Suggestions for Writing your Philosophy Paper
Hettinger, Spring 2006
The paper must show awareness of the class discussions and reading assignments pertaining to your topic. It should also continue to develop the discussion of these ideas in its own way. You can do this by arguing for an original thesis, by synthesizing the issues into your own framework, and by using your own examples. Concrete examples that illustrate your points should be an important part of the paper. Make distinctions which are crucial for analyzing the issue and critically examine the categories within which the discussion takes place. Probe the assumptions behind the various positions on the issue and trace their consequences. Try to be fair to positions you criticize.
Be clear. Perhaps the greatest mistake is to write in a way that the reader can't understand your point. If you use technical words (e.g., "utilitarianism" or "intrinsic value" or "rights") don't assume that your reader knows what you mean--define them. One way to check for clarity is to read what you have written to a roommate (or out loud to yourself) and see if he or she can understand it.
Argue, give reasons, present evidence, and support what you say. Presenting your own ideas is not simply a matter of stating your opinions and leaving it at that. You must defend and justify the claims you make. Anticipate objections: Imagine what those who object to your views would say and then respond to those objections. State whatever weaknesses you see in your position and then do your best to shore up your views. Mention any other issues that need to be resolved in order for the position you take to be completely supported. Make your presuppositions clear and defend them the best you can.
Get involved in the details of the discussion of the issue you choose: Get beyond sweeping general comments about the issue from the perspective of an outside observer. If you disagree with a position, make it clear exacly in what way you think the position is mistaken. If you support some position from the readings or class discussion, do not just repeat the reasons given in the text or class, but add your own original support.
Think (and write) in paragraphs, not in sentences or pages. One sentence is never enough to constitute an
argument with supporting reasons. If you find yourself going on for a page or more without a paragraph
break, you can be sure that you are rambling and that your ideas are not sufficiently well organized.
Paginate your paper. Avoid rhetorical questions (questions where no answer is expected because the
author thinks the answer is obvious). Avoid vacuous introductions. Make sure your paper has a title that
reflects what is in the paper.
My interest is not so much in what you argue for, but how you argue for it. It is the quality and depth of
your reasons that I will evaluate. Better and deeper arguments are those to which it takes a lot of thought
to respond. If there is an easy and obvious objection to your argument, then it's not a very strong one.
Never use another's words or ideas without quoting them or noting that you got them from someone else.
Cite the reference in whatever format you have learned, but make sure that the reader could actually find
you citation with the information given. (You need at least the author, title of the book or of the article
and journal, date of publication, publisher and page numbers). Talk to me first before you write the same
paper or related paper to one you have or are writing for another course. Quotes need to be explained in
your own words: Don't assume that the meaning of quotes are self evident. Proof read you paper using a
dictionary before you turn it in. Papers with misspelled words or incoherent or ungrammatical sentences
are not acceptable.
Be skeptical of internet sources and make it clear in your reference who is providing the information from
the Internet site. (That is, list this person's credentials or who the sponsor of the website is. Is it a
refereed site?) Do not write a paper where all your references come from the Internet and there is no
documentation of the quality of the sites you are using.
One typical way of writing a philosophy paper is to have an exposition section followed by a critical analysis section. In the exposition, you explain some position that you are interested in defending or criticizing. In the critical analysis section, do just that: critically evaluate the position you have just explained. Show why it is a good position (how it accounts for more than one might have thought) or explain its defects (why the position isn't tenable). These tasks can be done by bringing forth supporting examples or counter-examples, by giving arguments which support the position, or by presenting reasons against it. You don't have to come out either for or against a position you describe. A careful and thoughtful discussion of the positions strengths and weaknesses is perfectly appropriate.
Some Philosophical Argument Strategies
Some Virtues and Vices of Philosophical Writing (From Robert Solomon)