Philosophy Program

Writing Philosophy Essays

Contents

Preface

This booklet provides general advice on writing essays in philosophy. There is no simple formula for producing good essays in philosophy. Writing good essays requires a set of skills which can only develop over time and with practice. However, following the points below will help you to avoid some pitfalls. We suggest that you read these points now and consult them each time you write an essay.

These notes have been adapted by David Simpson, Julian Lamont, and Harry Beran, from a booklet written by Tim Oakley, for the Department of Philosophy at La Trobe University, and are reproduced here with his kind permission.

[Back to Contents]

Section 1: Good English

1.1 Why good English is important.

There are two reasons:

(a) You cannot write good philosophy in bad English. Clumsy or tangled expression will spoil your arguments, insights and explanations.

(b) Bad spelling and punctuation, and ungrammatical sentences,even where they do not interfere with the meaning of what you write, are unacceptable in work at university level.

The Program expects essays to be expressed in English of an adequate standard. Students sometimes ask whether marks are taken off for poor expression. Different markers will put different degrees of emphasis written expression. Most see their job as being to assess a student's ability in philosophy rather than in English expression. However, an essay may be marked down for poor English when this poor English lowers the quality of the philosophy.

1.2 What do we mean by good English?

The following are a few tips on how to write good English. If you need more help in writing essays than provided in these notes, see point 1.4. Section 3 of this booklet gives some general advice on structuring your essay.

(a) The right words are chosen, and they are used clearly.

Words are used with their correct meanings. Always use a dictionary to check any non-technical word when you are not quite sure of its meaning. Use your philosophy texts and references etc. to check the meaning of technical philosophical terms. Do not rely on the dictionary in these cases. Never use words you only half understand.

The meanings of words are explicitly defined where necessary. Technical terms (e.g. words for philosophical theories or concepts) have to be defined to show that you know what they mean. Other words sometimes have to be defined because many words are vague,or ambiguous, or take on different shades of meaning in different contexts, and the reader needs to know the exact meaning you intend in the context of your essay.

Words are correctly spelled.

Jargon is avoided.

(b) Good sentences are used.

Punctuation is correct.

Grammar is correct.

Each sentence makes its point concisely, and is clear to the reader.

Each sentence emphasises that aspect of the writer's point which deserves emphasis.

Words are placed correctly in the sentence to convey the right meaning. (For example, do not write 'Russell's theory satisfactorily explains...' when what you mean is 'only Russell's theory satisfactorily explains...').

(c) Paragraphs are well constructed.

Paragraphs should be composed of sentences the connections between which are obvious to the reader. The reader should never be left wondering what connection a sentence is supposed to have to those immediately before it. There should be clear and accurate use of 'link words' - the words indicating just what the connection is supposed to be between the claims expressed in two successive sentences (or, indeed, within one sentence). Think of the difference between 'and' and 'but' inserted between two claims. Some other link words are 'therefore', 'however', and 'similarly'.

Paragraphs should have a focus or topic. They should discuss a point, explain an idea or put forward an objection. It should be possible to identify the role of a paragraph in the general scheme of your essay.

(d) The whole essay is well constructed (see also Section 3).

Use 'sign posts' to tell the reader where you are going. Say things like 'I turn now to the second objection...'. If it helps, use sub headings, or numbered sections. (Note: some departments in the university may not accept this practice.) The reader should never be left wondering: 'Why did the writer start discussing this issue here?'

Use an introductory section to state what you are going to do in your essay, and use a concluding section to sum up what you have done. Since often we are clear about what it is that we want to say only by the end of the writing of a first version of an essay, try to produce a first draft and then rework your essay from it.

It should always be clear to the reader how the middle sections of your essay relate to the essay topic, and how they relate to the statement you make in your introduction about your response to the topic.

1.3 How can you improve your ability to express yourself in writing?

(a) Seek help in class

Your tutor is there to help you get on top of the philosophical issues (although not to proof read your essays). You should raise any problems you are having with your essay writing during your tutorial. Don't think that asking your personal question is selfish. Usually there will be other students having the same problem who will be relieved that you have asked the question. If the tutor believes the question is not relevant to others in the class, she or he will defer the question, and discuss it with you after the class.

(b) Get on top of the philosophical issues

Sometimes bad expression arises when you have a weak grasp of the subject matter.

If you know that your work is poorly expressed, and also know that you are confused about the subject matter, the first step is to get help on the subject matter, and to resolve your confusions. With luck, the problem you have with expression may disappear.

(c) Take care with your essay

Sometimes you will know, without anyone else telling you, that you could have written much better English than you did. Your essay was poorly written because you didn't take enough care over it. In this case, take more care next time, and refer to these guidelines for help.

(d) Get help from the professionals.

The Learning Development Centre is located in building 19.G102. It offers assistance in developing essay writing and study skills and is highly recommended for students who feel that there ability to write a clear and well structured essay needs developing. Their phone number is 21 3977.

(e) Consult books on essay writing

There are various books on how to write essays, how to study, and how to write good English. The better books include:

Clanchy, J., & Ballard, B. 1991, Essay Writing for Students, Longman Cheshire, Melbourne.

Strunk, W. Jr. 1979, The Elements of Style, 3rd ed., rev. E. B. White, Macmillan, New York (with an introduction and a chapter on writing by E. B. White).

Taylor, G. 1989, The Student's Writing Guide for the Arts and Social Sciences, Cambridge University Press, Melbourne

Section 2: Writing Philosophy Essays

Read through the summary of basic points, in 2.1, first, and then take time later to look at the details, in 2.2.

2.1 The Essential Points:

(a) You write philosophy to express your own reasoned view on a topic.
(b) Prepare carefully.
(c) Give reasons for what you say.
(d) Do not merely summarise the view of others.
(e) Think in terms of arguments.
(f) Aim for clarity and precision, and generally take care with your English.
(g) Keep what you say relevant to the set question.
(h) Structure your paper carefully.
(i) Keep quotations to a minimum.
(j) Re-read your essay before completing the final draft.
(k) Read and make use of the marker's comments.
(l) Get help when you need it from your tutor or from other sources.

2.2 Explanation and examples of these points:

(a) Basics.

Philosophy is the attempt to answer certain questions, solve problems and reach understanding of perplexities in a careful and rigorous way. As a philosophy student, you are here not just to 'study philosophy' in the sense of studying the answers to philosophical questions given by professional philosophers. You are here to 'do philosophy': to attempt to reach your own considered view on some topics. The chief tool of the philosopher is reason: she or he does not rely on a hunch, tradition or authority (including the authority of the lecturer, the tutor, or any famous philosophers studied). So you should think constantly in terms of arguments (reasons) for and against any view which you are discussing.

(b) Prepare carefully.

A good way to prepare essays: look at your lecture notes or a book, to give you just enough information to understand the topic. Then sit down and think about what your initial views on the topic are. Scribble down a page or so of notes, working out your own ideas. Then go away and do some reading. Then think some more. Then read some more. Then try to write out a plan, or even a draft. Read a bit more, if you need to. The 'think first, read second' policy has the following advantages:

- What you read will be much more meaningful and interesting to you if you already have views on the matter, even if those views are only tentative, and are later changed;

- You will read more critically, as you find yourself sometimes disagreeing with an author;

- This will in general produce a more independent-minded essay, which will give you better marks and much more personal satisfaction.

Avoid: reading as much as you can on the topic, taking notes on all that you read, then writing up an essay from your notes. This is bad for the following reasons:

- With a lot of straight reading you get mental indigestion and confusion.

- It is hard for you to form your own views on the issue.

- You tend to produce boring essays which merely summarise views of the authors you have read, and show little thought of your own. This will be boring both to you and your reader and will not get good marks.

- You are more likely to end up plagiarising.

(c) Give reasons for what you say.

Argue for the views you put forward. We want your view, but it has to be your reasoned view. Even where, after examining alternative answers to a question, you cannot make up your mind, give your reasons for remaining undecided. Give your reasons, not only or your basic position, but for your disagreement, for instance, with some particular argument or point of detail that another writer has put forward. You cannot argue fore very claim you make in an essay. But you can identify the claims you take for granted, at least for the purpose of your essay, as explicit assumptions, if they are controversial.

(d) Show independence of mind.

We do not expect you to say something on a topic which has never been said before. But we do expect you to be trying to give your own answers to questions raised by other people. The main thing to remember is that it is not enough to summarise the views of the lecturer or one or more authors, although these will no doubt influence your own thinking.

(e) Think in terms of arguments as much as you can.

Practice setting arguments out in standard premise/conclusion form. Do this with your own arguments, and with those you find used in books and articles. Notice that, as in part (ii) of the example in (g) below, many philosophy essay topics can be rephrased as questions about the strength of arguments. Assessing arguments is a central philosophical activity.

(f) Aim for clarity and precision. See Section 1 above.

(g) Be relevant.

Keep to the set topic, and do what is necessary to answer it. It is always a good idea to write out the set question in full at the beginning of the essay. Do not waste time on issues that are not asked about unless you can show their relevance. Do not spend time on biographical sketches of philosophers who have held the views under discussion. If you refer to the views of some writer, make sure that you keep to those views which really bear on the matter at hand, and avoid taking time off to discuss his or her whole theory.

(h) Structure your paper.

Consider an example. Suppose an essay topic is: 'Is Theory X the most plausible form of Theory Y?' A particular example is: 'Is preference utilitarianism the most plausible form of consequentialism?'

(i) You will need to start by stating clearly what Theory X and Theory Y are. This both shows the reader that you know what you are talking about, and helps to focus your discussion.

(ii) Work out what you will need to do to give a precise answer to the question. You will need to say something about what other forms of Theory Y there are, so that you can say whether Theory X is more plausible than they are. Think about what 'more plausible' means. To say Theory X is more plausible than another theory is to say that the arguments for and against Theory X on balance leave X better supported or justified than the other theory, given the arguments for and against the latter.

(iii) Work out a structure for your essay: give definitions of key terms at the start, followed by some sort of ordered consideration of arguments for and against different forms of Theory Y, followed by an assessment by you of the relative strengths of these arguments, so that at the end you can provide your answer to the question asked.

(iv) Stick to the point. Note, for example, that the question does not ask you anything about whether Theory Y as such is plausible. So don't waste time on that issue.

(i) Keep quotation to a minimum.

Resist the temptation to use quotes to show off how many books you have read or to try to make your essay more impressive. It is always best to put points in your own words. Doing this reassures both your marker and you that you understand the point.
Use quotation if there is a good reason for doing so: if the precise wording of some claim or definition is vital; if you need to provide evidence that someone really does hold a view that you say they do; or if someone has made a point so well that putting it any other way would be less effective. But quotation for the last reason must be used very sparingly.

(j) Take the time to re-read your paper before submitting it and while there is still time to make changes.

Correct any bits of bad expression you find. If you can, have someone else read your paper and give you feedback on whether it is clear and logical. Your reader may have other suggestions. All such assistance must be properly acknowledged. If you cannot find someone else to read your work, re-read it yourself, pretending that it was written by someone else, and imagine yourself attempting to understand it as an outsider. Ask yourself if a reader of your paper will be able to understand all of it, to gather what position you are taking up, and how you are supporting it. If you are doubtful, try and re-write the relevant sections.

(k) Read the comments on your paper when it is returned, as well as looking at the mark you received.

Try to make sure you understand the points the marker is making, as they may be an important guide to improving your next essay. If you are dissatisfied with your mark or don't understand the comments, consult your tutor.

Try not to feel worried or 'put down' if your tutor has written a large number of critical comments. He or she may be inviting you to think about further points which would enhance your work. If your essay is really unsatisfactory, you will receive a low mark and an explanation for that mark.

Section 3: Reading and Summarising Passages of Philosophical Writing

The ability to read a passage of philosophical writing with understanding is closely related to the ability to provide a good summary of the passage. By and large, if you can do one you can do the other. A summary is a statement in your own words, and in much shorter form, of the content of a passage. When you take notes on a book you read your are attempting a form of summary. The process is an important one. Here are some tips.

3.2 What should be in a summary?

It is not a point by point, sentence by sentence, restatement of the original. Nor should it merely be a selection of sentences - say every third sentence - taken from the original. A summary must contain an overview of what is going on in the passage being summarised.
Here are some of the things that an author may be doing in a passage of philosophical writing:

- Putting forward views on a topic.
- Putting forward an argument for a view.
- Putting forward an objection to a view.
- Putting forward an argument against an objection to a view.
- Setting out a number of contrasting views or alternative answers to some question.
- Explaining a technical concept.
- Explaining a complex theory.
- Discussing whether two apparently different views really are different.

You will be able to think of other possibilities. In longer passages of writing, several of these will be going on. In any case, your summary must make clear just what the author is doing.
Your summary must also make clear what the author's own attitudes and beliefs were concerning the material in the passage summarised. Again, consider the following different possibilities:

- If the author is putting forward views or arguments, are they her or his own views and arguments?
- Or are they the views and arguments of someone else? Are they being considered 'for the sake of argument' - perhaps so that they can be refuted?

There is another point. The author may have drawn a firm and definite conclusion in his or her discussion. Or a tentative conclusion may have emerged. Or perhaps the whole matter was left unresolved. Once more, you will need to include this point in your summary.
Once you have clarified the answers to these questions, you will find that the task of stating briefly the gist of the position, argument or discussion becomes much easier.

3.3 Summarising arguments.

It is sometimes difficult to put an argument into much shorter form. If it has been well stated in the original version, it will not have too many redundant words. To summarise arguments, we recommend that you try to put them into standard premise/conclusion form, and also try to add unstated (suppressed) premises where appropriate. Often you will find this quite difficult, but it is worth persevering, as it is an important step towards both understanding and assessing arguments.

3.4 Taking notes.

When you take notes, you should take them in your own words. When you do use the author's own words (e.g. where his or her precise formulation is important) then use quotation marks, and make a note of the page number. This practice will first of all force you to see whether you really understand what you are summarising, and also will help you avoid the error of transcribing into an essay an unacknowledged quotation from an author you discuss.

3.5 What if you simply cannot understand the passage to be summarised?

This will happen sometimes. Talk to your tutor. Also talk to other students. Sometimes in discussing a puzzling passage you will find that it becomes much clearer.

Section 4: Referencing in Philosophy Essays - The Harvard System

The two major reasons for using references in an essay are to acknowledge the source of an idea, interpretation or formulation, and to indicate the location of a quotation in the essay (so that it may be checked, or its context examined). Failure to acknowledge a source in your essay is plagiarism, and is regarded, according to University policy, as a form of cheating. When you reference effectively, you give the reader relevant information clearly and consistently.

The two most widely used systems are the Harvard (or 'author-date') system, and the traditional (or 'note') system. We recommend that you use the Harvard system in philosophy essays.

The following summary of the Harvard system is based on the Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers (Australian Government Publishing Service, Canberra). Part One, Section 9, provides guidelines for citing references, writing bibliographies and writing end notes or footnotes. The book as a whole has useful advice on many matters of style. There is a copy in the reference section of the library (R 686.2252/2), and it is also available from bookshops.

4.2 Textual references.

In the Harvard system, indicate a work by placing the author's or authors' surname(s) and the year of publication in brackets in the body of the text. Indicate a page of the work by adding a comma and 'p.' and the page number. Indicate a range of pages by using 'pp.' and the page range. If (in the same essay) you refer to two or more works by the same author written in the same year, differentiate the works by placing 'a', 'b', and so on after the year, and repeat this in the list of references. For example:

It has been claimed (Davidson 1971a, p. 57) that there are many difficulties in considering primitive actions and the actions we refer to when considering the consequences as numerically distinct, and that we speak of an action or event "under a description" merely to make it clear that some context is intentional (Davidson 1971b, p. 194). The first of these points has been disputed (see Vermazen 1980, pp. 95-7).

If the author's name is very obvious from the surrounding text, you need only include the year of publication, and page or section references if required. Stylistically, it is often best to keep the author's name within the flow of the writing. For example:

Perry (1976) criticises Williams' analysis of our intuitions regarding bodily transfer. He also (1975, pp. 143-152) tries to show how the memory criterion of personal identity can be analysed without use of the concept of identity.

When referring to a paper in an edited collection, as in the second reference in the previous example, cite the author of the paper, not the editor of the collection.

Indicate chapters with 'Ch.' or 'Chs', and sections with § or §§. If you are referring to a footnote, indicate the page number, then the number of the note. For example:

(Vermazen 1980, p. 60, n. 5)

If you are referring to an endnote, indicate the chapter number, then the number of the note.

For a direct quotation within the main body of the text, place the bracketed information directly after the quotation, before any further punctuation. For example:

Hirsch says that our concept of a physical object's persistence through time 'seems so fundamental and primitive that it requires a special effort to appreciate what philosophers might be after when they ask for an analysis' (1982, p. 3).

For a direct quotation which is set apart from the main body of the text (usually, when the passage quoted takes three or more lines), place the bracketed information after the entire quotation. In this case, always include the author's name. For example:

Dreyfus claims that this can be found in Heidegger's analysis of telling:

Throughout his discussion of telling, Heidegger opposes the traditional account of language found in both Husserl and Searle - that language consists of occurrent noises or marks that are given meaning, either by minds that are the source of what Searle calls intrinsic meaning or, as in Husserl, by being paired with abstract entities similar to Fregian senses. ... According to Heidegger, ... such accounts address a pseudo problem because their starting point is ontologically inadequate. (Dreyfus 1991, p. 218)

A quoted passage, whether in the main body of the text in quotation marks or set apart, should include all and only the punctuation, italicisation, etc. of the original. If, for example, you emphasise part of the quoted passage by italicising it, add a semi colon and 'emphasis added' after the page number(s).

If you leave out part of the original, indicate this (which is called an 'ellipsis') with three dots, as in the quotation above. Also do this when you leave out the end of a sentence; and then include the period (full stop) of the original after the three ellipsis dots.

If you start a quotation in the middle of a sentence of the original, and if an initial capital is appropriate, place the capital in square brackets. For example:

'[T]he practices containing an interpretation of what it is to be a person, an object, and a society fit together' (Dreyfus 1991, p.91).'

4.3 List of references (bibliography).

When using the Harvard system, place at the end of the essay a list of all the works to which you have referred in the essay. This list also plays the role of a bibliography for the essay.

The list of references must make it straightforward for the reader to trace a work referred to in the text by author and date. The two most important points are that the list is in order, first alphabetically, then by year of publication (starting with the earliest), and that the year of publication follows the author's name.

When listing an article or paper, include the range of pages taken by the paper at the end of the entry.

Place information about second and subsequent editions, editors, and translators after the title and before the publisher information.

Treat the year of publication as the first year of printing of the edition you are referring to, not as the year of a reprinting of that edition.

The following sample list of references gives examples of these points:

References

Davidson, D. 1971a, 'Agency', in D. Davidson, Essays on Actions and Events, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1980, pp. 43-62.

Davidson, D. 1971b, 'Eternal vs. Ephemeral Events', in D. Davidson, Essays on Actions and Events, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1980, pp. 189-204.

Dreyfus, H. L. 1991, PBeing-in-the-World: A Commentary on Heidegger's Being and Time, Division 1, MIT Press, Cambridge, Mass. & London.

Dreyfus, H. L. & Hall, H. (eds) 1992, Heidegger: A Critical Reader, Basil Blackwell, Oxford.

Hirsch, E. 1982, The Concept of Identity, Oxford University Press, New York & Oxford.

Perry, J. 1975, 'Personal Identity, Memory, and the Problem of Personal Identity', in Personal Identity, ed. J. Perry, University of California Press, Berkeley, Los Angeles & London, 1975, pp. 135-155.

Perry, J. 1976, 'Williams on the Self and Its Future', Journal of Philosophy, vol. 73, no. 13, pp. 416-28.

Vermazen, B. 1980, 'Negative Acts', in Essays on Davidson: Actions and Events, eds B. Vermazen & M. B. Hintikka, Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1985, pp. 93-104.