we both call 'me': the MINIMAL self — the bare subject of this present moment — and the NARRATIVE self — the identity built from the ongoing story of your life. Both matter; neither alone is the whole picture.
- 6.2.3 · Causality and determinism — Every event seems to have a cause, so if physical laws fix each state from the last, the future is set — including your choices. But this depends on what a physical law actually IS, and whether it rules out free will.
Explaining something is not the same as explaining it away. Science can fully describe the brain chemistry behind a feeling without proving the feeling is only chemistry with nothing left over. The whole topic turns on whether a complete physical account of the self LEAVES OUT something real — meaning, experience, freedom — or captures everything there is.
✍️ Bring it together — a Paper 1 Section B essay
Evaluate the claim that science can fully explain the self.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Important: Describing the positions instead of arguing with them. Don't just say 'reductionism says X, the narrative self says Y.' Give each view a reason, test it with an objection, then decide. A term earns nothing without its argument — and a top answer always reaches a reasoned conclusion, never 'it's just opinion'. Remember: Section B has no stimulus, so don't invent one — argue the claim directly.
✅ Check yourself
If you can answer these six, you have the spine of the whole topic.
What is reductionism about the self? The view that the self is nothing but its brain states and chemistry — mental life reduces to the physical, with nothing left over.
What might a physical account leave out? The felt quality of experience — what it is LIKE to be you — plus meaning, value and the first-person point of view.
Minimal self vs narrative self? Minimal = the bare subject of the present moment of experience. Narrative = the identity built from the ongoing story of your life.
What is determinism? The view that every event, including each brain state and choice, is fixed by prior causes and physical laws — one possible future.
Does determinism kill free will? It threatens it, but the answer depends on what a physical law IS and whether being caused is the same as being unfree.
Explain vs explain away? Describing the mechanism behind a feeling isn't the same as proving the feeling is unreal — description need not eliminate the experience.
Exam tips
- Section B is a 25-mark ESSAY on the optional theme with NO stimulus — argue the claim directly, don't invent a scenario.
- Turn the claim into a question, then argue for → argue against → weigh → conclude.
- Name the position with its argument — reductionism, the narrative self, determinism — a label alone earns nothing.
- Always weigh at least two views and end on a reasoned conclusion, not a list of positions.