PremiumDaniel M. A Level Philosophy tutor, A Level Classical Greek tutor, A ...

Daniel M.

Currently unavailable: for new students

Degree: Literae Humaniores (Bachelors) - Oxford University Alumni University

Contact Daniel
Send a message

All contact details will be kept confidential.

To give you a few options, we can ask three similar tutors to get in touch. More info.

Contact Daniel

About me

Oxford graduate with loads of enthusiasm and experience helping students at all levels understand things more clearly and enjoy learning

I finished at Oxford University last summer getting a 1st class degree in Literae Humaniores (Ancient Literature, History and Philosophy) - it was fun but hard work! Now I'm studying towards a Graduate Diploma in Economics (hoping to get a job in the real world).

I took more A-levels than was sensible: English Literature (A), Mathematics (A), Physics (A), Latin (A) and Classical Greek (A). Plus I took two extra AS-levels: History (A) and Ancient History (A). So I hope I can use my experience preparing for exams to help you get ready for yours. 

As you can probably guess, I'm pretty dedicated, a little bit crazy and interested in lots of things (not just studying). I love travelling too especially in China, where I taught English for 6 months and picked up a bit of Mandarin (still working on it). I also like running, playing badminton and watching interesting films.  

When it comes to teaching, I try to keep things simple, creative and intuitive. For me lessons are exciting when we can bounce ideas off each other while staying focused on the topic. In my view, developing as a student is about maturing in your understanding and refining your approach NOT memorising lots of facts. 

I have lots of experience teaching both classes and one-on-one, and I particularly like teaching over the internet because it's such a convenient, relaxed forum for learning. 

I hope that the high standard to which I have studied makes me a better teacher for students of all levels, because I can pinpoint the basics for beginners and go into the nuances with the more expert

I would be happy to help anyone applying to any university (including Oxbridge) with application/ interview preparation.

Subjects offered

SubjectLevelMy prices
Classical Greek A Level £20 /hr
Latin A Level £20 /hr
Philosophy A Level £20 /hr
Philosophy and Ethics A Level £20 /hr
English GCSE £18 /hr
English Language GCSE £18 /hr
English Literature GCSE £18 /hr
History GCSE £18 /hr
Maths GCSE £18 /hr
-Personal Statements- Mentoring £20 /hr

Qualifications

QualificationLevelGrade
Classics & PhilosophyBachelors Degree1.1
MathematicsA-LevelA
PhysicsA-LevelA
EnglishA-LevelA
Ancient GreekA-LevelA
LatinA-LevelA
Disclosure and Barring Service

CRB/DBS Standard

No

CRB/DBS Enhanced

28/08/2014

Currently unavailable: for new students

General Availability

Weeks availability
MonTueWedThuFriSatSun
Weeks availability
Before 12pm12pm - 5pmAfter 5pm
MONDAYMONDAY
TUESDAYTUESDAY
WEDNESDAYWEDNESDAY
THURSDAYTHURSDAY
FRIDAYFRIDAY
SATURDAYSATURDAY
SUNDAYSUNDAY

Please get in touch for more detailed availability

Questions Daniel has answered

Can logic prove the existence of God?

This is a very open question. How would you start?  We could start by thinking about what the questioner means by 'logic'. By 'logic' the questioner probably means something like 'argument' or 'reasoning', although there are other kinds of 'logic', like 'maths' or 'formal logic'. Mathematic...

This is a very open question. How would you start? 

We could start by thinking about what the questioner means by 'logic'. By 'logic' the questioner probably means something like 'argument' or 'reasoning', although there are other kinds of 'logic', like 'maths' or 'formal logic'. Mathematical or formal logic is written in symbols (think numbers or computer code). 'Logic', even if it is not mathematical or formal, emphasises the strong link between 'steps' in the argument, and the objectivity of the argument (not emotional, the kind of argument a computer would accept). Anyone who is rational (not mad and not influenced by their emotions) should accept a truly logical argument.

So a logic is a kind of strong 'argument'. An 'argument' and 'logic' are not the same: there are 'logical' arguments and 'illogical' arguments. Think of an ‘illogical’ argument. We are interested in logical arguments, good strong arguments, the kind that would convince anyone who isn’t mad or emotional. The kind that would convince a computer. 

Within 'logic' there are different kinds of argument/ reasoning, 'analytic' and 'synthetic'. 

What does 'analytic' mean? 'Analysis' - drawing out what is already there in the definition. Think of an analytic statement: 

If you are single you are not in a relationship/ married. 

What does 'synthetic' mean? 'Synthesis' - putting together empirical evidence. Think of a synthetic argument:

All observed swans are ‘white’. Therefore all swans are ‘white’. 

Which is a stronger kind of argument? Which is more useful? Which could be considered proof? 

Analytic arguments are generally stronger but less useful because they don't tell you more than you already know. Both could be considered proof though.

What about the starting point of a logical argument? 

'Logic' gets you from A to D, via b and c., A > b > c > D. As well as having logical steps, and argument that proved the existence of god would have to have a strong starting point ‘A’. It’s no good starting in the wrong place and continuing logically. And we can’t get to ‘A’ by logic, because we can’t offer proof for our starting point, otherwise we would always be going backwards. Imagine if we offered proof for ‘A’ (a > A > b > c > D), then we would have a new starting point ‘a’. How do we get our starting point? Well we need a starting point that everyone can agree.

So if we are to have an argument for the existence of God, we would need to have a starting point that everyone can agree (‘A’) and then strong logical steps that everyone would accept to the conclusion ‘D’ that God exists. 

What starting points have people offered? Think about the design argument; the cosmological argument; the ontological argument. 

Does everyone agree on these starting points? Are these strong starting points? 

E.g. the design argument: the order of the universe.

E.g. the cosmological argument: everything has a cause. 

Eg. the ontological argument: the essence of god

How do these arguments move to their conclusion (analytically/ synthetically)? 

E.g. the design argument

The universe is beautifully ordered & everything that has order has a designer > the universe has a designer (god)

What about this further assumption? ‘Everything that has order has a designer - is this analytic or synthetic?

E.g. the cosmological argument. 

Everything has a cause > the universe must have a cause. This is an analytic - drawing out what is already there. 'Everything' includes the 'universe'

What is the main weakness in logical arguments?

Starting points or steps within the argument? 

Can you think of any other arguments for the existence of god? Where do they start? How do they move to their conclusion? 

E.g. Religious experience 

Can logic prove the existence of god? What do you think? 

Even within 'logic' there are different kinds of reasoning, 'analytic' and 'synthetic'. What does 'analytic' mean? 'Analysis' - drawing out what is already there. What does 'synthetic' mean? 'Synthesis' - putting together empirical evidence.

Which is a stronger kind of argument? Which could be considered proof? 

Are there analytical arguments 

see more

9 months ago

182 views
Send a message

All contact details will be kept confidential.

To give you a few options, we can ask three similar tutors to get in touch. More info.

Contact Daniel

Still comparing tutors?

How do we connect with a tutor?

Where are they based?

How much does tuition cost?

How do tutorials work?

Cookies:

We use cookies to improve our service. By continuing to use this website, we'll assume that you're OK with this. Dismiss

mtw:mercury1:status:ok