How can I critically engage with an argument that I support/like?

It is important to remember that when writing essays in exams, the examiner is interested in the way in which you engage with the question and not merely the content of the course. What is so exciting about essay subjects like Philosophy, Religion, English and History is that you are given a window of opportunity in your exam to present a convincing argument to the reader. Whilst it can often seem as if the ‘Point, Evidence, Explain’ structure is the most important thing, you should remember that this is a guideline to help your essay structure and not to limit it. You need to use the knowledge you’ve learnt and put it to the test. It is up to you to carefully pick the relevant knowledge for essay questions (which I can help you practise) so that you can make the strongest argument possible. It is fundamental however to do this in the plan first. Always begin an essay knowing where it will end so that there is a continuous and consistent argument throughout. I know it can often be hard when you grow to prefer or support a theory in your studies, particularly if you are then asked to interrogate or justify it. My greatest piece of advice for a philosophy student would be to always question why you like the theory, is it because it appeals to your intuition or your stance on morality or existence? Even if you decide that you want to fully support a theory in the conclusion of an essay- you still have to fill the essay! No idea or conception is perfect, and it is your job as a philosopher to place pressure on the theory and use your own ideas to try to find holes within it. It can often seem a little intimidating to introduce your own counter arguments against big philosophers like Plato or Aristotle, but you have to remember that your opinion is just as valid and interesting and the examiner will appreciate the bravery! One key point to look for in this situation is if the argument depends on any presuppositions or assumptions. Does the utility principle of utilitarianism presuppose human enjoyment to be the goal of life? If the goal of life is something else, does the theory still hold? Do not be afraid to mix and match your knowledge from the topics and even from other subjects and reading. As long as it is relevant and you are enhancing your argument you should believe in your power to convince the reader (I managed to reference a Louis Theroux documentary in one of my A Level examinations!).