HOW TO WRITE A PHILOSOPHY PAPER

At the most general level, philosophy papers will attempt to establish some point by giving reasons for it. Philosophy papers will have the overall form of an argument which moves from premises or evidence to a conclusion. The premises can be factual, conceptual, or moral, but they must be uncontroversial. Its conclusion, however, should be stated first, to give your reader a clear sense of where you are headed in the paper. Your very first sentence should state the thesis or point of the paper, and will typically have the form: "In this paper, I will argue for the position that...." or "I will establish that...." or "I will attempt to prove...." or some variant of these. There is no need to begin your paper with scene setting, reflections on life or academia, or the like. There is no need to establish a tone or mood. Get straight to the point. In general, avoid story telling, autobiography, anecdote, and history.

Once you know what claim you are going to establish and have stated what you are going to show or establish, the rest of your paper should be carefully structured with an eye to its conclusion. Tailor the subjects you discuss to the end you are trying to achieve and avoid extraneous matters; you need not discuss every facet of a subject, only those that are relevant to your conclusion.

Typically, your paper will be critical, that is, you will defend or attack someone else's view (actual or hypothetical). This suggests a two part structure for your paper: (1) a descriptive, discursive, or expository part, and (2) an argumentative or evaluative part. First, you will map out the position of the author you are going to discuss. You are marked, in part, on whether you accurately understand what an author's position and argument are. Do not simply catalogue or list claims the author makes, rather present them as the argument they are (or attempt to be). And be fair. Do not overemphasize the seemingly most extreme elements of an author's position, especially if you play down or overlook argumentation which the author gives for them. Do not turn the author into a strawman. Avoid quoting the author; mere quotation will not show that you understand what the author is doing. Also remember that I have read the texts, and am familiar with them, so your exposition may be brief.

Second, evaluate or criticize the author's position. If you support the author's conclusion or defend the author's position from attack by entertaining and refuting possible objections to it. Some questions to consider when evaluating an author: Are his premises true? Does his conclusion follow from his premises? Does the author contradict himself? Does the author equivocate on terms, using ambiguous words or phrases as though they had only one, clear sense? Does the author's argument have hidden or suppressed premises that are implausible or that contradict other stated premises? Does the author's argument commit him to additional consequences beyond those he explicitly claims, consequences that are implausible or even absurd? Does the author deal with all the relevant aspects of a problem? What are the practical consequences of the author's position? Is your own position subject to possible counter-objections?

You are expected to put some of yourself into your paper. Do not simply repeat positions stated in class or in the texts discussed. Make ideas discussed in class into your own; transform them. And use material from class only as it is relevant. You should be able to demonstrate your grasp of the materials discussed without resorting to "showing off." Further, when you state your own opinions, remember that I am interested in them not in that they are yours, or that they represent your gut reactions to things, but rather am interested in them to the extent that you can support them with arguments and evidence. I am, that is, concerned with your considered opinions. Don't be shy in stating them.

Devote time to matters in proportion to their significance. Avoid padding! When using examples for the sake of exposition or clarification, keep them short and to the point. They should by no means make up the bulk of your paper.

Express yourself as clearly as possible. Aim for coherence of the whole, and simplicity in the paper's parts. Use simple diction and grammar. Avoid woolliness. Overly long sentences generally signal mental confusion. When you are famous, you may write like Gibbon; until then, simplicity is the word. Avoid repeating yourself. Try reading your paper out loud -- you will be amazed at what flaws and awkwardness of thought and style this will sometimes reveal.

Finally, "When in doubt, leave it out."

Two highly recommended short books on the mechanics and graces of writing:

William Strunk & E. B. White's The Elements of Style.

William Zinsser's On Writing Well.