In a philosophy paper, the main question to keep in mind is ‘why?’: 1) What is the philosopher’s position, and why, and 2) what is your position or thesis, and why? Trace out the reasoning of the philosopher and your own reasoning as carefully as possible. To help gauge the appropriate level of detail to include, please imagine that your reader is an intelligent person who has not been reading along with our class.
Papers should be 3-5 pages (double-spaced) and use a standard method of citation (e.g., MLA or Chicago). Please include works cited page or a bibliography. (If your only texts are our course books, this is fine; list them as works cited.)
The following is a suggested structure for papers:
1) Introduction: Introduce the reader to the topic you will be discussing. Initially, lay out the general context or problem, then narrow the focus of the paper by stating your thesis. The thesis should be an arguable claim, not a statement of fact about the text. (You might also give a map after your thesis. For example, “I will argue this claim by reviewing so-and-so’s position on x and demonstrating that the author’s assertion y is flawed in such-and-such a way.”)
2) In the body of the paper, you should A) present the position(s) to be explained and evaluated, B) muster textual evidence, and C) argue your thesis, which typically culminates in a clear evaluative section toward the end.
2) Exposition: describe the author’s position. Before you can evaluate a claim, you need to present this claim. Attempt to be as clear, fair, and precise as possible. Define terms, and show steps of arguments. Cite text, and be sure to comment on quotations. Tie quotations into your paper for the reader: explain what the author is claiming and how it fits into your presentation or argument.
Argue your thesis using evidence from the text, examples, and a clear progression of ideas. Do not simply list reasons in support of your thesis. The aim here is quality, not quantity. Choose a few points, and explain them well.
3) Evaluation: consider an objection, and attempt to answer this objection. Generally, this kind of evaluation works either by giving your objection to a central argument of a thinker or by raising and then defending against a hypothetical objection. If you are arguing against an author, what might this person say in answer to your thesis? How would you respond? If you are defending an author, what might someone who disagrees find questionable in your thesis? Try to present this challenge as strongly as possible and to answer it fairly. (Be sure to develop the objection, e.g., devote separate paragraphs to objection and reply.) Please note: to show that there is an alternative view is not yet to establish that this alternative is better. You must give an argument to show that the alternative is better.
4) Conclusion: The last paragraph of your paper should be used to re-state your thesis and remind the reader of the argument you have given. Please do not introduce new evidence in the last few sentences. At this point, the game is over; give highlights and the final score.
While I am primarily interested in your ideas, I will also be concerned with the mechanics of your paper. Grammar, spelling, and a clear writing style will be taken into account. Good writing skills go far in providing a clear presentation of your thoughts. I encourage you to pay close attention to the text. Make good use of your sources, both primary and secondary, but be careful to give credit where it is due. Please be wary of plagiarism; always cite another person’s ideas regardless of whether you are directly quoting or paraphrasing them.
topic:
Against Socrates’ position that the soul is immortal, Simmias objects that the soul is in fact a harmony, which is dependent on the body for its coming-to-be and preservation. Explain Simmias’s harmony position and Socrates’ response to this argument. (You may want to narrow your focus and discuss only part of Socrates’ response. If so, please clearly indicate this choice.) Offer evaluation of Simmias’s objection and/or Socrates’ reply. Is the argument compelling? Why, or why not?
Topic:
Tentative thesis:
Exposition and interpretation of text (including definitions and key passages):
Main argument or position that will be the focus of the evaluation:
Evaluation (1-2 healthy paragraphs)
A) objection
B) (IF DEFENDING) reply
Conclusion (initial two-sentence summary):
Last Completed Projects
| topic title | academic level | Writer | delivered |
|---|