Writing, Rewriting, and Grading Philosophy Papers

Nick Smith

To many students, philosophy essays seem different from papers in other courses.  In actuality, philosophy papers have the same structure as papers in other disciplines.  We're just more obsessive.

The best way to bomb a philosophy paper is to write a stream-of-consciousness ramble boldly asserting your opinions.  Philosophers do not give opinions-they make arguments.  We argue about the very nature and meaning of existence, and these arguments must be built from the ground up.  We take nothing for granted.  Writing a quality philosophy paper can therefore seem absurdly difficult to newcomers to the discipline.  Philosophy requires analytic heavy lifting, but once you develop these muscles you will barely break a sweat writing for your other courses.  Philosophy is the best form of training for law school, for example, because there you will be required to build arguments on every exam and in every class.  Almost everything you study in law school is merely an excuse to practice your argumentation skills, and you can memorize every word the Supreme Court has written and still fail out of law school because you don't know how to write an argument.  Whatever you do with your life, being able to construct and evaluate arguments is very useful.  It is how you distinguish true from false, good from bad, beautiful from ugly, and meaningful from meaningless.

I'll say it again: Philosophers do not give opinions-they make arguments.  So what is an argument?  In short, you start with premises that you expect your readers will believe and convince them that they should believe these premises.  With a few premises in place, you go on to demonstrate why a readers MUST agree with your conclusion if she agrees with your premises.

I want to know WHY you hold your opinions and whether the reasons you give are convincing.  If your reasons are not convincing, you need to make a better argument.  You many even need to change your position.  Whenever you make a claim, ask yourself WHY this claim is true.  Give the best answer you can, and you will then be doing philosophy.  For example, you might claim that "Abortion is murder."  Why?  "Because a fetus is a person."  And why is that?  "Because it has human DNA."  So does a booger, so why does that matter?  Etcetera.  Whenever you make a claim you should imagine me asking you why you think that it is right.  The more "whys" you answer, the deeper your analysis will go and the more likely you are to sink your teeth into some bedrock problem of philosophy.  You cannot hide behind your beliefs, emotions, intuitions, religion, or even the claims of famous philosophers, and some students find that they feel "naked" thinking in this way.  You are alone with your arguments, struggling to figure out for yourself what is right and what is wrong.  All of those questions that you've bottled up since you were a curious tyke should be flowing freely.  You needn't discover a groundbreaking new idea in the history of philosophy to get an A, but you probably will be blazing a trail in your own intellectual development.

The truly amazing thing about philosophy, which I hope you come to realize in my courses, is that the "big questions" are not academic busy work.  They are directly related to the meaning and value of our lives.  Once you experience the gravity of these problems, you will want to solve them for yourself.  You will need to solve them for yourself.  This can get messy because you may run into a question that you have no  idea how to answer, yet you realize that it is essential to many of the beliefs you hold most dearly.  Here philosophy feels as important as religion, but instead of relying on faith you think for yourself.  When you reach this stage you write for more than just a grade in an institution, but for your own ends.  You will become a more thoughtful, reasonable, and better person.

Although philosophy essays can take many forms, the following guidelines should help you understand what a successful paper will accomplish and how to go about the process.

1. Before You Even Begin to Write the Paper

Students often feel like they have millions of ideas about a paper swirling around in their minds and they don't know where to begin.  The first thing you should do is get every idea that you have about the topic out onto paper in its most basic shorthand form.  You will notice that you actually have a half dozen or so ideas.  I suggested opening a word processing document and dumping all of your relevant ideas onto the page.  Also enter pertinent notes from class and passages from the readings that you find particularly elucidating.  Note where you'll need to answer a "why". 

Once all of these ideas are out, you will begin to see how the pieces fit together.  It will look something like a chessboard, and you should start moving pieces around.  I spend a lot of time staring at the screen at this stage, and it's usually when I'm thinking hardest.  You will see that this group of thoughts speaks to the same issue, that this idea follows this one, and that this quote supports this claim.  Strategically move the pieces around, and order will come from chaos.  You can now divide the paper into sections and subsections, and an outline will emerge.  I like to break papers into sections with headings, as I have done with this discussion of writing, because it makes the paper's organizational structure obvious for both reader and author.  THIS IS THE PROCESS OF OUTLINING, AND IF YOU DON'T GO THROUGH THIS STAGE YOUR PAPER IS DOOMED.  As you'll notice when doing the reading for the course, it's easy to get lost in philosophical arguments and the landmarks remind us all where we're going.

Now that you have a sense for the structure of the paper, you can dig into analyzing your argument itself.  Does it add up?  Where are the gaps and soft spots?  What are the counterarguments, and where will they spring up?  How will you respond?  At this point you will undoubtedly find that you need to return to the texts for clarification and perhaps to dig up more support for your argument.  Plug all of these materials into the structure, continue to move the pieces around until you have a solid framework, and you have an outline.  You probably haven't written a complete sentence yet, but you've done the most important work in the paper.

2. Thesis and Introduction

Now you must start thinking about precisely what you will be arguing.  As anyone who has taken a course from me will tell you, I will hound you until your thesis is perfect.  You must craft a clear, direct, interesting, relevant, original, and engaging claim that you will argue for throughout the paper.  The thesis should lay bare the logic and frame of the argument.  In other words, the thesis should state each premise and how the premises add up to the conclusion.  THE MOST RELIABLE WAY TO BEGIN A THESIS IS WITH THE WORDS: "In this paper I will argue...."

If your thesis is not exactly right, I immediately know that the paper cannot earn an 'A.'  You should boil down the entire argumentative structure of the paper into a one or two sentence thesis to provide the reader with a map of what is to come and explains the purpose of each subsequent paragraph.  Your thesis and introduction must set up each move of your argument so that the subsequent sentences unpack and reinforce the previously stated thesis.  It might look something like: "Mill's utilitarianism, holding XXXXX [here mentioning briefly the aspects of the doctrine relevant to your argument] has fallen prey to the criticism [here stating a clear abbreviated version of the charge].  Mill defends against this challenge by [here a careful, accurate, and quick rendering of the core of his retort] and/but ultimately succeeds/fails to hold off this attack [and here the most crystallized version of your personal assessment of the exchange including reference to the reasons and argument you utilize to embrace or assault the doctrine]."

An unsuccessful thesis will be too thin, cryptic, and without reference to the line of reasoning that will guide the paper.  This leaves the reader to begin a journey to a destination that hasn't been clearly described with a vague map that she has little reason to trust.  Be bold, clear, and comprehensive.  Don't worry if your thesis is a paragraph long.  Your thesis is your conclusion (or better yet, a summary of your argument), and therefore it can be difficult to write it at the beginning of the process.  Just as you do not know the result of a scientific experiment until after you have completed it, you cannot know your actual thesis until after you have taken all the steps to prove it.  In other words, your experiment may fail, and you will need to adjust your thesis accordingly.

You must also consider the scope of your thesis.  Is it too broad, for example attempting to compare Hume, Kant, Hegel, and Nietzsche on beauty in an eight page paper?  That sounds like enough for a large book or series of books.  Design a thesis that allows you to dig into each component of the argument you want to make.

And please get right to your thesis in the first paragraph, better yet, the first sentence.  Spare me the openings like "Philosophers have debated the problem of XXXX for millennia...."

3. The Argument

Remember that the goal of the paper is to make a convincing argument.  After setting out the map of the terrain you will traverse in making your argument, you must proceed, step by step, to reveal your evidence and prove that you are right.

Every sentence should have a purpose, and you should feel like you are laying down bricks to build your argument.  Your premises are the building blocks of your argument, and you take time to properly place and set each one.

You define terms that need it, and you explain the concepts.  You provide supporting evidence each time you make a claim of any sort.  Evidence may take the form of illuminating examples, textual support, explicit demonstrations of sound reasoning, or any other effectively persuasive device.  You do not rely on unwarranted presuppositions, meaning that you do not found your argument on an undefined contentious claim (for example claiming that happiness is the most important thing in life without arguing why).  You demonstrate consistent mastery of the issues and texts.  When referring to the reading, you provide accurate and defensible accounts of the relevant aspects of the texts, and you display sensitivity to the conceptual nuances of the theories.  You do not omit obvious support for your claim.  All evidence consistently moves toward establishing the thesis, and the support is properly laid out and well integrated into the paper's argumentative framework.  You state all claims as concisely as possible, and all material is immediately relevant.

You take opposing positions and potential weaknesses in your position very seriously.  You lay out the criticisms of your position in their most robust and meaningful form and do not misrepresent them so that you can avoid their real challenge.  You analyze and evaluate both your position and the opposing position, and you honestly confront and surmount the potential criticisms with further sound argumentation.  If you cannot solve a problem presented by a counter-argument, you can revise your argument slightly, change your argument altogether, or admit the strength of the counter argument but explain why it does not change your position in light of other issues you find more important.

You go beyond rehearsing the typical points, and you establish an independence from the texts.  At the conclusion of your analysis, the merit of the thesis falls off of the paper like ripe fruit from a tree.

4. Style and Mechanics

You perform this work with elegance and grace.  The organizational structure builds a strong and clear frame, and the sentences fill in a robust argument.  You demonstrate integrity and intelligence without becoming pompous.  The entire paper has been refined and does not have sloppy mistakes.

5. Rewriting

Rewriting is even more difficult than writing.  Presuming that you have accomplished everything described above, there comes a point of diminishing returns working on your paper before anyone else reads it.  At this point I suggest following an old bit of writer's advice: take out half of the words.  Every sentence can be tightened up, and you will find that trimming your language of unnecessary words will improve your writing significantly.  Also, this is the time to read your paper aloud to yourself.  You will see the paper from a different angle.

You submit the paper to me and I return it to you with a dozen paragraph-long comments, each of which you could write another entire paper responding to.  Now you think your paper stinks, you're sick of it, and you check the calendar to see if it's too late to drop the class.

You should start over with a new outline.  Re-outline what your paper actually says, and then plug my comments into your outline.  Determine which of my comments you think merit responses or fundamental changes to the paper.  The structure of the paper may need to be rebuilt from scratch.  Or maybe the structure is sound, but your first paper concluded right where I thought it was getting interesting.  Analyze my comments, and argue back.  The outline will expand like an accordion, and you will again be staring at it like a chess board trying to determine how the pieces work together.  Now you're back to "Before You Even Begin to Write the Paper," and you are truly rewriting.  All good papers go through this process, as even professional philosophers do not hatch completed arguments.

6. Questions to Consider When Writing and Rewriting

After you draft your essay, try to read it as if you were someone else reviewing your writing.  Consider the following questions:

1. What is the paper's thesis?  Is it clear, direct, and interesting?  Does the author provide a map that the argument will follow?  How might the thesis be improved?

2. How does the author go about making her argument?  Is this strategy effective?  Has she utilized the most effective structure to build the argument?  How might she improve the argumentative structure of the paper?

3. Does the author effectively a) explain, b) utilize, and c) analyze the relevant texts?

4. Is the argument convincing and well-supported?  Does the argument rest on any meaningful presuppositions?  On what points do you challenge the author?  Articulate your opposition.

5. Does the author anticipate counter-arguments to her position and does she candidly address these obstacles?

6. Does each word, sentence, and paragraph reflect a controlled and graceful engagement with the material, or is the paper held back by awkward language?  Point to specific areas where problems with language arise.

7. Does the paper demonstrate courageous, independent, and critical thinking?

8. What are the three greatest strengths of this paper?

9. What are the three areas the author should think about most seriously during the revision process?

7. All of this Reduced to Grades

Ultimately, I must convert your paper into a letter grade according to its relationship to the objectives above.  Here is my general grading rubric:

'A' papers:

• have a perfect thesis (see above) which states the premises and conclusion of the argument

• make a clear and sophisticated argument with a rigid analytic framework, meaning that all of the premises are properly explained and add up to a viable argument

• dig down a few levels of "why" questions to get to genuinely difficult and important problems

• demonstrate fluency in the appropriate texts by citing and explaining them and don't leave out textual support where it would advance the argument.  They also do not include discussions of the text that are irrelevant to their argument

• do not simply recite the texts but analyze them, explaining where and why the author agrees and disagrees with the texts

• use this analysis of the texts to advance their own independent criticism of the texts or application of the texts

• often use original examples to support their arguments

• present counterarguments in their most challenging form and honestly respond to these issues.  Sometimes even the best papers admit when they do not have a convincing response to a counterargument

• do not need to be literary masterpieces.  Simple, clear, mistake-free, and well-organized writing is all you need

• are often the product of rewriting after thoroughly absorbing my comments and re-outlining the paper.  Remember that I allow you to rewrite infinitely

• at the 700 seminar level, will be suitable for publication in an undergraduate journal or submission as a graduate school/law school, etc., writing sample.

'B' papers:

• fall short of the criteria for 'A' papers

• have a pretty good thesis, but the thesis is often incomplete and too skimpy

• have a sound structure

• make a sophisticated argument with some success

• may be missing a premise or have the premises in the wrong place

• often do not quite accomplish the objectives stated in the thesis or otherwise don't earn their conclusion

• demonstrate competency in the texts by citing and explaining them correctly and when appropriate, but don't offer enough meaty analysis.  'B' papers often explain the material as well as 'A' papers, but don't evaluate it as thoroughly.  'B' papers do not have the same command of the material as 'A' papers

• rest on a relevant presupposition or two or makes uncritical assumptions

• address some counterarguments well, but don't handle all of them convincingly, fail to appreciate the full force of the challenge, or omit some counterarguments altogether

• can have all of the qualities of an 'A' paper but also have extraneous stuff that gets in the way

'C' papers:

• have a vague or otherwise undeveloped thesis

• try to make an argument but never get it off of the ground or lose sight of their argument and fall into the dreaded stream-of-consciousness paper

• suffer from organizational problems and look like their arguments were not fully outlined before they were written

• seem to understand the material but appear afraid to dig into the text and do battle with the problems

• discuss the issues, but only superficially and passively

• make an error in reasoning that must be corrected

• make assertions without justifying them

• address only some of the important counterarguments

• stray off-topic

• are sloppy

'D' papers:

• don't have a thesis

• don't make an argument

• read like a book report

• make grave mistakes in argumentation or understanding

• fudge to make the minimum word requirements

• are otherwise a mess

'F' papers:

• If you satisfy the word minimum, make an honest attempt to complete the assignment, and don't cheat, you will pass.  The vast majority of 'F's in my classes are for incomplete work or plagiarism.

*And remember that if you make a genuine effort on the first draft, you can rewrite any paper for a grade as many times as you can endure.