General Guidelines for Writing Philosophy Papers

The material below is divided as follows:


Necessary Features of a Good Argumentative Essay

(1) A Thesis

An argumentative essay has to have a thesis that the author is intending to defend. Quite simply, if a paper has no overall thesis, then that paper is not an argumentative essay. This thesis should be made clear up front, right in the introduction, and then the reader has a clear idea of what the overall point of the paper is supposed to be.

(2) An Argument for that Thesis

Having a thesis is indeed necessary for a good argumentative essay, but an argumentative essay also requires an argument for that thesis. If there's no argument, then the essay fails to be an argumentative essay. This argument should be clearly stated in its own clearly indicated section of the paper, its logical structure should be clear, and its premises should be defended.

(3) At Least One Objection Considered to that Thesis or Argument

It may seem a bit strange to consider objections to one's own thesis or argument, but a good argumentative essay will do so. For think about how much better the paper will be if you do it: Critical readers will be looking for weak points in your argument, and if you anticipate their criticisms and respond to them in the paper itself then those critics have to look elsewhere to find a way to refute you. Also, try to consider and respond to the best criticism that might be raised against you--good critics won't waste their time on weak objections. In a short paper, there's really only room to consider one objection, so make it a good one and give it the appropriate attention.

(4) A Clear Overall Structure to the Essay

Good written work of any kind will be clear in all respects. The meaning of every word and phrase will be clear to the reader, and the point of every paragraph will be clear in terms of what that paragraph is about and how it fits into the rest of the paper. Furthermore, the whole paper will have a clear structure: The main thesis will be clearly stated at the beginning, the paper will have individual sections for exegetical material, statements of arguments, defenses of their premises, and considering objections and replies to them. The overall structure of the paper will be indicated in the introduction to the paper, and a conclusion will summarize the essay and wrap things up.

(5) Clear Exegetical Material

Argumentative essays tend to consider either an argument or a position, and either criticize that argument or position or defend it against an objection. This requires a section of the paper that clearly lays out what that argument or position is. If someone's argument is to be considered in the paper, then that argument has to be clearly stated along with what reasons might be given for accepting the premises. If a philosophical view or position is to be considered in the paper, then that position has to be clearly stated along with reasons for why that position might seem to be attractive. Only then will a good argumentative essay go on to consider criticism of that argument or position.

(6) Impeccable Mechanics

Perhaps this goes without saying, but all good essays have impeccable mechanics. Every word is spelled correctly, there are no awkward sentences, and every sentence is grammatically correct. All mechanical problems should be eliminated during the revising and proofreading process.

General Stylistic Considerations

Your paper should satisfy the following general guidelines: It should be the appropriate length for the assignment in question, typed, and double-spaced with one-inch margins on all four sides of the text. Use a normal 10-, 11-, or 12-point font size. Citations must be included as needed following the MLA or APA style guidelines (footnote-, endnote-, or in-text-citations are acceptable--just be consistent). Number the pages and be sure to give your essay a title that fits with the overall topic of the paper.

Types of Critical Essays

Philosophical essays on the whole are critical papers, and they fall into two main types. First, a paper may examine a particular position (or thesis) regarding some philosophical issue, or present a new position. After an exegetical section that explains the position clearly, one then either defends it from criticism or argues against the position. Furthermore, the paper should then consider possible responses to your defense or criticism.

Second, a paper may examine a particular argument. As for the first type of paper, one should first lay out the argument as clearly as possible. Next, one should give further reasons in support of the premises (which would most likely be the reasons given by the author(s) of the argument). Then, give either a defense of the argument against a criticism or a critical attack upon the argument. This can be addressed in a number of ways: One might examine the logical form of the argument and see if it is indeed of good logical form. Or, one might critique one or more of the premises of the argument (by either challenging the author’s support for the premise or by giving an independent argument against that premise). Finally, one should anticipate responses (as before).

If the paper is a short one (five pages or less) you should focus sharply on what you take to be the one best criticism of the position or the one best criticism of the argument you are considering. If you are defending the position or argument, defend it against that criticism and then consider responses. If you are criticizing the position or argument, present your criticism as clearly as possible and then consider responses.

Structural Considerations

In my experience, there are a number of ways to improve a paper from a purely formal or structural point of view. What is meant here is that no matter what the quality of the content of a paper might be (i.e., the point being made and the arguments given in defense of it), if the material is not presented clearly and precisely then the overall quality of the paper will suffer greatly. A few ways to ensure the overall clarity of a paper are as follows:

(1) Make the introduction clear and concise. This opening portion of a paper should let the reader know (briefly) what the paper will examine, what arguments will be considered, what responses will be considered, etc. In short, the introduction should give the structure of the paper to follow in a clear and concise way. If the introduction of a paper isn’t clear, the rest of the paper isn’t likely to be clear either. For our purposes your introduction should only be a few sentences at most.

(2) Organize the paper in a clearly structured way. Divide the paper into sections that follow each other in a logical way. Consider again the suggestions above for a paper examining an argument. After introducing such a paper, the logical progression of topics would be to first present the argument under consideration, then the criticism (or defense) of it, and finally a consideration of the best possible responses. Also, be sure to use appropriate transitional points to be perfectly clear as to when one section is over and another begins.

(3) Present only one argument per paragraph. This might seem odd, but following this advice serves two functions. First, presenting only one argument per paragraph forces you to present the argument clearly and completely. Second, there is little chance of confusing the argument with any other material introducing it or responding to it if the argument gets its own paragraph in the paper. Keeping arguments separate (for example, an argument separated from a criticism of it) makes for a clearer presentation.

(4) There’s no need to try to sound deep and profound. Being verbose and obscure might make your paper sound more intelligent, but the danger is that the paper will suffer from a lack of clarity. There is plenty of room for elegant and aesthetically pleasing writing in philosophy, but without clarity your ideas won’t come through as effectively.

(Some of the preceding points were taken from Michael Tooley’s handout "Writing Essays in Epistemology." See his page for more on this.)

Topics

I should also say a few things about topics for papers. If the length of your paper will be relatively short, it should focus very sharply upon a specific argument or position we have discussed or read recently. If your topic is too broad, it will be almost impossible to write a successful paper. For instance, an attempt to defend the claim that all truth is relative to the observer would probably require considerably more space than three to four pages, especially considering the myriad of replies one must refute in order to properly consider objections. If you’re worried about whether your topic is appropriate for the space allotted, or if you would like to discuss your idea at some length, please don’t hesitate to come see me.

Planning Your Argument

Planning an argumentative essay is not always easy, since it’s often difficult just to get started on a critical analysis of a position or argument. Naturally, first you need to understand precisely what the position or argument is. Then you might consider some of the following general issues. Of course, very few of the following considerations will find their way into the finished product, but you should think about them in the course of planning your paper.

(1) For analysis of an argument, consider these issues:

(1a) Support for the argument’s conclusion

  • If the argument is claimed to be deductive, is the argument valid or invalid? I.e., does the truth of the premises guarantee the truth of the conclusion?
  • If the argument inductive, is the argument strong? I.e., does the truth of the premises significantly raise the probability of the truth of the conclusion?
  • Is there a formal or informal fallacy present? Sometimes an argument is given which is invalid at first sight, but would be valid with the addition of an extra premise that the arguer seems to be assuming. Such missing premises are often highly problematic.
  • If the argument looks to be of poor form, is there any to recast the argument in such a way that it is of good form?

(1b) Support for the argument’s premises

  • Are there any premises that appear to be suspect?
  • If so, can you think of an argument for the negation of that premise?
  • Often there are secondary arguments given in favor of a premise. Are there any weaknesses in those arguments?

(1c) Assumptions

  • Are there any crucial assumptions that aren’t adequately defended?
  • Are there any crucial assumptions that are dubious or outright false? Can you give a good argument against that assumption?

(1d) Definitions

  • If the philosophical position or thesis contains or presupposes a definition, can you think of a counterexample to the definition?
  • Remember that definitions may be faulted for being either too broad or too narrow.

(1e) Consequences

  • Even if the argument appears to be compelling, what are the consequences of the argument’s conclusion?
    Such consequences may be in conflict with other, better-defended positions.
  • There is a method of argumentation known as reductio ad absurdum ("reduction to absurdity"). If a contradiction can be derived from a set of propositions then at least one of those propositions must be false.
  • One or more of the premises may also have problematic consequences.


(2) For analysis of a position or thesis, consider these issues:

(2a) Alternative views

  • What are the alternatives to the position being considered? Remember that there may be more than just one alternative.
  • Is the support for one or more of the alternatives stronger than the support for the position being considered?

(2b) Instances of a general claim (see above, (1e))

  • A philosophical position is usually a general claim with many particular instances. A position’s instances might be problematic or even inconsistent with one another or with other established claims.

(2c) Support for the position

  • As elaborated on in (1), the argument or arguments in support of a position may be faulty in one way or another. For any philosophical position the crucial issue is the reason (or reasons) given in favor of that position.

Back to top

Dennis Earl (email: dearl@coastal.edu)
Department of Philosophy and Religion
Coastal Carolina University
P.O. Box 261954
Conway, SC 29528-6054

Last Modified November 23, 2004