<p>I just got my grade back on a paper and it was not good.</p>
<p>Modus ponens.</p>
<p>yeah. most philosophy papers aren’t good on a student’s first few tries. it’s very different from an English paper. Starting is the hardest. Philosophers love hearing you say “I”, whereas English papers absolutely forbid you to do this. The main thing is to be as clear as you can, and transition is important. You should draft an outline before you begin. You can’t just start writing out of nowhere for a philosophy paper. This is one of those cases where free-writing may not help as much. You should know your paper from beginning to end before you begin to write. Not necessarily everything, but just a clear idea of your arguments before you begin.</p>
<p>I am in a tough philosophy class here at BU, and my professor posted a guide to writing a good philosophy paper. Here is the link. It has some very helpful tips. The key things to convey are the conclusion you will be writing toward and the premesis that will lead you to that conclusion. Make sure to ARGUE your point and present multiple counterarguments that you can defend against. I’d definitely read the guidebook by my prof (in PDF)</p>
<p><a href=“http://people.bu.edu/pbokulic/class/writing-hints-07.pdf[/url]”>http://people.bu.edu/pbokulic/class/writing-hints-07.pdf</a></p>
<p>try this for advice:
<a href=“http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html[/url]”>http://www.jimpryor.net/teaching/guidelines/writing.html</a></p>
<p>As a Philosophy major, I’ll vouch for the PDF shared by Devilsrule. It addressed everything that came immediately to my mind (and a lot more). The advice seemed strong through the end of page 3, or #23-ish. After that, it’s still good, but a bit pickier and/or specific to that course/professor.</p>
<p>Just to reiterate one point from the PDF guide: it really is okay (and good) to state your intentions! Students are generally taught that “In this paper, I will show X by Y, and then I will blah blah blah” is a horrible jumping off point, but it’s basically expected in philosophical writing. Philosophical arguments can become quite complex, so such “signposts” are helpful to your readers. Note that this “statement of intent” is (probably) not your thesis.</p>
<p>I also want to echo a previous poster: outline, outline, outline! I would always start with my thesis and build from there in whatever order the ideas came to me. I’d try to sort out the main ideas of my body paragraphs first, and then I’d add in rough descriptions of my arguments. Finally, I’d go through my sources and find the quotes I wanted to use and I’d stick them in the appropriate places. At the end of this process, I could put the random stacks of notes and books away and work directly from my printed off outline. No clutter. I’d also highlight the outline as I typed quotes and ideas into the paper so that I knew I had covered everything. I’d often spend only a tiny fraction of my time and effort on the paper itself…most of my energy went into the outline. Of course, this was only my process, but I suggest finding something that works for you and will keep you similarly well-organized.</p>
<p>Finally, above all, if you’re unhappy with the grade from your first paper, talk to your professor. Make sure you understand what you need to improve. Try to write your next paper ahead of time and bring a rough draft in. If you don’t have the time to do that or your professor won’t let you, then go in with your ideas…make sure that your topic is okay and that you’re understanding the arguments properly. Some students think that philosophy is kind of an intellectual free-for-all, all about opinions and personal perspectives, so they take big risks with their interpretations. While this can be admirable and effective, it can also be dangerous. Don’t be surprised if a professor tells you flat out “No. Sorry. That’s just plain wrong. The argument doesn’t imply that.” For this reason, I generally think it’s good (especially if you’re unsure of yourself) to run your ideas by the professor before running too far with them.</p>
<p>Good luck the next tme around! The good news is that once you get the hang of writing philosophy papers, they’re relatively fun to write. You get to throw a lot of seemingly meaningless conventions to the wind :)</p>
<p>Thanks, for real. I really appreciate it. </p>
<p>Yeah, I’m an econ/math/finance type dude if my screen name is any hint. I decided to take “Intro to Moral Philosophy” because I never get a chance to write/read with my otherwise very quant. course load. </p>
<p>Anyhow, I just got a “C” on my Aristotle paper, and needless to say, wasn’t very happy. My prof said most student’s end up with a B- for the semester. It is very rare for a student to get an “A.”</p>
<p>My goal is to get at least a “B” on my Hume paper. I knew this class would be a challenge for me.</p>
<p>Also, really good advice from the link in the post right before mine (which I hadn’t seen before):
**
The comments I find myself making on students’ philosophy papers most often are these: </p>
<p>“Explain this claim” or “What do you mean by this?” or “I don’t understand what you’re saying here” </p>
<p>“This passage is unclear (or awkward, or otherwise hard to read)” “Too complicated” “Too hard to follow” “Simplify” </p>
<p>“Why do you think this?” “This needs more support” “Why should we believe this?” “Explain why this is a reason to believe P” “Explain why this follows from what you said before” </p>
<p>“Not really relevant” </p>
<p>“Give an example?” </p>
<p>Try to anticipate these comments and avoid the need for them! **</p>
<p>Once again, just reiterating what you’ll read for yourself anyway :p</p>
<p>Also, if you know there are weak spots in your argument, don’t assume that your professor won’t notice. Your best bet is probably to address them head-on and figure out a brief argument for why obvious attacks will fail, or for why the weak spots are inconsequential.</p>
<p>I was just about to ask what class you’re in and which prof you have, but of course, I don’t need that information now.</p>
<p>I’m in the same class and I’m happy that I got an A on my Aristotle paper. Then again, I am a prospective philosophy major (with an economics minor at that).</p>
<p>The best advice I can give is to be clear and straightforward. It seems like an easy thing to do, but it’s really not. A lot of time has to be invested into clearing up confusing sentences and the like. Structure your paper well and make sure every paragraph has a point that is clear and easy to understand. Transitions help make your paper flow better too. Define important terms and as Student615 suggests, don’t think weak spots will go by unnoticed. A close reading of the philosophical text is crucial.</p>
<p>Hume looks challenging, and Kant even more so. Good luck with the rest of the course.</p>
<p>^lol…that’s impressive, though. Philosophy is a hard major. I’ve done all the econ courses (and more) you’ll have to take for a minor, so it would be cool if we could help each other. If not, I’ll just bug my TA. This course was meant to challenge me in a completely different way. I guess I just have to focus on improving and not beat myself up.</p>
<p>I’m taking philosophy this semester (engineering major) and one of the first things the TA said was that style doesn’t matter. Keep it short, sweet, and precise. The methods they teach you in english (“tell me what you’re going to tell me, tell me, then tell me what you told me”) just don’t work.</p>
<p>Me, I wrote my first paper (on Heraclitus) like I would write a math proof, and I got one of the highest grades in the class (A-)</p>