AQA A-Level Philosophy | Paper 1 | 2027 Predicted Paper | Mark Scheme Question 1, 2 and 3
Question 1
What is meant by infallibilism as an analysis of propositional knowledge?
[3 marks]
What is expected in the answer?
This is a 3-mark AO1 definition question. Students should give a short, precise account of the conditions infallibilism places on knowledge. There is no need to discuss Gettier in detail or evaluate whether infallibilism succeeds.
AQA’s vocabulary defines infallibilism as the view that S knows that p if and only if p is true, S believes that p, and S has justification which guarantees the truth of p, so S could not possibly be mistaken.
Levels of response
Marks | Descriptor |
3 | A full and correct answer, stated precisely with little or no redundancy. |
2 | The substantive content is correct, but there is some imprecision, omission or redundancy. |
1 | One or more relevant but fragmented points are made. |
0 | Nothing written worthy of credit. |
Indicative content
A full answer may include:
infallibilism is a post-Gettier analysis of propositional knowledge
S knows that p only if:
p is true
S believes that p
S is justified in believing that p
the justification must be so strong that it guarantees the truth of p
therefore S could not possibly be mistaken about p.
The current specification describes this as strengthening the justification condition in response to Gettier.
Example student answer
Infallibilism says that S knows that p when p is true, S believes p, and S has justification which guarantees that p is true. This means that S could not possibly be mistaken.
Example commentary
3/3
This is exactly the kind of answer a 3-mark question rewards. It identifies the belief and truth conditions and, crucially, gives the distinctive feature of infallibilism: the justification guarantees truth.
AQA’s 2023 examiner report found that the strongest 3-mark answers were often simply clear specification-level definitions. Students lost marks when they gave only a partial account or introduced imprecise descriptions, while extra discussion of related issues usually added nothing.
An answer such as:
“Infallibilism means you need to be really certain that your belief is true.”
would be too imprecise. Psychological certainty is not enough. The point is that the justification itself guarantees the truth of the belief.
Question 2
Explain Plato’s slave-boy argument for innatism.
[5 marks]
What is expected in the answer?
The command word explain requires the student to show the reasoning of the argument, not merely state that Plato believes knowledge is innate. For 5 marks, the answer should move clearly from what happens in the slave-boy example to Plato’s conclusion about the origin of the geometrical knowledge.
Want to read more?
Subscribe to revision-notes.com to keep reading this exclusive post.
