PHIL
332: PAPER AND DISCUSSION GUIDELINES
1. DISCUSSION TOPICS. It is not necessary to discuss all the topics
on the list of discussion topics. You
will need to coordinate with the other discussion leaders to decide which
topics you are going to focus on and to make sure that no two discussion leaders
choose the same side of the same issue.
When there are two (or more) sides to an issue, it is best if different discussion
leaders argue each side of the issue.
Each discussion leader should plan a 5-minute presentation. It is a good idea to begin your presentation
by reading your discussion question to the class. After all sides on an issue have been heard,
the class will be given an opportunity to ask you further questions.
2. PREPARATION FOR DISCUSSION. The discussion questions relate to the views
of one or more of the authors we have read.
Ground your discussion in the text.
As discussion leader, you should be very familiar with what those authors
actually say on the issue. A good way to
prepare for the discussion and for writing the paper is to identify every
passage in the reading relevant to the issue you are discussing. Don't try to review all these passages in
class. You can call upon them as
necessary.
3. MEET WITH ME IN ADVANCE. Discussion leaders should plan to meet with
me before they do their presentations to make sure they understand the point of
the question they will be discussing. You
can make an appointment during my office hours or talk to me after the class directly
preceding the discussion session.
4. PAPER TOPIC.
Your paper should be on one of the topics discussed in class, though not
necessarily on the topic for which you were the discussion leader. Your paper should be well grounded in the
text. It should also reflect the
discussion that took place in class and should go beyond it.
5.
PAPERS SHOULD BE 5-7 PAGES (300 WORDS PER PAGE). THEY SHOULD BE PREPARED AS WORD DOCUMENTS (OR
IN RTF FORMAT). THEY SHOULD BE SUBMITTED
TO ME (wtalbott@u.washington.edu)
AS EMAIL ATTACHMENTS BY MIDNIGHT ON THE MONDAY AFTER THE CLASS IN WHICH THE
TOPIC WAS DISCUSSED. THE FILENAME SHOULD BEGIN WITH YOUR LAST NAME.
There
is no penalty for length per se, but papers exceeding seven double-spaced pages
of text (2100 words) will be penalized, if they could have been shortened by
careful editing. (Footnotes may appear
on a separate page.) Although papers are
evaluated chiefly on their philosophical merits, grammar, spelling, and diction
will also be evaluated. You are expected
to express your thoughts in clear, grammatical, English sentences.
6. CITE FULLY AND ACCURATELY. Make sure you accurately state the position
of any author you discuss. Any time you
quote an author or attribute a proposition to an author, the quotation or
attribution must be supported by a citation to the text, with page
numbers. YOU MAY NOT CITE ME AS AN
AUTHORITY ON WHAT AN AUTHOR SAYS (UNLESS I AM THE AUTHOR!). YOU MUST CITE THE AUTHOR HIM/HERSELF. Where the reference is to a text in the
assigned readings, it is sufficient to provide page references in parentheses
immediately after the quotation or attribution.
In all other cases, provide a full bibliographic reference in a footnote
or endnote. The page limit on the paper
applies to the text of the paper only.
Footnotes are free.
7. TO SHOW THAT YOU UNDERSTAND AN AUTHOR'S
POSITION, IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT TO SIMPLY PARROT THE AUTHOR. Where you quote the author, make sure you
explain in your own words the significance of the quoted material. It is often helpful to use your own examples
to clarify the views of the author you are discussing.
8.
USE CARE IN INTERPRETING AN AUTHOR, PARTICULARLY SOMEONE YOU DISAGREE
WITH. If on your interpretation of an
author, the author either is inconsistent or has made an obvious error of
reasoning, begin by assuming that you have misinterpreted the author. Reread the relevant passages carefully to see
if you can put together a consistent position that is not obviously
erroneous. If you
cannot do so, or come to my office hours or make an appointment to discuss it
with me.
9. CAREFULLY DISTINGUISH VIEWS THAT YOU CLAIM AN
AUTHOR HOLDS FROM VIEWS THAT YOU CLAIM THE AUTHOR SHOULD HOLD OR IS COMMITTED
TO HOLDING. Claims that an author holds
a particular view must be supported with cites to the text. But claims that an author should hold or is
committed to holding a particular view must be supported with relevant
arguments, in addition to cites to the text.
10.
USE LABELS. In your paper, you will
typically have to distinguish between a number of different theses or
positions. It is often useful to give
names or labels to the various theses or positions, for ease of reference. For example, in class we distinguish between
historical social contract theories and hypothetical social contract
theories.
11. USE EXAMPLES.
In philosophy, it is easy to get lost in a discussion of abstract ideas.
You should not feel that you understand an author's view unless you can explain
how it applies to relevant examples. In
your paper, you should not deal entirely in abstractions. You should try to develop one or two or more
examples which (perhaps with some variations) can be used to illustrate the
main issues in the paper.
12. CRITICAL EVALUATION. In your paper, you must critically evaluate
the positions taken by the author you discuss on the relevant issue—that is,
you must make the strongest case you can make on both sides of the relevant
issue, then take your own stand on which side is, on balance, the most
reasonable position to take, and explain why you think so.
13. AVOID PLAGIARISM. Whenever you turn in any assignment in this
course, the understanding is that what you are turning in is your own original
work, except to the extent that you explicitly credit others for their
contributions. You have an obligation to avoid even the appearance of
impropriety, by always attributing any argument or idea that you have borrowed,
even if you have modified it, to its source.
The source may be written or oral.
For example, if an argument was suggested by a fellow student, include
that information in a footnote.
14.
STYLISTIC
SUGGESTIONS
(including
some adopted from Professor BonJour)
1. Make sure that you express
yourself in complete sentences. Each
sentence must contain, at a minimum, a subject and a predicate in grammatical
agreement that make sense together.
2.
A common mistake is sentences that run on too long. Two or more gramatically
complete sentences should be separated by a period, not a comma. If you want to link them more closely, you
can use a semi-colon, or a comma and a conjunction (e.g., "and" or
"but). Other things being equal,
two short sentences are better than one longer sentence.
3.
Check the meanings and spellings of all words that you are not sure
of. It is recommended that you use a
computer spelling checker before printing your final draft.
4.
Some people believe that really good philosophy must be very deep, and
thus hard to understand. You will not be
rewarded for such writing in this course.
Your goal should be to make your papers as clear, as unambiguous, and as
easy to understand as the subject matter allows. A good way to test for awkward constructions
as well as for sense is to read your paper aloud to someone else, or even just
to yourself. You may also have it read
by one of the tutors in the