HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.

html

HOW TO WRITE PHILOSOPHY PAPERS

A Manual for Beginning Philosophy Students

by

William O. Stephens

Department of Philosophy

Creighton University

INTRODUCTION

Writing philosophy papers is difficult. Learning how to do it well requires many

things. First you have to want to improve your writing skills. Second, you have to
practice, and this requires relentless hard work. Third, you must develop the
ability to benefit from your professor's criticisms. Learning how to understand,
appreciate, and fairly evaluate views other than your own is a fourth requirement.
Fifth, one needs to develop a self-critical attitude about one's own work; this is
vital for successful rewriting. One reason why writing philosophy papers well is
difficult is that it entails doing two things well. Part of good philosophy is good
grammar, and the other part is good thinking. Good thinking consists of presenting,
in a logical way, good reasons to support your thesis. You must construct sound
(cogent) arguments. Thus, your reasoning must be free of formal and informal
fallacies. Your logic must be rigorous, not sloppy. You must carry the burden of
proof in arguing for your thesis, and you must apply the principle of charity in
responding to objections to your thesis. Accordingly, your paper must be clear,
coherent, precise, and rigorous in order to be good philosophy. A philosophy paper
is obviously not an oral conversation. Instead of speaking your mind, your ideas
must be expressed in the written form. Consequently, your paper must be well written
in order to count as good grammar. You must articulate your thinking in plain,
concise, syntactically well formed, properly punctuated, correctly spelled English
sentences. So in addition to demonstrating your mastery of logic, you must also
demonstrate your mastery of language. As your understanding of logic increases, you
will be able to develop more sophisticated arguments. As your vocabulary increases,
you will be able to express more subtle ideas.

Poetry, fiction, journalism, and chemistry lab reports are all different kinds of
writing, each of which has its own style and internal standards of excellence.
Philosophy has its own style and internal standards of excellence as well. This
manual is intended to explain what goes into conceiving, organizing, and writing a
philosophy paper; it is offered as guidance to help you in the process of learning
how to write a thesis defense paper for your philosophy class. Bear in mind, then,
that this is a practically oriented "how to" manual and not itself a philosophy
paper.

I. WHAT IS THE POINT OF WRITING A PHILOSOPHY PAPER?

Contrary to what you might think, your professor does not assign a philosophy paper
in order to torture you. The purpose of writing a philosophy paper is for the

1 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

student to explore a philosophical topic at greater length, in greater depth, and in

greater detail than is possible in a class discussion. If you are a student who does
not speak up in class much, writing a paper is really the only opportunity you have
to show your professor that you can carefully work through the ideas you have about
a particular topic in the course. The point of the exercise is for you to learn how
to think and write well about a philosophical topic. This can only be accomplished
by actually doing it. Submitting the final copy of the paper should be a moment of
pride for you because it marks the culminating achievement of the long and intense
process of thinking about your topic, formulating your thesis, constructing
arguments to support your thesis, wrestling with objections, composing the first
draft, rewriting, editing your rewrite, and proofreading the final version. You
might also experience a sense of relief that your paper is done and out of your
hands. The physical product, a set of printed pages, shows your reflective,
rigorously reasoned, and thoroughly considered judgment on an issue that either
matters to you (because you have chosen it) or at least should matter to you
(because it is on a significant topic in the course). The educational process often
leaves nothing more tangible to testify to your skills. When I was an undergraduate,
I learned much more from writing papers than from taking exams. Perhaps it was
because I had to exercise my own autonomy and judgment in writing papers. The paper
is your creation. It contains your brainchildren. The paper is for your professor
and for a course, but the paper is yours. That is why you should not be indifferent
about it. If you do it well, you have good reason to be proud.

A. The thesis defense paper or argumentative essay

The natural question to ask is what kind of a paper you are supposed to be writing
here. That depends on what your professor wants, of course. The most common type of
philosophy paper, and the only one we are concerned with here, is the thesis defense
paper, also known as the argumentative essay. Thesis comes from an ancient Greek
word that means stand or position. In a thesis defense paper you are expected to
take a stand on a philosophical issue. You must clearly explain what your position
is. That is, you must explicitly state your thesis in the form of an assertion.
Euthanasia, freedom of the will, and skepticism are not theses, but merely topics.
Examples of theses include:

Active, voluntary euthanasia is morally wrong under all circumstances.

Human beings do not possess freedom of the will.
Sentient, nonhuman animals have a right not to be tortured.
Plato's theory of Forms rests on an untenable form of dualism.
Over the counter tobacco sales ought to be made illegal.

Notice that all of these are assertions. They claim that something is the case. As
statements, each one is either true or false. Now you might think that no one knows
whether any of these claims is true or false because they are all just matters of
opinion. This is precisely the difference between merely voicing an opinion and a
thesis defense paper. In a thesis defense paper you must do more than simply state
your view; you must justify your thesis, present arguments to support it, and defend
it against objections. This is very different from trading opinions with someone
with whom you disagree. In a thesis defense paper you do not get angry, narrow your
mind, disregard opposing views, and insist you are right. Rather, you gather
evidence to support your position, offer reasons for believing your thesis is true,
and broaden your mind to consider seriously how an intelligent person might object
to your thesis. The thesis is the final conclusion of your paper. Throughout the
rest of your paper you will be marshalling evidence to support your thesis and

2 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

directly addressing criticisms of your thesis.

B. The student as author

It probably seems too obvious to mention, but it is worthwhile to remember that you
are the author. Several things follow as a consequence of this. First, the ideas you
present and the arguments you advance must be your own. If you draw on other sources
like the professor's lecture, the primary source reading that was assigned, or a
secondary source you got from the library, then you must give credit where credit is
due. It is perfectly fine to agree with what somebody else says about your topic,
but you must explicitly state whose idea you are affirming. Failure to refer to the
source of the idea you print in your paper is plagiarism.

Secondly, unless the assignment is to do a research paper, your professor doesn't

want you to report on what other people think about your topic anyway. The thesis of
your thesis defense paper must be what you really think. After all, your professor
probably knows what many other philosophers think about your topic. What your
professor does not know is what you think about the philosophical topic under
discussion, and what your reasons are for thinking that way. So be sure to write
only what you really believe, and explain why. If you say what you believe but don't
explain why, you are sincerely voicing your opinion, but not philosophizing. Your
thesis defense paper is your exploration, analysis, and evaluation of a
philosophically interesting subject. It is not a book report. It is not the
transcript of a call-in show. So concentrate on presenting your own arguments and
don't merely report someone else's arguments or voice your unexamined, unsupported
opinions.

A third point which follows from the fact that you are the author of your paper is
that your professor does not expect you to prove your thesis once and for all.
Philosophy is not mathematics. In a mathematical deduction with codified axioms and
rules of inference, proof is expected. When it comes to philosophical topics,
however, proof is too high a level of certainty to expect. Your professor does not
expect you to produce the caliber of argument of a seasoned philosophical genius.
Rather, you should simply try to present the most credible, fair-minded, logically
coherent, and orderly defense of your thesis you can. So don't write: "In this paper
I will prove that so and so." Write something more like: "I will argue that the
weight of reasons supports the position that such and such."

Remember that what you are trying to do is persuade the reader that there are good
reasons for believing that your thesis is true. You do this by examining the
concepts involved, weighing evidence for and against your thesis, and logically
assessing reasons. Feelings have nothing to do with inquiring into a philosophical
issue. For one thing, your professor has no way of grading your feelings. For
example, don't fall into the very common habit of writing things like: "Socrates
felt that philosophy was his mission in life" or "I feel that Socrates was unjustly
convicted." People feel hot or cold, bored or excited, happy or sad. A thesis
defense paper is about conceptual analysis, reasoned chains of thought, well
supported judgments, arguments, and counterarguments. It is emphatically not about
feelings. "I feel that..." is unacceptably subjective. In contrast, "I argue
that..." implies that there are objective grounds for the author's position. So
think clearly and reason logically in writing your paper. Don't feel your way
through it. This is a thesis defense paper, not a diary or a love letter, so DON'T
USE THE VERB "FEEL" when you should instead say "think," "believe," "judge," or
"argue."

3 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

C. The professor as audience

The audience of your paper is your professor, and your professor may know more about
the subject of your paper than you do. But this certainly doesn't make this exercise
a waste of time. For one thing, if you do a good job, your professor may very well
learn something from your paper. More importantly, in working out your thesis
defense, you will learn from having constructed and examined arguments and
counterarguments.

Put yourself in your professor's place for a moment. You will be reading dozens and
dozens of papers, many of which will be on the same topics. What sorts of things are
you going to look for when you read this huge pile of papers?

ORIGINALITY. A fresh insight, a new perspective on the topic, an original argument,

a creative analysisþthese things will distinguish your paper as special and
memorable.

CLARITY. Make your meaning as plain as you can. Don't obscure your ideas with
awkward sentences or polysyllabic words dredged up from your thesaurus. Use words
you understand, spell them correctly, and put them in straightforward, grammatical,
properly punctuated, complete sentences.

COHERENCE. Make your ideas hang together so that each one leads smoothly and
logically to the next. Don't wander off onto tangents. You don't have room for
digressions in this paper. A well reasoned thesis defense is always well organized
and to the point.

CONCISION. In a paper less than ten pages long, you simply don't have the room to be
long-winded. Trim out excess verbiage. Make every word count.

RIGOR. Be logical. Construct direct, cogent arguments, not long, convoluted,

seemingly sophisticated but ultimately weak arguments. Avoid all informal fallacies
like the plague. Remember to carry the burden of proof in advancing your arguments
and to apply the principle of charity when addressing opposing views.

These are the criteria your professor will use to grade your paper. A paper that is
sloppy will not receive a high grade. A paper can be sloppy due to poor reasoning,
poor organization, poor typing or spelling, poor word usage, poor syntax, or any
combination of the above. On the other hand, if you put real time and effort into
your paper, it will show, and the professor will grade it accordingly and be proud
of your achievement.

The attitude you should take toward your audience is respect. Your professor assigns
the paper to you as a requirement toward earning credit for the course, so obviously
you must take sufficient time to do the assignment. On the other hand, you are
putting demands on your professor's time too. You expect your professor to spend
sufficient time reading and trying to understand what you have written, and to
expend effort in commenting on it. If you submit a sloppy, carelessly and hastily
written paper, you have wasted your professor's time. Not only does the sloppy work
reflect badly on you, but by failing to give your best effort on your paper, you are
short-changing your own education. Keep in mind that your professor is deeply
committed to helping you get the best education possible. So devote the time and
effort necessary so that you can honestly say to yourself when you submit the final
version of your paper that you did the best job you could given the amount of time
allotted.

4 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

Finally, remember that what really matters to your professor are the ideas and
arguments in your paper, and not the grade it gets. The comments the professor
writes on your paper draw attention to the strengths and weaknesses of the paper.
The constructive criticisms are intended to help you learn from the assignment. The
professor's input can also help you improve your paper if you rewrite it. Thus even
though the paper writing exercise is technically completed when your paper is
returned to you, the professor's comments carry on the philosophical dialogue which
you initiated by turning in your paper in the first place.

II. ARTICULATING YOUR THESIS: THE INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH

Your paper should have a clear beginning, middle, and end. The beginning of the
thesis defense paper is the introductory paragraph. A good introduction is necessary
for getting your paper off on the right foot. In the introductory paragraph you
should first introduce the topic you will discuss, and briefly explain why it is an
important subject. You should not begin with trite, verbal padding like: "For
centuries philosophers have pondered the controversial philosophical question of
such and such." Do not waste space stating the obvious. The introductory paragraph
of the thesis defense paper is not a historical overview. All you need to do in the
introductory paragraph is: (1) briefly explain what the topic of your paper is, (2)
briefly explain why that subject is worth discussing, and (3) explicitly state your
thesis.

Now before you can state your thesis, you must find a topic you are interested in
investigating, and then formulate a position you think you can defend. Topics should
not be so broad that they can't be examined thoroughly. "Plato" is much too broad.
"Plato's epistemology" is still too broad. "Plato's theory of recollection in the
Meno and the Phaedo" might be a workable topic for a ten to fifteen page paper. "The
Argument in Plato's Meno that everyone desires the apparent good" could be suitable
for a five to seven page paper. Remember, this is your paper topic, not your thesis.
The topic is a noun phrase, not an assertion. Your paper topic might make a good
title for your paper, but since it is not an assertion it cannot be your thesis.

Next, choose a thesis that is worth the effort you will put into arguing for it. A
thesis that no reasonable person would challenge will be uninteresting. You don't
want to present iron-clad arguments for a trivial position no one cares about. On
the other hand, you shouldn't choose an overly ambitious thesis that you won't be
able to defend adequately in the space allotted. Your thesis should be
controversial. There should be some decent arguments both for it and against it.
Your thesis should also be about something you are interested in studying because
you want to understand it better. Finally, your thesis must be specific and tightly
enough focused that you can do a thorough job presenting arguments to support it,
considering counterarguments against it, and responding to those counterarguments.
An example of a decent thesis might be `The argument which Socrates advances in the
Meno from 77c to 78b that everyone desires the apparent good is not valid.'

As you write the body of your paper you may discover that you are having trouble
constructing good arguments to support your thesis. If so, then you either need to
work harder on developing supporting arguments, or else modify your thesis so that
it becomes easier to defend. Part of the learning process at work in writing your
paper is coming to change your mind about your topic by broadening your knowledge.
If it slowly dawns on you that the thesis you originally formulated is indefensible,
then abandon it and pick a new thesis. Settling on a thesis is often more like
discovering an attractive new building you haven't noticed before than attempting to
buttress an old, familiar building that is falling apart.

5 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

To summarize, then, in your introductory paragraph you should:

state what the topic of your paper is

briefly explain why that topic is important and worth addressing
state exactly what your thesis is

If you want to, you can also state the two or three main reasons (which you will
expound on at length in the body of your paper) which support your thesis. If you
choose to do this, do it briefly. As a general rule, your introductory paragraph
should be no longer than half a page.

III. PRESENTING YOUR MAIN ARGUMENT

A. Tone

What you are trying to do is offer credible reasons for believing your thesis is
true. Since your professor is your audience, your audience will be persuaded by
clear, plausible arguments, not shrill, emotionally charged rhetoric. This means,
for example, that you avoid using exclamation points for punctuation. Shouting does
not persuade a reasonable reader. Moreover, since your topic is a controversial one,
be sure not to overstate your case. If you oversimplify the nature of the issue,
then your reasoning will not persuade. Try to be fair to the complexity of the issue
you are addressing. For example, don't write anything like "Only a moron could
object to my argument that so and so" or "Any simpleton can see that I am right when
I claim that such and such." Remember, your tone should be serious, fair-minded, and
reasonable, not dogmatic, closed-minded, and exaggerated.

B. Semantic precision and sensitivity to usage

Semantics is the theory of the meaning of words. Anti-intellectuals sometimes charge

that philosophy is nothing but semantics. This claim is false, and also serves as a
good example of imprecision. Philosophy is a rich and complex discipline which can
be divided into three main branches: logic, ontology (metaphysics and epistemology),
and axiology. Ethics, aesthetics (the philosophy of art), and social and political
philosophy are sub-branches of axiology. The philosophy of language (including
semantics), symbolic logic, and informal logic (critical thinking) are
sub-disciplines of logic. The philosophy of science, the philosophy of mind, and the
philosophy of perception are sub-branches of ontology. There is also the philosophy
of religion, the philosophy of literature, the philosophy of law, and the philosophy
of history. Each of these areas has its own history of development. Moreover, there
are many different philosophical methods or approaches to how to do philosophy:
analytic philosophy, ordinary language philosophy, phenomenology, feminism,
deconstructionism. So it only takes a moment of thought to realize that the
assertion "Philosophy is nothing but semantics" is clearly false because it wrongly
reduces all of philosophy to a single subject within a single branch of the whole
"tree" of philosophy.

In philosophical writing the way words are used is crucial to success. A large part
of improving your writing skills is learning how to use words with greater precision
and subtlety. The claim that "Philosophy is nothing but semantics" is imprecise
because it is an oversimplification. Philosophy is much more than semantics. Another
type of imprecise claim is the overgeneralization. Claims like "All people know so
and so" and "Every society is such and such" are most probably false. It takes only
one counterexample to refute a hastily made, broad generalization, so be very

6 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

careful about making universal claims. A more accurate claim might be "Most people
know so and so" or "Many societies are such and such." Remember that for an argument
to be cogent all of its premises must be true, or at least acceptable. If your
argument contains even one false or questionable generalization, then it will not be
cogent.

Even qualified claims that assert that "Most A's are B's" need to be supported by
some kind of evidence. If you claim that "Most people believe that they have free
will," then you need to cite some kind of representative poll which shows this. Be
very careful in basing your arguments on empirical claims like this because there is
always the danger that you might be committing the appeal to popular belief (ad
populum) fallacy. Your paper is an argumentative essay aimed at persuading the
reader to believe your thesis. Your arguments should not rest on your shaky,
generalized speculations. Your goal is to convince the reader what the reader ought
to believe (on the basis of the reasons you present), not to describe what people do
believe (for whatever reason or lack thereof).

Remember that you carry the burden of proof in arguing for your thesis. It is your
knowledge that is at issue and your reasoning skills that are being tested.
Consequently, it is your responsibility to show your professor that you, the
student, know the precise meaning of the terms being discussed. Any technical terms
must be at least clarified if not fully defined.

C. Gender exclusive language

A common example of insensitivity to word usage is to use man in the so-called

generic sense to refer to all human beings. Consider the following passage:

... A defining technology defines or redefines man's role in relation to

nature. By promising (or threatening) to replace man, the computer is
giving us a new definition of man, as an "information processor," and of
nature, as "information to be processed."
I call those who accept this view of man and nature Turing's men. I
include in this group many who reject Turing's extreme prediction of an
artificial intelligence by the year 2000. We are all liable to become
Turing's men, if our work with the computer is intimate and prolonged and
we come to think and speak in terms suggested by the machine. When the
cognitive psychologist begins to study the mind's "algorithm for
searching long-term memory," he has become Turing's man. So has the
economist who draws up input-output diagrams of the nation's business,
the sociologist who engages in "quantitative history," and the humanist
who prepares a "key-word-in-context" concordance.
Turing's man is the most complete integration of humanity and
technology, of artificer and artifact, in the history of Western
cultures. With him the tendency, implicit in all eras, to think "through"
one's contemporary technology is carried to an extreme; for him the
computer reflects, indeed imitates, the crucial human capacity of
rational thinking. Here is the essence of Turing's belief in artificial
intelligence. By making a machine think as a man, man recreates himself,
defines himself as a machine. (J. David Bolter, Turing's Man: Western
Culture in the Computer Age. Chapel Hill: The University of North
Carolina Press, 1984. p.13)

This passage is chock full of gender exclusive language. The author uses man to
refer to all humankind, and men to refer to people of both genders. The cognitive

7 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

psychologist is a he. This author unwittingly uses language in such a way as to

exclude the female reader from identifying with the subject matter being discussed.
It is simply inaccurate and inappropriate to write the word man when you mean human
being or person. Women are people too. Your choice of pronouns should reflect the
fact that a man is an adult, male human being, and a woman is an adult, female human
being. A woman is no more a man than a man is a woman. Appealing to the generic
sense of man is simply an excuse for perpetuating unnecessary, sloppy usage. So use
humankind or humanity instead of Man or mankind. Often you can avoid having to write
the awkward "he or she" altogether. For example, the author could have written:
"When the cognitive psychologist begins to study the mind's `algorithm for searching
long-term memory,' the cognitive psychologist has become Turing's human." Similarly,
the following sentence is also free of misleading gender exclusion: "By making a
machine think as a person, one recreates oneself, defines oneself as a machine."
Avoiding the habit of gender exclusive language use requires only a little thought
and practice. The fact that many authors in the past have used gender exclusive
language in no way justifies your following their bad habit in your own writing.

D. Outlining each step of your argument

In the introductory paragraph you have already introduced your topic, explained its
importance, and stated your thesis. We could say you have set the table and are now
ready to begin serving the meal. The logical thing to do next is to present the bare
bones of your argument. This way your reader will have a road map, as it were, of
the journey you will take through your paper. This will also help you structure your
reasoning. So outline each step of your main argument, writing out each premise in
order one by one, and ending with your final conclusion (the thesis).

Now the nature of your thesis and the material to be discussed will dictate how you
should best organize the body of your paper. However, one simple approach is to:

(1) show that your main argument is valid;

(2) show that each premise is relevant to the truth of the conclusion;
(3) show that each premise is true or acceptable.

This is a very straightforward way to demonstrate that the argument supporting your
thesis is cogent. However, doing this well is not easy, and will require rethinking
the logic of your argument and revising each step to strive for greater and greater
rigor.

E. Successive elaboration of each step in consecutive paragraphs

Each remaining paragraph in the body of your paper should then elaborate on each of
the "bare bones" of the main argument you have outlined. By devoting a whole
paragraph to fleshing out each premise of your argument, you should be able to
provide ample demonstration of the truth of each premise. You can do this by
providing evidence for the premise and clarifying the technical or ambiguous terms
within it. This process of elaboration should continue until you judge you have
sufficiently discharged the burden of proof necessary for a reasonable person to
accept each premise.

Perhaps the most common vice in writing philosophy papers is failing to offer
adequate evidence in support of a bold, controversial claim. The more questionable
the premise is, the greater the burden of proof you have to carry in trying to
establish it, and the more work you'll have to do in order to succeed. In fact, if a
particular premise is very controversial and complex, you may have to construct a

8 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

subargument in order to make a solid case for accepting that premise. In effect you
will be embedding a smaller subargument within the larger framework of your main
argument. Here again, outlining your reasoning will guide you in organizing your
chain of thought.

A different but equally common vice in writing philosophy papers is to have overly
long paragraphs. You should organize your paper so that each paragraph is a unit
containing one basic point or element of your overall argument. The length of
paragraphs should thus be proportionate to the length of the whole paper. A short
paper (one to three pages) should be organized into succinct paragraphs (roughly two
to five sentences long) in which you argue briskly from point to point. In a paper
of moderate length (four to seven pages), you should try to keep paragraphs shorter
than a page in length. In a long paper (eight or more pages), it would be acceptable
to have some paragraphs which were correspondingly longer. As a general rule,
however, conciseness applies both to the length of sentences and to the length of
paragraphs. If you find that you cannot offer sufficient support for one of your
premises in less than a page, then you should break that premise down into two or
more intermediate steps and devote separate paragraphs to each one. This process
often needs to be repeated again and again, and that is why it is called "successive
elaboration."

F. Illustrating each point with examples

As has been explained above, if you assert a universalization of the form "All A's
are B" or "No C's are D," then you have committed yourself to a heavy burden of
proof. Say you are claiming that "All human beings are self-aware." This would mean
that you must do more than describe four or five human beings who are self-aware.
You would have to explain how there is something innate in all human beings which
makes them all self-aware. Say you want to claim that "No nonhuman animals are
self-aware." In this case you would have to do more than explain how a squirrel, or
a goldfish, or a chicken lacks self-awareness. You would have to produce evidence
that all nonhuman mammals, all birds, all reptiles, and all fish lack the capacity
for self-awareness because of their various physiological natures.

The burden of proof for establishing the plausibility of a generalization such as

"Most E's are F" is proportionately lighter. So if you want to support the claim
that "Most laws are useful and morally justified," then by citing several examples
of such laws and explaining why they are useful and morally justified, you will
probably have sufficiently established that at least some laws are useful and
morally justified. You would then have to find additional evidence in order to
establish that most laws are useful and morally justified. If you can't come up with
such additional evidence, then you must change your assertion to "Some laws are
useful and morally justified." Never overstate your claim or exaggerate in a thesis
defense paper. The old adage "Don't bite off more than you can chew" can be applied
to a thesis defense paper in the form of the maxim "Don't shoulder a burden of proof
heavier than you can carry."

The point is that you must back up all of your controversial claims with some kind
of evidence. Using clear examples to illustrate each point of your argument provides
one kind of acceptable evidence. Also remember to exercise your judgment: some
examples are better than others.

IV. CONSIDERING OBJECTIONS TO YOUR ARGUMENT

If you end your paper after presenting only your arguments for your thesis, your

9 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

paper will be too one-sided. After all, since the thesis you are supporting is a
controversial one, there must be some reasons for thinking that your thesis might be
false. If there were no evidence against your position, then you wouldn't need to
present much evidence for it because it would be fairly obvious. But no
philosophically interesting problem has an obvious solution, so presenting the
arguments for your thesis is only the first phase of a good thesis defense paper.

Considering objections to your thesis in a serious way is a mark of intellectual

maturity. One of the most important goals in philosophy is to learn how to overcome
your dogmatically held preconceptions and develop a self-critical stance about your
ideas and judgments. If you can make progress in this difficult and challenging
self-scrutiny, your professor will be impressed.

"But where do these objections to my argument come from?" you may ask. "After all, I
am supposed to argue for what I believe is true, not against it." If you can't think
of plausible objections to the thesis defense you have constructed, and you cannot
recognize any weaknesses in your own reasoning, then you should go to the library
and do some research. You will find that there are plenty of authors who have
constructed arguments against your thesis. When you find some of those arguments you
must be careful to present them fairly and accurately. You gain nothing by
misrepresenting the argument against your thesis. Your professor will certainly take
you to task for this, because in philosophy it is a form of cheating to butcher your
opponent's argument. It is to fail to apply the principle of charity. Here are some
practical suggestions to bear in mind:

If something you have written has been written before by someone else,
footnote it.
If something you have written has been written better, quote it and footnote
it.
If something you have written has been written in more detail, adapt it to
your essay and footnote it.
If someone else has said something against what you have said and is wrong,
use that view as an objection to yours, footnote it, and then refute it.
If someone else has said something against what you have said and is right,
footnote it and revise or qualify your thesis accordingly, and adapt it to
your newly conceived essay.

A. Searching for counterexamples

Remember, to refute the claim that "All A's are B," all one needs to do is find one
counterexample. In the examples discussed above that would be one human being who is
not self-aware, or one nonhuman animal (say a chimpanzee) who is self-aware. The
burden of proof for substantiating the truth of a universalization is extremely
high, so be very careful about making such sweeping claims. In considering
objections to your argument, you should think very hard about whether there are any
counterexamples to your universalizations. If so, then you must change the claim
from "All A's are B" to "Many A's are B." If you want to make a stronger claim than
"Many A's are B," then you'll need to provide some statistical evidence that "Most
A's are B" is true.

B. Including evidence against your assertions

Say you are arguing that Socrates consistently holds the same beliefs in the Apology

10 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

and the Crito. Once you have collected the passages in both dialogues that express
similar views you should quote and then closely examine passages in the two
dialogues that appear to conflict with or perhaps even contradict each other. You
will gain nothing by simply ignoring such passages as if they don't exist. Instead,
bring them to light and then try to show how, on careful analysis, they do not
really conflict. On the other hand, if, even after thorough scrutiny, they do seem
to be inconsistent, then you'll have to try to explain the cause of that
inconsistency. This might ultimately lead you to revise your thesis so as to take
these conflicting passages into account. Your paper will be made stronger by
considering seriously evidence against your assertions because it will be more
circumspect.

Perhaps the worst thing you can do is to attack an author's arguments by failing to
present them accurately at all. This would be a blatant case of failing to apply the
principle of charity. It is perfectly alright to argue against an author, but you
must not do so by simply disregarding the author's arguments. So make every effort
to include, not exclude, evidence which seems to conflict with your assertions.

C. Are matters more complicated than you describe them?

A common mistake in philosophical writing is to oversimplify the issue being

addressed. Since interesting questions in philosophy have a long history and are
rich with complexity, the answer is very rarely likely to be a simple one. Remember
the informal fallacy of the false dilemma. Learning how to appreciate the complexity
of arguments on both sides of an issue is an important part of gaining an education
in philosophy. This is not to say that those arguments will be equally good. In
fact, after careful scrutiny one of the arguments will often emerge as stronger than
the others. But unless you explore these competing arguments, you will not be able
to discover which set of reasons prevails. So just as you should do all you can to
avoid overgeneralizing and overstating your case, you should also be careful not to
oversimplify the considerations relevant to your thesis.

V. RESPONDING TO THE COUNTERARGUMENTS

Let's review what you've accomplished so far. In the first paragraph you have
introduced your topic and explained why it is interesting and worth investigating.
You have then clearly stated the thesis for which you will argue in the paper. In
the subsequent paragraphs you have developed your own arguments for that thesis. You
have collected the evidence which supports your claims, you have illustrated them
with clear examples. That is, you have presented good reasons for accepting them.
You have not overstated your case, you have avoided unsupportable
overgeneralizations, and you have explored all considerations relevant to the truth
of your thesis by accurately portraying the complexities involved in your topic. In
addition to all that, you have searched for and perhaps found counterexamples to
your generalizations. You have even fairly presented your opponents'
counterarguments against your thesis. At this point you may think you have surely
done enough in one paper.

In fact, however, your task is not complete. If you were to stop after presenting
one or two counterarguments, your reader would be left with the impression that
while you, the author, have some reasons for holding your position, others have
different reasons for holding theirs -- and that's all there is to it. But that's
not all there is to it. What you have shown is that your topic is a complex and
controversial, and there are indeed some arguments on both sides which, at least on
first glance, appear plausible. Now your job is to compare the arguments you have

11 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

advanced with the counterarguments your opponent has advanced. Do the

counterarguments reveal real deficiencies in your reasoning? If so, then is there a
way to revise your arguments so as to incorporate your opponents' criticisms and
thereby make your position stronger than it was before? Are the counterarguments
really good ones, or are there mistakes concealed in them? You can't discover this
until after you analyze those counterarguments in depth, with care and with
precision. A carefully examined argument often looks very different from one which
appeared plausible at first glance.

So don't just present your opponent's counterargument and stop there. Go on and work
through that counterargument to evaluate the plausibility of its premises and the
validity of its reasoning. Are there any counterexamples to your opponent's
universalizations? Are there considerations which the counterargument overlooks?
Remember, be fair in assessing your opponent's position. Don't take any cheap shots
at it by distorting the evidence which is advanced. It is possible to engage with
your opponent's counterarguments without violating the principle of charity, and the
very best thesis defense papers succeed in doing exactly that. It is okay to be
tough-minded and rigorous in tackling opposing views, but you must also be
open-minded and fair; it could turn out that your opponent has leveled a fair
criticism of your argument which requires you to revise it accordingly. If this is
the case, then you owe your opponent gratitude for helping you to see the weaknesses
of your argument you were previously unaware of, and thus allowing you to improve
your reasoning.

One useful metaphor is that writing a good philosophy paper is like playing a good
game of chess: you make a thoughtful move, and then your opponent makes a thoughtful
response. Then you reply to that countermove with yet another considered, deliberate
move. Your thesis defense paper should be a similar kind of intelligent dialogue
between yourself and your fair, honest, and accurate understanding of your opponent.
You must include your best thoughts and be self-critical enough to realize when your
opponent has made a move which calls for you to change your strategy. Clinging to a
failing strategy in chess results in a lost game. Narrow-mindedly insisting on the
truth of your unsupported, unexamined assertions in a philosophy paper by
disregarding the counterarguments, criticisms, and objections to your thesis made by
your opponents is a doomed strategy for a thesis paper. The result will be a failing
grade.

VI. COMPLETING YOUR ARGUMENT: THE CONCLUDING PARAGRAPH

Having carefully and methodically led your reader through each progressive step of
your argument in the body of your paper, you must complete your chain of reasoning
with the final link: your conclusion. Now the ultimate conclusion of your argument
is the thesis you said you would argue for at the beginning of your paper in the
introductory paragraph. So the simplest way to write the concluding paragraph is to
summarize your argument. Since you have included a discussion of the criticisms of
your argument, you can briefly review the most weighty objections and then make an
overall evaluation of the success of your argument.

Merely summarizing what you have already argued, however, is not a very interesting
way to end your paper. A more interesting concluding paragraph might explain what
further implications have arisen from your argument. In this way you can point to a
new but related issue which the investigation of your topic has generated. Or
perhaps your inquiry has uncovered an interesting question worth thinking about, but
which you didn't have room to discuss at length in your paper. You might reflect
briefly about such a question in the concluding paragraph.

12 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

Another way to end your paper is to explain why your discoveries are important. You
should already have said something about why your topic is worth discussing in the
introductory paragraph, but the importance of your results cannot be fully
appreciated until after you have worked through each argument and counterargument
step by step.

Remember, this is an argumentative essay on a controversial, philosophical topic; it

is not a geometrical demonstration. Consequently, do NOT write: "Thus I have
conclusively proven that such and such." Instead, weigh the results of your inquiry,
judiciously taking into account the arguments, counterarguments, and replies to
those counterarguments, and write something more like: "I have argued that the
weight of evidence seems to support my thesis that so and so." As always, don't
claim to have shown more than you really have.

VII. FORMAT

A. Paper Quality

Use medium or heavy weight paper, NOT erasable onion skin. Erasable paper encourages
you to correct typographical errors with a pen at the last minute; this almost
always means you will miss several mistakes. Erasable paper is also difficult for
the professor to write comments on.

B. Print Quality

The print should be sufficiently dark and distinct. Don't frustrate your professor
with faint print. You want to make the paper easy to read, not difficult to read.
Therefore, don't hesitate to put a new ribbon into your printer if the print is not
dark and clear.

C. Font and line spacing

Use a 12 pitch (12 characters per inch = elite) font. Using larger pitch (10 or
fewer characters per inch) is another formatting trick which will not fool your
professor.

The entire text of your paper should be double-spaced except for block quotations
(see section E below). Don't triple or quadruple space between paragraphs since this
again is a waste of space and paper.

D. Margins

Your top, bottom, left, and right hand margins should all be one inch wide. Margins
wider than that are a waste of space and a waste of paper. Margins narrower than
that make it difficult for your professor to write comments beside the text.
Widening the margins to stretch a three page paper into a five page paper is one of
the oldest tricks in the book -- your professor will not be fooled by it. If your
paper is too short, then devote your energy to thinking about your topic more
instead of trying to disguise your paper so that it looks longer than it really is.

E. Quotations

Quotations which are longer than three lines should be set off in single-spaced
block paragraphs. The following is an example of such a quotation.

13 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

Compare writing an essay with riding in an automobile. If a passenger

does not know the destination, it will be difficult for him to remember
the roads he has taken. If, on the other hand, the destination is known,
then every left and right turn, every sign and traffic signal, is
organized in relation to that destination. (A. P. Martinich,
Philosophical Writing. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall, 1989. p.32)

Notice that there are no quotation marks around this direct quotation. That is
because the single-spacing of the block paragraph format indicates that it is a
direct quotation, so no additional punctuation is needed.

Quotations which are three lines or shorter should be put within double quotation
marks like this: "Do not confuse rhetorical pyrotechnics for philosophical light"
(A. P. Martinich, Philosophical Writing. Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice Hall,
1989. p. 33). Notice that the period is inserted after the citation, and not inside
the last quotation mark. Be alert: don't make this common mistake. If you directly
quote a passage which contains a word or phrase which itself appears within
quotation marks in the text, then you should put single quotation marks around that
embedded phrase, and double quotation marks around the whole quoted passage. (See
section III.C above for an example of this.)

F. References and Notes

Two different examples of acceptable references are illustrated in section E above.

The first style of reference is the footnote. A superscript number is inserted
immediately after the quotation, and the complete citation information is then
placed at the bottom of the same page on which the quotation is printed.

The second type of reference illustrated above is the parenthetical reference. Here
the complete citation is inserted within parentheses after the quotation. Notice
that the period is placed after the parenthetical reference, not in front of it.

The third type of acceptable reference is the endnote. Instead of placing the
complete citation on the bottom of the same page as the quotation to which it
refers, you should collect all the notes together and put them on a separate page
after the page your concluding paragraph is on. If this style is chosen, a header
reading "ENDNOTES" should be put on the top of the page above the consecutively
ordered notes.

G. The cover page

On the cover page print the TITLE of your paper, your NAME, the professor's name
(spell it correctly: just as "philosophy" has no "v" in it, neither does
"STEPHENS"), the course number and name, and the DATE on which you are actually
turning in your paper. If you are submitting your paper late (i.e. after the due
date), then putting the date when it was due on the cover page is dishonest. Trying
to deceive your professor won't work anyway.

A paper without a title is like a child without a name. The title should give the
reader a good idea about the content of your paper. It should be specific, not
something like "Plato" or "Free Will." Use your imagination and make it clever.
Finding an appropriate title for your paper can be a quite creative process, so
enjoy it and come up with a good one.

H. Bibliographies

14 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

The bibliography is not a place to list several entries which you found in the
library but never actually read in preparing your paper. If you concentrated on the
primary text in analyzing your topic and developed your own arguments, then you may
not have a bibliography at all. In a philosophy paper this is perfectly okay. You
should be concentrating on examining the arguments on your own. Your professor wants
to see the results of your inquiry, not your report of what other philosophers have
said about your topic. It is permissible to draw on what others have said, but then
you should try to incorporate their ideas smoothly into the structure of your thesis
defense. The bibliography allows you to give credit to the sources you have actually
read and benefitted from in stimulating your own thinking about your thesis. Include
all those books, and only those books, in the bibliography that you actually read
parts of and used to inform yourself in writing your paper. Use other sources
intelligently, not mechanically.

I. Page Numbering

Do not number the cover page. The page your introductory paragraph is on should be
labelled "1". Every page after that should be numbered consecutively ("2" and so
forth), including your endnotes page (if you have one) and your bibliography (if you
have one). DON'T FORGET TO NUMBER YOUR PAGES!

J. Stapling

Staple your pages together in the upper left hand corner. Do NOT use a paper clip.
Paper clips can come off too easily and get hooked onto other students' papers. Do
NOT use plastic binders or paper folders; they are a waste of your money.

VIII. POLISHING TOUCHES

A. Rereading, rethinking, rewriting

Now that you have assembled your darkly printed, numbered pages in the correct
format and have stapled them all together, you should be eager to submit your
"completed" paper to your professor. You have put a lot of work into it and you look
forward to receiving your professor's reaction to it. However, at this point it is a
good idea to take your paper, put it in a drawer, and leave it there overnight. Now
if you have put off writing your paper until the night before it is due, then you
have already made your task much more difficult than it needs to be. Papers
generated in the dark of night by stressed out writers with sleep deprived bodies
will appear to be exactly that when your professor reads them in the harsh light of
day. Procrastination invites disaster. You don't want your paper to be a disaster.
Therefore, you don't want to procrastinate in writing your paper.

On the other hand, if you have budgeted your time well, you will be able to have at
least one night's sleep before you have to submit the paper. Then, when the dawn
rouses you from your satisfied slumber and greets you with a new day, you can afford
to relax. You will have had a restful night's sleep, and you can take a refreshing
shower and eat a nutritious breakfast. If you are proud of what you have written,
the next thing you will want to do is deliver it to your professor. STOP. Take your
paper out of the drawer and read it through out loud word for word. You will most
probably discover some typographical errors. Those are easy to fix.

The challenge is to be critical about the content of your own writing. Pretend you
discovered this paper in your roommate's desk. Think of it as someone else's work.
Can you see any flaws in the reasoning? Are there objections the reader could raise?

15 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

Your roommate would welcome your constructive criticisms since the paper could be
revised so as to include them and respond to them. That is all the more reason why
you should exert yourself to find shortcomings in your own paper. Try to be detached
about the success of your thesis defense and search hard for ways to strengthen your
reasoning. Return to the criteria which your professor will use to grade your paper:
originality, clarity, coherence, concision, rigor. There will undoubtedly be parts
of your paper which could be improved in one or more of these respects. Again, if
you have planned well, you will have the time to rethink your arguments and rewrite
your paper in order to incorporate these improvements.

In particular, you should reread those counterarguments you tacked on late last
night. Could you do a better job of presenting those counterarguments? Are the
criticisms of your opponent really as weak as you thought before? The advantage of
rereading your first draft aloud is that you will hear how your arguments sound, and
this can help to reveal their deficiencies. So reread it, rethink it, and then sit
back down at the computer and rewrite it.

B. Proofreading and correcting

The single biggest problem with student papers is that they are not adequately
proofread. If your final copy is sloppy, it will detract from the content of your
paper. Very sloppy typing, spelling, punctuation, and referencing will LOWER YOUR
GRADE. These sentences were not adequately proofread by the students who wrote them:

There are many health related problems do to eating meat.

High saturated fat, suck as meat products, clog up arteries which may cause
strokes and death.
Today's fast moving pace, can supply the Eskimos with food, and it seems that
they are killing because it's traditional and not to feel their belly.

When reading your thesis defense paper, your professor makes no distinction between
a typographical error and a misspelled word. Both are errors due (not "do") to
sloppiness. Errors distract the reader from the presentation of your ideas. Poor
punctuation also detracts from the clarity of your expression. So do run-on
sentences. So do rambling paragraphs. All of these errors should be corrected when
you proofread your paper. Your goal is to submit a paper that is letter perfect.
Each misspelled (or misused) word adds to the impression that you were too lazy and
careless to bother proofreading your paper. Each garbled sentence adds to the
impression that you neglected to read your paper out loud, as you were instructed
to. In contrast, a clean, error-free paper will allow your professor to concentrate
directly on your arguments. A few mistakes will distract your professor by obscuring
your arguments. Multiple mistakes will frustrate the whole effort. As mentioned
above (in section I.C), you should have an attitude of respect toward your audience.
If you have not carefully proofread and corrected your paper, it will be a slap in
your professor's face.

The following are some commonly misspelled words. Misspelling these (or any other)
words betrays poor proofreading:

aesthetic or esthetic
affect (as in: How did that movie affect you?)
argument (not arguement)
atheist
casual (as in: Wear casual clothes.)

16 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

conceive, deceive, perceive, receive (not concieve, etc.)

dependent (not dependant)
effect (as in: What was the cause of that effect? or I effect real
change.)
existence (not existance)
possess (not posses)
premise
separate (not seperate)
than (as in: This is better than that.)
then (as in: If this is true, then that is true.)

The following are some commonly confused homonyms. The spell-checker of a word
processor will not catch these because they are used in the wrong context, not
misspelled:

bare, bear
do, due
imminent, immanent, eminent
principle, principal
there, their (as in: Their books are over there.)

The following are the singular and plural forms of words often used in philosophy:

Singular Plural
basis bases
criterion criteria
datum data
hypothesis hypotheses
phenomenon phenomena
schema schemata
stratum strata
thesis theses

Proofreading Bloopers from Actual Student Papers

IX. FINAL THOUGHTS

As I explained at the very beginning of this manual, writing philosophy papers is

difficult. It was no less so for me, your professor. Since I wrote well in all of my
other classes, I was surprised and frustrated when my earliest philosophy papers
were sharply criticized instead of being roundly praised. I had to struggle mightily
over the course of several semesters in order to overcome the weaknesses I had in
writing philosophy papers. I believe that my philosophical writing improved because
I took to heart my professor's critical comments on my papers and because I resolved
to make every effort not to commit the same mistakes. I came to realize that there
is no single "best" style of philosophical writing which all students should try to
imitate. Rather, my professor's tough-minded input helped me to improve my own style
of philosophical writing. I have worked to make it as effective as I can ever since.
Similarly, I urge you to work hard at improving your own style of philosophical

17 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM
HOW TO WRITE http://puffin.creighton.edu/phil/stephens/writingm.html

writing. Improvement is certainly achievable so long as you want to put the effort
into it; but no one ever reaches the "final" stage of producing a "perfect" piece of
writing. No such object exists in the world. Rather, perfection exists as an ideal
which represents the appropriate goal to aim for in practice. That is why your goal
should be to strive to perfect your writing, knowing full well that improvement is
an ongoing process that never ends. Over the course of history, those pieces of
writing that have approached the ideal have become known as masterpieces.

last revised November 4, 2004

Copyright © 2004, William O. Stephens

18 of 18 8/27/09 11:13 PM