PAPER GUIDELINES
Follow
these guidelines in preparing your papers:
1. ALL DRAFTS OF PAPERS SHOULD BE POSTED FOR
PEER REVIEW IN HTML FORMAT BY THE DEADLINE.
See separate handout for information on posting drafts. Drafts will be graded down if they do not
comply with these guidelines, especially Guideline #6 on citing.
2.
EACH STUDENT SHOULD COMMENT ON TWO PAPERS BY THE DEALINE FOR
COMMENTS. Do not comment on a draft unless you have some suggestions for improving
it. Do not be the second to comment on a posting,
unless all postings have at least one comment; do not be the third to comment
on a posting unless all postings have at least two comments. There should be no more than three comments
on any individual posting. In your
comments, make sure you inform the author if the paper violates any of these
guidelines, especially Guideline #5 on citing.
3. PAPERS SHOULD BE PREPARED AS WORD DOCUMENTS
(OR IN RTF FORMAT). THE FILENAME SHOULD
BEGIN WITH YOUR LAST NAME. PAPERS SHOULD
BE SUBMITTED TO THE PHIL 450 ELECTRONIC DROP BOX. THERE IS A LINK TO THE DROP BOX ON THE PHIL
450 WEB PAGE. Papers should be 5-7
double-spaced pages (300 words per page).
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.
4. OUTLINE OF YOUR PAPER. See the paper topic handout for guidelines on
what to include in your paper. These
guidelines provide the basic structure of the paper. You may build on the basic structure in any
way that you think would improve the paper.
When you finish writing your paper, you should be able to write an
outline of it that shows how the different parts fit together logically.
5. NON-TECHNICAL INTRODUCTION. Your paper should begin with a non-technical
introduction to the problem you will discuss.
For example, if your topic is foundationalism
and coherentism, you must explain the basic idea of foundationalism and coherentism
in terms that an ordinary person could understand and without referring to any
other philosophers. You can refer to
other philosophers after you set up the problem.
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, if you wish to distinguish
different versions of epistemological internalism or
externalism, give them easy to remember names.
Whenever you use a label, always clearly state what the label refers
to.
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 authors you discuss—that is, you must 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