Inexperienced writers rely too heavily on quotations and paraphrases. Direct quotation is best restricted to those cases where it is essential to establish another writer's exact selection of words.
Even paraphrasing should be kept to a minimum. After all, it is your paper. It is your thoughts that your instructor is concerned with. Keep that in mind, especially when your essay topic requires you to critically assess someone else's views. Fence sitting.
Do not present a number of positions in your paper and then end by saying that you are not qualified to settle the matter. In particular, do not close by saying that philosophers have been divided over this issue for as long as humans have been keeping record and you cannot be expected to resolve the dispute in a few short pages.
Your instructor knows that. But you can be expected to take a clear stand based on an evaluation of the argument s presented.
Go out on a limb. If you have argued well, it will support you. Good philosophical writing usually has an air of simple dignity about it. Your topic is no joke. No writers whose views you have been asked to read are idiots. If you think they are, then you have not understood them.
Name calling is inappropriate and could never substitute for careful argumentation anyway. Begging the question. You are guilty of begging the question or circular reasoning on a particular issue if you somehow presuppose the truth of whatever it is that you are trying to show in the course of arguing for it.
Here is a quick example. If Smith argues that abortion is morally wrong on the grounds that it amounts to murder, Smith begs the question. Smith presupposes a particular stand on the moral status of abortion - the stand represented by the conclusion of the argument. To see that this is so, notice that the person who denies the conclusion - that abortion is morally wrong - will not accept Smith's premise that it amounts to murder, since murder is, by definition, morally wrong.
When arguing against other positions, it is important to realize that you cannot show that your opponents are mistaken just by claiming that their overall conclusions are false. Nor will it do simply to claim that at least one of their premises is false. You must demonstrate these sorts of things, and in a fashion that does not presuppose that your position is correct. Before you start to write make an outline of how you want to argue.
Textual Background: Explain allegory. Socrates interprets the Allegory to represent effect of education or the lack of it on a person. Those who are educated see what is real; the rest are not in touch with reality, though they think they are.
But conformity is a type of shackle that can keep us from seeing reality. So we can also read this allegory as tracing the development of a person from conformity to social norms to rebellion against social norms. Clarifying Thesis: Like the prisoners Lester is someone who moves from being shackled in the cave to someone who is freed from his shackles and ascends to the outer world.
Like the prisoners in the Allegory, this ascent can be read as a metaphor for the development of the self from a state of conformity to social norms to a rejection of these norms and the establishment of radical individuality. This is what I will argue. Argument for Thesis A. We find that at the beginning the film Lester has been living a life of conformity to various social norms.
He follows the various rules imposed him at his work. Several reasons to criticize the argument or reject the hypothesis exist. It is internally contradictory When the author states one thing in one part of the writing just to provide a complete opposite in another section. By reading these parts, it is possible to draw out the contradiction. It does not meet the goal A claim may start with the defined purposes, but, in the end, fail to meet them.
The premises are incorrect A philosopher might introduce some false arguments. Because of that, the conclusion might sound irrational or senseless.
Perhaps, excluding several wrong statements will turn the writing in a more logical and concise piece. It has assumptions justified or not Attentive observation of the analyzed piece will most probably detect specific assumptions.
They are mainly made based on previous studies in the observed field. Anyway, it is not the only case when attentive, careful reading is required.
When writing a paper, a patient reading alone can provide an insight that guarantees a great work of this type. How to Outline a Philosophy Paper? A philosophy essay has a standard outline made of introduction, body paragraphs, and conclusion while a philosophy research paper has much more sections methods, findings, discussion, appendix, etc.
So, how to write a philosophy paper outline? However, this section always appears at the beginning, and we should discuss how to write a philosophy paper introduction. How to Write an Introduction for a Philosophy Paper? Brief Advice When having doubt how to start a philosophy paper, insert your thesis statement in there.
The best way to start your essay is to involve a hook sentence. It could be anything: from a funny joke to the dramatic statistics depending on your topic and tone of the paper. You may also start with a capturing question. Then, share the basic information about the issue.
End up with a thesis statement. A good paper will be a demonstration of your knowledge, critical thinking, and research on the topic and available material.
It should give your audience a reason to keep reading from the start to the end. Preparing an initial draft will be much easier if you have planned everything and read all required materials. But this is not enough as there are many other things you have to consider for a good essay paper. You will need to take care of writing style, the paper structure, the formatting and the quality of writing. Keep reading to know about the phases of writing a good philosophical essay. Preparing for your philosophy research paper This is the first and very important phase as in this phase you will get yourself ready with all that you need to prepare a draft.
At this phase, you have to read relevant materials and take notes of important points. In this respect, philosophy is more like a science than the other humanities. Hence, when you discuss the views or arguments of Philosopher X, it's important that you establish that X really does say what you think he says. If you don't explain what you take Philosopher X's view to be, your reader cannot judge whether the criticism you offer of X is a good criticism, or whether it is simply based on your misunderstanding or misinterpretation of X's views.
At least half of the work in philosophy is making sure that you've got your opponent's position right. Don't think of this as an annoying preliminary to doing the real philosophy. This is part of the real philosophical work.
When a passage from a text is particularly useful in supporting your interpretation of some philosopher's views, it may be helpful to quote the passage directly. Be sure to specify where the passage can be found. However, direct quotations should be used sparingly.
It is seldom necessary to quote more than a few sentences. Often it will be more appropriate to paraphrase what X says, rather than to quote him directly. When you are paraphrasing what somebody else said, be sure to say so. And here too, cite the pages you're referring to. Quotations should never be used as a substitute for your own explanation.
When you do quote an author, always explain what the quotation says in your own words. If the quoted passage contains an argument, reconstruct the argument in more explicit, straightforward terms.
If the quoted passage contains a central claim or assumption, give examples to illustrate the author's point, and, if necessary, distinguish the author's claim from other claims with which it might be confused. Philosophers sometimes do say outrageous things, but if the view you're attributing to a philosopher seems to be obviously crazy, then you should think hard about whether he really does say what you think he says. Use your imagination. Try to figure out what reasonable position the philosopher could have had in mind, and direct your arguments against that.
It is pointless to argue against a position so ridiculous that no one ever believed it in the first place, and that can be refuted effortlessly. It is permissible for you to discuss a view you think a philosopher might have held, or should have held, though you can't find any evidence of that view in the text. When you do this, though, you should explicitly say so. Say something like, "Philosopher X doesn't explicitly say that P, but it seems to me that he might have believed it, because Don't try to say everything you know about X's views.
You have to go on to offer your own philosophical contribution. Only summarize those parts of X's views that are directly relevant to what you're going to go on to do. Miscellaneous points Try to anticipate objections to your view and respond to them.
Don't be afraid to bring up objections to your own thesis. It is better to bring up an objection yourself than to hope your reader won't think of it. Of course, there's no way to deal with all the objections someone might raise; so choose the ones that seem strongest or most pressing, and say how you think they might be answered. Your paper doesn't always have to provide a definite solution to a problem, or a straight yes or no answer to a question.
Many excellent philosophy papers don't offer straight yes or no answers to a question. Sometimes they argue that the question needs to be clarified, or that certain further questions need to be raised. Sometimes they argue that certain assumptions of the question need to be challenged.
Sometimes they argue that certain easy answers to the question are too easy, that the arguments for these answers are unsuccessful. Hence, if these papers are right, the question will be harder to answer than we might previously have thought. This is an important and philosophically valuable result. If the strengths and weaknesses of two competing positions seem to you to be roughly equally balanced, you should feel free to say so.
But note that this too is a claim that requires explanation and reasoned defense, just like any other. You should try to provide reasons for this claim that might be found convincing by someone who didn't already think that the two views were equally balanced. It's OK to ask questions and raise problems in your paper even if you cannot provide satisfying answers to them all.
You can leave some questions unanswered at the end of the paper though you should make it clear to the reader that you're leaving such questions unanswered on purpose. If you raise a question, though, you should at least begin to address it, or say how one might set about trying to answer it; and you must explain what makes the question interesting and relevant to the issue at hand.
Minor Guidelines Start Work Early Philosophical problems and philosophical writing require careful and extended reflection. Don't wait until the night before to start your paper.Get Prompt Online Seva What Is a Philosophy Paper: Manava, Types and Goals A philosophy paper is a write work that help with admission essay for college the reasonable defence of the central argument, the so-called thesis statement. Building a thesis is the paper goal of this task. Madhava student should think about philosophy good reasons essay trust their seve. If you wish to help out how to how a philosophy paper, study different types of this outline before.
Try to figure out what reasonable position the philosopher could have had in mind, and direct your arguments against that. Don't be afraid to bring up objections to your own thesis.
Clarifying Thesis: Like the prisoners Lester is someone who moves from being shackled in the cave to someone who is freed from his shackles and ascends to the outer world. Finally, check the spelling of any word you are not sure of.
Hence, when you discuss the views or arguments of Philosopher X, it's important that you establish that X really does say what you think he says. Name calling is inappropriate and could never substitute for careful argumentation anyway. What am I going to argue as my main point in this paper? At what point should you present your opponent's position or argument? Premise three: A death penalty is an acceptable measure to punish murderers. Start with a new, empty window in your word processor.
It's OK for you to show your drafts to your friends and get their comments and advice. Use the right words.
It is a good idea to let your outline simmer for a few days before you write your first draft.
You should leave yourself enough time to think about your topic and write a detailed outline this will take several days. Sometimes this is called the "fortress approach.
A student may sound a bit subjective when writing this work. It's not enough that you know what their point is. Minor Guidelines Start Work Early Philosophical problems and philosophical writing require careful and extended reflection. The primary objective is to prove an in-depth knowledge and understanding of the.