Writing Philosophy Papers: Requirements and Grading Criteria

 Papers get good grades which show the following. That is, these should be regarded as requirements. Do them and you get a good grade. This handout is structured as follows: There are comments about general methods and editing, then a three-part essay pattern, then general yearnings again. These are to some extent particular to me, but if you follow these guidelines in any courses in which you have to deal with arguments, your teachers will be shocked, will love you for it, and will give you better grades.

Write an introduction. Usually you will write this as the last thing, after you have finished the body of your paper. The intro should say what your paper is about, what controversies are addressed, what stands you take, what the main points of progress or turns are in your argument. If you write the introduction last, it is more likely to be accurate, but you may find that writing an intro or an outline first helps you keep on task. If you do write the intro first, though, be sure to leave time to go over it and fix it after you have done the rest of the paper.

Be picky in your editing. Faculty will always notice misspellings and poor usage, and some will hold them against you even if they are not marked and even if they are not consciously noticed. Fix everything. Most people are not good proofreaders of their own work--an old copyeditors' trick is to tap each word with a pencil as you read it out loud--at least listen and look at each word. If you cannot do this well, get the help of someone who can and start acquiring the skill.

 Think in terms of arguments. The three part structure below will help with this, but it goes deeper. You are taking stands on issues (which you may need to explain and clarify) and backing them up, and you are doing this constantly, at every moment of every essay. You are either doing this well or you are doing it badly. Self-awareness regarding your arguments and the arguments you are discussing will help you do this well.

I. First, you have to do some thinking like the arguer or writer whose work you examine. So, leave your own views out. Explain and clarify the issues to which the writer is responding. Think of the issue as a question about which it is possible to disagree. State it as a question rather than as a phrase. Abortion is not an issue but a nest of issues. Is it morally okay for a woman to use abortion as a means of birth control? is an issue. Is the speech of Alcibiades a counterexample to Diotima’s (Socrates’) abstract account of love?--that’s another. Does Aristotle succeed in getting out from under Platonism?--that's another. Or, Do we need ethics? or What's ethics supposed to do for us? could be issues. The status of definitions–there’s no question mark, a troubling sign–this is a flabby, gaseous issue or none at all. Consider your audience to be students beginning the unit of the course addressing your particular topic. Tell quickly how the issue or problem arises, what the range of possible positions is, what is at stake, how it fits with other issues in the course or other related issues. This last sentence is a very model of conciseness–doing the work it describes will take lots of time.

 If your paper is partly about what others have said (which it always is), summarize not just their stands but their arguments. Tell what they see differently about the issues, what stands or positions they take, how they support those positions, what their worries or motives are. Summarize their arguments sympathetically. State the arguments as strongly as possible. Minimize sarcasm or snideness. Clarify the argument by giving examples which are friendly to it from your own experience. Use your own examples as well to clarify difficult or key concepts, but leave your own views out of this section. This section is a key part of your essay. If it is less than a full third of your essay, you should worry about that.

II. It is after you have shown mastery of the thinking of others that you are free to think yourself and to tell what you think. If you have gotten this far, give your ideas, but only if you can argue for them. Intuitive or unexplained and unargued positions on the issues raised by the paper will only lead to a blizzard of question marks and grouchiness as your teacher grades the rest of the class, even if you are right and even if your teacher agrees with you. Figure out why your position is the correct position or is a better position, and explain. If you are in a rush, this is the place where you are most likely to show that you have not thought. Often it is a struggle to see why you think the way you do. Here’s where you can learn about your own thinking, but this often involves mental excavation work.

III. So far you have written about what some speaker, a philosopher, has said, and then you have written giving your own thinking. Now you must again be schizophrenic (in the old Greek sense of splitting off another point of view), and be a critic of your own view. Think of it from the point of view of an opponent--a good, thoughtful opponent, and write out objections that could be raised. Cast a cold eye on your own thinking. Give the criticisms in the strongest possible terms. Then sit back, think and write about those criticisms. If you have to take it all back, then do so. If not, say why.

Some teachers like for you to have a settled position, with the loose ends tied up. If your teacher does want a clearly worked position, this is an important factor and it should shape your paper. Others, like myself, are less interested in the ending than in authentic agony along the way. We’ll wait for a letter from you when you do get the issue settled twenty years from now.

Your own life and interests can make a paper more alive, authentic, and interesting to the reader. If you have a sense of humor, show it. If you are a parent, examples from your interactions with your kids may be helpful in thinking through philosophical issues. (You have no children. Well then, do you have parents? Interests? Adventures? A life? Interested friends who discuss these matters? Imaginary friends?) If you are bitter and cynical, let it show. If a happy-go-lucky Pollyanna simpleton like your professor, let that show. If terribly earnest and humble, let it show. Academic papers often fail of excellence because the writer's life remains alienated from the topic. Make the topic your own.

To summarize: First, describe the arguments you are confronting, and give close and worried attention to clarifying the issue; Second, give and argue for your own views; Third, provide the best objections to your own views and deal thoughtfully with them.

Violate guidelines when appropriate, including this one.

jwp: d:\office\wpwin\wpdocs\writphil.s05