Found a stimulus and issue you like?
Drop it straight into the free Philosophy IA frame. The planning sections — choosing the stimulus, framing the issue and planning the argument — are free; unlock the full step-by-step IA — analysis of the stimulus, arguments and counter-arguments, evaluation and conclusion — to take it to the top band.
Start this IA in the Philosophy frame →PERSONAL IDENTITY & THE MIND
Stimuli that pull apart what we usually bundle together — body, memory, consciousness — let you argue a precise question about the self.
1 · A sci-fi film that uploads a dying character's mind into a new body → is the survivor the same person?
The scene preserves the psychology while replacing the body, pulling the two candidate criteria of identity apart — and the duplication case (run the upload twice) gives you a decisive counter-argument to engage, not just assert.
2 · A diptych photograph of one person before and after a decade of serious illness → are they the same self?
A real, ordinary case (no sci-fi) where bodily and psychological continuity come apart by degrees, forcing you to clarify numerical vs qualitative identity rather than retell a story.
3 · A documentary scene of a person with advanced dementia who no longer recognises family → does the person remain?
The case tests the memory criterion at its hardest edge and connects to genuine ethical stakes (who decides for "them"), giving the argument real weight beyond the abstract.
4 · A video game that lets a player "respawn" with full memories after death → is the respawned character the same agent?
A specific, everyday stimulus that engineers a clean test case — continuity of psychology across a break in existence — letting you argue rather than describe gameplay.
ETHICS & MORAL PHILOSOPHY
Adverts, news stories and scenarios that stage a moral choice let you argue a normative position and engage the strongest objection to it.
5 · A charity advert showing a single distant suffering child → how far does our duty to help strangers extend?
The advert's use of one identifiable child (not statistics) is itself the philosophically loaded feature — it lets you argue impartial duty and meet the demandingness objection head-on.
6 · A news report of a self-driving car programmed to choose who to harm in a crash → can moral worth be calculated?
A real engineering decision forces a precise consequentialist-vs-deontological clash, and the "pre-programmed intention to harm" gives the Kantian objection genuine bite to engage.
7 · An advert that uses an influencer's authentic-seeming endorsement to sell a product → is deception that harms no one wrong?
The stimulus isolates manipulation from harm (the buyer may be satisfied), so you can argue what exactly makes deception wrong — concept-rich, and the "no harm" reading is a strong counter-argument.
8 · A film in which a character keeps a promise at great cost to themselves and others → does keeping it remain the right thing?
The scene cleanly opposes duty and outcome, letting you argue a position and test it against the obvious utilitarian rejoinder rather than surveying ethics in general.
KNOWLEDGE, TRUTH & REALITY
Illusions, deepfakes and dreams stage a gap between appearance and reality — ideal for a focused epistemology argument.
9 · An optical-illusion artwork the eye cannot stop misreading → can perception give us knowledge of the world?
A concrete case where you know the truth yet still perceive falsely lets you argue about the reliability of perception precisely, not in the abstract.
10 · A deepfake video indistinguishable from genuine footage → what can now count as evidence for what is true?
A live, specific phenomenon revives the sceptical problem with real stakes — you can argue what justification survives when the usual evidence is unreliable.
11 · A film whose protagonist cannot tell whether they are dreaming → can we ever know we are not being deceived?
The scene literally dramatises the sceptical hypothesis, so you can argue a response (e.g. that the standard for knowledge is not certainty) and meet the sceptic at full strength.
12 · A news photograph later revealed to be staged → does a true belief formed from a fake still count as knowledge?
A real case where the belief is true and justified yet intuitively not knowledge lets you argue the Gettier point through a concrete stimulus rather than a textbook example.
Ready to argue it rigorously?
The Philosophy IA frame walks you through every criterion — and the paid unlock builds your stimulus analysis, arguments, counter-arguments and evaluation into one export-ready document.
Open the Philosophy IA frame →SOCIETY, POLITICS & JUSTICE
Protest images, laws and news stories raise sharp questions about authority, freedom and fairness you can argue with a clear position.
13 · A protest photograph of one person standing before a line of riot police → when is disobedience to the state justified?
The image stages legitimacy itself as contested, letting you argue the grounds of political obligation and engage the order-and-stability objection seriously.
14 · A news story about a lottery that allocates scarce organ transplants → what makes a distribution just?
A concrete allocation rule forces competing theories of justice into direct conflict over one decision, so you argue and adjudicate rather than describe.
15 · A song protesting mass surveillance → does security justify the loss of privacy and liberty?
The lyrics' assumption that being watched is itself a harm is the loaded feature — you can argue what liberty is for and meet the "nothing to hide" objection.
16 · A news report of a viral mob shaming a stranger for a single post → is collective moral punishment ever legitimate?
A live phenomenon isolates punishment from the state, letting you argue what legitimates punishment at all and why proportionality and standing matter.
AESTHETICS, TECHNOLOGY & BEING HUMAN
Art, AI and the body raise questions about meaning, creativity and freedom that a specific stimulus can sharpen into one arguable issue.
17 · A music video by an entirely AI-generated "artist" → can something without intention create genuine art?
The case removes the artist's intention while keeping everything audiences respond to, so you can argue what art essentially requires and meet the "meaning is in the work" reply.
18 · An advert promising you can "become your best self" through a wearable that nudges your choices → does it expand or erode freedom?
The product assumes nudged choices are still "yours", which is exactly the assumption to question — letting you argue what free agency requires rather than describe the gadget.
19 · A photograph of a beautiful landscape now scarred by industry → is natural beauty a real property or a human projection?
The image invites a value judgement everyone shares, which lets you argue whether such agreement evidences objective beauty or just shared sentiment.
20 · A film in which a character chooses a perpetual blissful simulation over reality → is a pleasant illusion a good life?
The scene dramatises Nozick's thought experiment with a real choice, so you can argue what makes a life go well and engage the hedonist's strongest reply.
21 · A news story of a person who recovered "lost" memories that turned out false → is the self built on a reliable narrative?
A real case where memory is sincere but false stresses the memory criterion from a new angle, letting you argue whether the narrative self can do the work memory cannot.
22 · An advert insisting "the customer is always right" about taste → are there standards for better and worse judgement?
The slogan states relativism as obvious, which is the assumption to interrogate — you can argue for genuine standards and meet the subjectivist objection at full force.
23 · A viral clip of a robot apparently grieving when "switched off" → can a machine have a mind or moral status?
The clip tempts us to attribute mind from behaviour alone, which is exactly the move to scrutinise — letting you argue what evidence of mind could ever consist in.
24 · A news story of a person who attributes a tragedy entirely to "fate" → are we genuinely responsible for what we do?
The interviewee's fatalism is the loaded assumption to test — you can argue whether responsibility survives causation and engage the incompatibilist objection seriously.
From a stimulus to a top-band IA
A stimulus-and-issue is the easy part — the marks are in how you build the analysis. The Philosophy IA is a philosophical analysis of a non-philosophical stimulus of about 2,000 words, marked out of 25 across four areas: expression, knowledge & understanding of the issue, identification & analysis of the stimulus, and development & evaluation (the argument). Whichever stimulus you pick, the same moves win: draw a precise, arguable issue out of the stimulus (never just describe it), clarify the key concepts, build an argument for a position, engage the strongest counter-argument at full strength, and reach a reasoned, evaluated conclusion that judges whether your thesis survives — keeping the stimulus in play as a recurring test case throughout.
Build your chosen idea into a full IA
The examiner-written Philosophy IA writing frame takes you through every section with the rubric, worked good-and-bad examples and the traps that cost marks. The planning sections — choosing the stimulus, framing the issue, planning the argument — are free; unlock the analysis, arguments, counter-arguments and evaluation to finish the whole IA and export it to Word or PDF.
Open the Philosophy IA frame →Philosophy IA ideas — FAQ
What makes a good non-philosophical stimulus?
It is genuinely non-philosophical (a film, advert, song, photograph, news story or artwork — not a philosophy text or lecture), specific and rich rather than broad, and contains a feature that does real philosophical work: an image, a choice, a claim or a tension that raises a focused issue rather than merely illustrating a theme. If you can point to exactly what in it provokes the question, it lets you analyse rather than describe.
How do I find the philosophical issue a stimulus raises?
Look for the assumption the stimulus quietly makes that a philosopher would want to question, then turn it into a precise, arguable question about concepts, justification or values — identity, knowledge, freedom, justice or mind. "Identity" is a topic; "Is personal identity grounded in psychological or bodily continuity?" is an arguable issue. Name the specific feature that raises it so the link is shown, not asserted.
Should I cover one issue in depth or several?
Depth over breadth, every time. One focused question argued rigorously in about 2,000 words — concepts clarified, a position defended, the strongest counter-arguments engaged and an evaluated conclusion reached — scores far better than several big questions touched lightly. Development and evaluation rewards sustained argument, not coverage.
How do I turn the idea into a top-band IA?
Build it section by section in the free Philosophy IA writing frame — choose the stimulus, frame the issue, plan the argument, then analyse the stimulus, construct your case, engage the strongest counter-arguments, and evaluate toward a reasoned conclusion that judges whether your thesis survives.
📬 Free: the IA topic-picker checklist + examiner tips
Get the Topic-Picker & Top-Band Checklist (PDF) plus short, examiner-written tips for each stage of your IA — straight to your inbox. No spam, unsubscribe any time.
✅ You're in! Grab your checklist now: download the PDF — tips will follow by email.
IA ideas for other subjects
History IA → Global Politics → English HL Essay → All IA tools →