How to write the IB Philosophy IA

The Philosophy IA is the one piece of coursework your Philosophy grade is marked on internally — worth 25% of your final grade at SL and 20% at HL. Most students lose marks not because they cannot do philosophy, but because they pick a stimulus that does not really raise an issue, spend the essay describing the stimulus instead of analysing the issue, or argue only one side. This guide takes you through the whole task: what the IA is, how it is marked, exactly how to write each part, and what separates a top-band analysis from an average one.

The IB Philosophy IA at a glance

The Philosophy IA asks you to write a philosophical analysis of a non-philosophical stimulus. The stimulus is the spark, not the subject: you take something that was never written as philosophy — a film, an advertisement, a song, a photograph, a news story — and use it to open up a genuine philosophical issue, which you then analyse and evaluate. The essay is about 2,000 words and is marked out of 25 across four criteria. The single most important decision you make is the stimulus, because a stimulus that does not honestly raise an issue forces you to bolt philosophy onto it, and examiners can always tell. The whole task rewards genuine philosophical thinking drawn out of the stimulus rather than imposed upon it.

How the Philosophy IA is marked: the four criteria

Every mark you earn comes from one of these four criteria. Treat each as its own standard and make sure your essay clearly delivers on all four:

How to write a Philosophy IA, step by step

1. Choose a rich non-philosophical stimulus. Find a film, advert, song, photograph or news story that genuinely raises a philosophical issue rather than one you have decided on in advance and are now hunting an image for.
2. Identify the philosophical issue it raises. Name one focused issue the stimulus opens up, and frame it precisely as a question worth arguing about.
3. Connect it to relevant philosophy. Bring in the thinkers, concepts and arguments that bear directly on the issue, represented accurately.
4. Build an argument. Construct a clear, reasoned position that analyses the issue, rather than retelling what happens in the stimulus.
5. Raise and weigh counter-arguments. Set out the strongest objection to your view and respond to it, so the essay genuinely evaluates rather than asserts.
6. Conclude. Draw the analysis together into a measured conclusion that follows from the argument you have made.
7. Express it clearly and concisely. Write in well-structured philosophical prose within the word limit, keeping the issue and argument easy to track.

Philosophy IA structure: what goes in each section

There is no fixed template, but the structure that maps most cleanly onto the four criteria is:

• The stimulus & the issue — briefly present the non-philosophical stimulus and the focused philosophical issue it genuinely raises.
• The philosophy — introduce the relevant thinkers, concepts and arguments, accurately, and show how they apply to this issue.
• Analysis — develop your own reasoned argument about the issue, using the philosophy to do real analytical work.
• Counter-argument — set out the strongest objection or alternative position and respond to it.
• Evaluation & conclusion — weigh the competing positions and reach a conclusion that the argument supports.
• References — a consistent citation style for the stimulus and every philosophical source.

What a strong vs weak Philosophy IA looks like

The quickest way to raise your marks is to see the same work done two ways. Here are three places where strong and weak IAs diverge.

Choosing the stimulus

Identifying the issue

The evaluation

Common mistakes that cost marks

• A stimulus that raises nothing. A "deep-looking" image that does not honestly open an issue forces you to impose philosophy onto it.
• Describing instead of analysing. Retelling what happens in the film or advert, rather than analysing the issue, caps Identification and analysis.
• Misrepresenting the philosophy. Getting a thinker's view wrong undermines Knowledge and understanding even if the writing is fluent.
• A one-sided argument. No serious counter-argument means the Evaluation criterion cannot reach the top band.
• An unfocused issue. Trying to cover a whole theme rather than one arguable question scatters the essay.
• Disorganised writing. If the reader cannot follow the issue, the argument and the conclusion, Expression suffers.
• Drifting far over 2,000 words. The essay is meant to be tight — padding buries the argument.

Philosophy IA — frequently asked questions

Guidance written by experienced IB examiners and aligned to the current Philosophy guide. Not affiliated with or endorsed by the International Baccalaureate Organization.