Length and Scope. The assigned topic calls for a combination of textual analysis—presenting the views of one or two philosophers—and critical evaluation based on that presentation. Since this is a relatively short paper (as is the other one you will write for this class), you will need to pace yourself in order to cover all parts of the assignment. This assignment requires you to prepare an outline: you might want to use such an outline from the outset as a working tool in order to keep track of what you intend to accomplish, even if your outline (the structure of your paper) changes during the writing process—perhaps especially then!
Introductions, Conclusions, and Repetitions. There is a tendency in certain kinds of writing classes and manuals to insist on a formula calling for the restatement of the "thesis" of the paper in the introductory paragraph, and again at the end of the paper. In brief papers such as this one, you needn't devote too much space to restatements because your reader can easily remember on page 6 what was announced on page 1. Instead, make sure that your paper moves somewhere, that each sentence and paragraph brings your inquiry forward, successively building upon what has already been accomplished. A good test for this as you are writing your paper is to ask: Could the sentence that appears here on page 5 have been written exactly the same way back on page 1, or does it result from the work I have done on pages 2–4? If the former is the case, it is probably necessary to restructure the paper or to rewrite parts of it. (If what I have said here is unclear, please talk to me about it.)
This is not to say that opening and closing paragraphs don't serve a function: You should indeed begin your paper by introducing the reader to the scope and purpose of your paper. But do so not by preempting your conclusion, but by arousing your reader's interest in what you have to say, by putting the central problem of the paper in as compelling terms as possible. Make your reader care enough about the outcome or upshot of what you are presenting to want to read on.
Logical Relationships and Transitions. A crucial way to make the structure or flow of your paper (the logical relationships between the ideas in it) transparent is by explicitly indicating these sorts of "transitions." But beware of the lure of periodically inserting words like "however" and "thus" simply because they look good, i.e., seem to suggest a logical relationship that simply isn't there. Learn more about recognizing real and artificial transitions by reading up on "velcro" in this handout from the Harvard Writing Center: "Transitioning: Beware of Velcro." Or look here for more ideas on "Transitional Devices."
Citations and Quotations. These paper topics—like this course in general—ask you to consider certain philosophical problems by way of a careful consideration of the views articulated in the texts we have read. You will need to provide evidence for your interpretation of a philosopher's views by means of citation—mentioning or discussing his or her ideas—or direct quotation of passages from their text. Whenever you cite/report an idea or quote a passage or term, you must provide a bibliographical reference (in a footnote or endnote if it is your first reference to a work, or in parentheses in the body of your paper for subsequent references) to the source of the citation or quotation. (Failing to cite the source of an idea or using a passage or key phrases from a text, whether consciously or unconsciously, constitutes plagiarism.)
Be careful, however, to cite and to quote only as much as is actually helpful in supporting the points you are trying to make. Don't let quotations or paraphrase take over your paper; its primary aim is to communicate your interpretations and arguments. Never quote or paraphrase at length without providing an interpretation/elucidation of what is being said and making clear its importance for your purposes.
Relevance. Make sure it is at all times clear to the reader what a given statement in your paper contributes to its overall aim. For instance, do not report the views of the philosopher you are discussing on matters unrelated to your appointed topic.
Presenting Your Opinion/Interpretation. Just as it is necessary to substantiate your presentations of someone else's views by means of citation and quotation, do not offer opinions of your own unless you are prepared to substantiate them with reasons or arguments. If you end up criticizing an author or position you have discussed, make sure you are not disagreeing simply for the sake of disagreeing. A good way to proceed is to make the case for the author's view as strong as possible (giving it the benefit of the doubt) before launching your critique. If you do this, you give your reader the opportunity to verify that you have properly understood the author's view and have based your assessment on a full consideration of its possible merits.
Note that it is perfectly acceptable to write a paper that doesn't wind up fully agreeing or fully disagreeing with the position you have laid out. Indeed, these paper topics don’t require you to give any opinion. There are many other ways to convey that the views under discussion are worthy of your and your reader's consideration.
Grammar. Look over the quizzes you have been handed back to get a sense of where your own problems with grammar tend to lie. One pervasive grammar problem we have discussed in class concerns the use of pronouns, e.g., "it," "this," "such," "both," "all," "that idea": Check that they all refer to something unambiguously. You can test this by trying to spell out which of the words from the preceding sentence(s) would replace to produce the meaning you are aiming for.
Formal Matters. Your papers should be double-spaced and have normal (one-inch) margins, with any long quotes (more than three lines) set off in separate indented, single-spaced paragraphs. Choose some accepted, consistent, economical style for bibliographical citations. Abbreviated parenthetical page references in the text are probably the best option for most citations--just make sure you establish what abbreviations you're using--e.g., just the author name when only one work by that author is under discussion, or RR for Cohen's Religion of Reason, etc., or a note that explains: "All page references in the text, unless otherwise indicated, are to Martin Buber, I and Thou." Please number and staple the pages you hand in.
Those of you who use Word for Windows may run into the dreaded footnote bug: footnotes that refuse to stay on the same page as their reference numbers. A guide to solving this problem has been posted on the MS Word MVP FAQ Site.
Help. Beyond your discussions with me and with each other, you are encouraged to use the resources of McMaster's Writing Clinic, Center for Student Development.
© Dana Hollander, 1998-2004