Philosophy Summer School - Detailed Outline

This page provides a detailed outline of the in-person Philosophy Summer School, a five-day course for students aged 15 – 18 considering philosophy or related subjects at university. The programme below explains what students study on each day, from early questions about personal identity and moral responsibility through to later sessions on knowledge, mind, experience, power, and culture.

The course is taught through seminars, discussion, and collaborative philosophical enquiry, giving students a taste of how philosophy is studied at university level.

Prefer to view and download the PDF version of this outline? You can do so here.

Jump to a particular section:

Day One – Identity and Ethics
Day Two – Knowledge and Reality
Day Three – Experience and Being
Day Four – Power and Meaning
Day Five – Culture and Society

Across the week, students engage with some of the central questions of philosophy, moving from questions about the self and moral obligation through to debates about knowledge, consciousness, and the nature of human existence. The course then broadens out to consider how individuals are shaped by wider social and cultural forces, exploring ideas about power, politics, and the role of culture in modern society.

Students encounter a range of influential philosophical thinkers and arguments, drawn from both analytic and continental traditions, and are encouraged to test their own intuitions through structured discussion and debate. By the end of the course, participants will have developed a clearer understanding of how philosophical arguments are constructed, how to analyse complex ideas, and how to engage critically with challenging and sometimes unsettling questions.

Please note that for some groups, sessions may run in a different order.

10.30 – 1.00 Personal Identity

What makes you the same person over time?

Are you really the same person you were as a child, or has that person disappeared? If you lost your memories, would you still be you?

The session begins with students’ own intuitions, exploring what they take to be fundamental to their identity – whether that is the body, memory, personality, or something else. These ideas are then tested by asking what it means to remain the “same” person across time, and whether this kind of sameness is even possible.

We then turn to John Locke, who argues that personal identity consists in the continuity of consciousness, particularly memory. This raises difficult questions about responsibility and the limits of memory.

Finally, we explore Derek Parfit’s famous thought experiments, which challenge the idea that identity is fixed or even especially important. Could there be more than one “you” – and if so, which one is really you?

By the end of the session, a familiar question about the self becomes a much deeper and more unsettling philosophical problem.

1.00 – 2.00 Lunch

2.00 – 4.30 Peter Singer’s Practical Ethics

Are we morally obliged to help others – or is giving to charity simply a good thing to do?

Students first explore their own intuitions about responsibility and obligation. Do we owe more to those close to us, or should distance make no difference at all?

We then turn to Peter Singer’s famous argument. If you saw a child drowning in shallow water, you would be morally required to help – even at some cost to yourself. Singer argues that the same reasoning applies to people suffering from extreme poverty across the world.

This leads to a striking conclusion: giving to charity may not be optional or “generous” at all, but something we are morally required to do.

Students test this argument through discussion and objection, considering questions about fairness, practicality, and the limits of moral demand. The discussion then widens to global justice, asking whether we should prioritise those closest to us, or treat all lives as equally important.

By the end of the session, students will have confronted one of the most challenging questions in ethics: how much do we really owe to others?

10.30 – 1.00 Knowledge and Epistemology

Do we actually know anything about the world around us?

We normally take it for granted that our experiences reflect a real, external world. In this session, that assumption is put under sustained pressure.

Beginning with René Descartes’ method of radical doubt, students explore a series of sceptical arguments: the unreliability of the senses, the possibility that we might be dreaming, and the unsettling idea that we could be systematically deceived.

These ideas lead to a striking conclusion: if these doubts succeed, it may be impossible to know anything about the external world at all.

We then examine modern versions of this problem – including the “brain in a vat” scenario – before turning to a range of philosophical responses. Can scepticism be answered, avoided, or simply lived with?

By the end of the session, students will have engaged with one of the most fundamental questions in philosophy: whether knowledge itself is as secure as it seems.

1.00 – 2.00 Lunch

2.00 – 4.30 Philosophy of Mind

What is a mind – and could a machine ever have one?

We begin with a central debate in philosophy: whether the mind is simply part of the physical world, or something fundamentally different. Is consciousness just brain activity, or is there more to it than that?

To explore this, students examine some of the most influential thought experiments in philosophy. Thomas Nagel asks what it is like to be a conscious creature, highlighting the subjective nature of experience. Frank Jackson’s “Mary’s Room” raises the possibility that not all knowledge is physical, while John Searle’s “Chinese Room” challenges the idea that computers could ever truly think.

These ideas lead directly into questions about artificial intelligence. What would it mean for a machine to be intelligent – or even conscious? And how could we tell the difference between genuine thought and a convincing simulation?

By the end of the session, students will have engaged with one of the most pressing philosophical questions of our time: whether minds can be reduced to matter, or whether something essential would be lost in the process.

10.30 – 1.00 Phenomenology – The Philosophy of Experience

What does it mean to describe experience as it is actually lived?

This session introduces a simple but radical idea: philosophy should start not with abstract theories, but with the structure of experience itself. Rather than asking why things happen, phenomenologists first ask what it is like to experience the world at all.

Developed by Edmund Husserl, phenomenology introduces a distinctive method. It attempts to set aside assumptions about the external world – what Husserl calls the “natural attitude” – in order to focus purely on how things appear to us in consciousness . This process, known as the epoché, allows us to examine experience without importing scientific or everyday explanations.

A key idea here is intentionality: the claim that all mental states are directed towards something. Beliefs, desires, and perceptions are always about objects, whether real or imagined. This insight, developed by Franz Brentano, underpins the analysis of how consciousness relates to the world.

Students also explore how phenomenology differs from traditional philosophy. Instead of treating the world as something observed from a distance, it treats experience as something we are already immersed in. Even ordinary moments – boredom, attention, perception – become philosophically significant when examined closely.

By the end of the session, students will understand phenomenology as a method: a way of investigating experience that challenges many of the assumptions underlying modern philosophy.

1.00 – 2.00 Lunch

2.00 – 4.30 Phenomenology – Being in the World

What does it mean to exist in the world?

The second session moves from method to a more ambitious question: the nature of human existence itself. The focus shifts to the work of Martin Heidegger, who transforms phenomenology into a philosophy of being.

Heidegger challenges the traditional picture of the human being as a detached observer of the world. Instead, he argues that we are always already in the world – involved in it, shaped by it, and interpreting it through our actions . This idea, known as being-in-the-world, rejects the sharp divide between subject and object that had dominated earlier philosophy.

These ideas are explored through a series of striking examples. Heidegger distinguishes between different kinds of beings: objects that are “worldless”, animals that are “poor in the world”, and human beings – what Heidegger calls Dasein – who are “world-forming”. These distinctions reveal that human experience is not simply passive observation, but an active structuring of meaning.

A central concept is the difference between things as we use them and things as we merely observe them. A hammer, for instance, is not first encountered as an object with properties, but as something for hammering – part of a wider network of purposes and meanings. Only when this practical engagement breaks down do we step back and view it abstractly .

Through these ideas, phenomenology becomes a powerful way of rethinking familiar philosophical problems. Questions about knowledge, scepticism, and reality are reframed by recognising that we are never outside the world looking in – we are always already participants within it.

By the end of the session, students will have encountered one of the most influential ideas in modern philosophy: that understanding human existence requires starting not from detached thought, but from lived engagement with the world

10.30 – 1.00  Power and Society: Foucault

What is power – and how does it shape the way we live?

Power is often understood as something held by governments, laws, or individuals. In this session, students encounter a radically different view, developed by Michel Foucault: power is not something possessed, but something that operates through networks of relationships across society .

This means that power is not confined to obvious institutions like the state or the police. It is present in everyday practices – in schools, workplaces, medicine, and even in the way we think about ourselves.

To explore this idea, students examine Foucault’s account of punishment. Public executions once displayed power through spectacle and violence, but modern systems rely instead on discipline – carefully structured routines designed to shape behaviour over time. This shift reveals a deeper and more pervasive form of control.

We then consider Foucault’s famous example of the panopticon: a system of surveillance in which individuals regulate their own behaviour because they might be watched. This raises a striking possibility – that modern power works not by forcing us, but by shaping how we act and think.

Finally, students apply these ideas to contemporary life, analysing familiar institutions and technologies in Foucauldian terms. Where is power operating? How does it influence behaviour? And is it possible to resist it?

By the end of the session, students will have developed a new way of thinking about power – not as something imposed from above, but as something embedded in the structures of everyday life.

1.00 – 2.00 Lunch

2.00 – 4.30 Politics and the Meaning of Life: Arendt

What gives a human life meaning?

This session begins from a stark possibility: that life may have no inherent meaning at all. If that is true, what – if anything – could make it worthwhile?

Students consider a range of possible answers before turning to the work of Hannah Arendt, who offers a striking and unconventional response: the meaning of human life is found not in private experience, but in public action.

Arendt argues that much of what we do – work, consumption, even inward reflection – cannot by itself give life lasting significance. Instead, meaning arises when we act in the presence of others, contributing to a shared world through words and deeds.

To develop this idea, students examine Arendt’s distinction between different kinds of human activity, and her claim that genuine freedom lies in the ability to begin something new in the public sphere. This leads to a powerful and sometimes unsettling conclusion: that a meaningful life depends on participation in a political world.

By the end of the session, students will have encountered one of the most distinctive ideas in modern philosophy – that our lives are given meaning not by what we think or feel, but by what we do together.

10.30 – 1.00 Taste, Class, and Culture: Bourdieu

Are your tastes really your own?

Why do people disagree so strongly about what counts as “good” or “bad” taste – in art, music, food, or fashion? And why do these disagreements often seem to map onto social class?

The session begins with the traditional philosophical view, developed by Immanuel Kant, that judgments of beauty are disinterested and universal. We then turn to the work of Pierre Bourdieu, who challenges this idea at its foundation.

Bourdieu argues that taste is not simply a matter of individual preference, but is shaped by upbringing, education, and social background . Our preferences function as a form of cultural capital, signalling our position within society and distinguishing us from others.

Students explore how this works in practice, analysing everyday examples of “good” and “bad” taste and considering how these judgments operate within different social contexts. This leads to a broader question: if taste is socially conditioned, can it still be meaningful to talk about genuine aesthetic value?

By the end of the session, students will have developed a new perspective on culture – not just as a matter of personal expression, but as a site of competition, identity, and power. This raises a further question: what happens when culture itself becomes part of a larger system of control?

1.00 – 2.00 Lunch

2.00 – 4.30 Culture, Conformity, and Control: Adorno

Does popular culture make us more free – or less?

Music, film, and entertainment are often seen as forms of self-expression and creativity. In this session, students encounter a much darker view. But in this final session, students encounter a much darker view, developed by Theodor Adorno and the Frankfurt School.

Adorno argues that modern “mass culture” is not simply produced for enjoyment, but operates as a system of control . Cultural products are standardised, repetitive, and designed to be easily consumed, encouraging passive habits of thought rather than critical engagement.

As a result, our preferences may feel personal and spontaneous, but are often shaped by the structures of production and distribution that surround us. Culture, in this sense, does not challenge society – it quietly reinforces it.

Students explore how these ideas apply to contemporary life, analysing familiar forms of media and asking whether they promote independence or conformity. This raises a difficult question: if culture itself is shaped by these forces, where – if anywhere – can genuine freedom or critical thought still be found?

By the end of the session, students will have engaged with one of the most provocative conclusions of the course: that the very things we turn to for escape may be part of what holds us in place – and makes alternatives harder even to imagine.

This outline provides a detailed view of the themes and topics explored during the in-person Philosophy Summer School. The programme is designed to introduce students to the kinds of questions philosophers ask and the methods they use to analyse them, while also giving participants the opportunity to test those ideas through discussion and debate.

You can also return to the main in-person Philosophy Summer School page for full details about the course and how to apply.