Alasdair MacIntyre on Writing in Philosophy

Four Rules for Writing a Philosophy Paper

Rule 1: A philosophy paper is not a “test” of what you already know. Think of it instead as a process in which you are thinking, learning and discovering as you go. You can’t understand something if you can’t write it down.

Rule 2: What you believe is irrelevant. As you start a philosophy paper, set your personal beliefs aside. Your paper should not contain statements beginning with phrases like “I believe . . . ” “I think . . . ” or “It is my view that. . . .”

Rule 3: Keep your prose as plain as possible. Flowery, poetic introductions are unnecessary. Be precise with your language. Don’t use one word when you mean another. For example, don’t say that thinking a certain way is “logical” when you’re not dealing with logic—use a word like “reasonable.” Also, be careful to avoid unnecessary modifiers—don’t say two things are “vastly different” if “different” will suffice.

Rule 4: Don’t write the paper for the professor. Think of yourself as writing for an “ideal reader”—a person who, while intelligent, may be unfamiliar with the text or argument you are evaluating.

The Two Main Tasks of a Philosophy Paper

Depending on the assignment, you may be asked to do one or both of the following:

1. Explain the claim you are going to discuss.

What kind of claim is the author making? Some claims are necessary truths (“2+2=4,” “all bodies have spatial locations”). Many claims involve concepts that may require you to provide information about their context. If the claim you’re discussing involves the concept of God, ask yourself: “What kind of God is this author writing about? From what kind of religious or philosophical background does this concept come from?”

2. Identify and evaluate the arguments being used to justify the claim.

All arguments proceed from premises (statements accepted as inherently true) toward a conclusion (what one intends to prove). Look at the following sample argument:

                                          Julie is a Notre Dame student. (Premise 1)

                                          All Notre Dame students like Notre Dame football. (Premise 2)

                                          Therefore (from 1 and 2), Julie likes Notre Dame football. (Conclusion)

When evaluating an argument, always begin by identifying the conclusion—in this case, it’s “Julie likes Notre Dame football.” Then, ask: “From what premises did it emerge?” The above argument makes this easy, but most authors will not present their arguments in such a premise-conclusion form. It will often be up to you to draw out the premises from the body paragraph of a text. Once you’ve identified the premises, ask: “How did the conclusion emerge?” In the sample argument, again, it’s pretty obvious, but sometimes arguments will have hidden premises or intermediate steps.

After you have taken the above steps and come to understand how the argument works, evaluate it in terms of its validity and soundness.

An argument is valid if asserting the premises and denying the conclusion leads one to contradict himself. Our sample argument is valid, because it would seem contradictory to say that Julie doesn’t like Notre Dame football if we accept the premises to be true.

An argument is sound if it transmits truth—that is, if it is valid and all of its premises are true. While we have shown our sample argument to be valid, we might have some doubts about the truth of the second premise. Notre Dame football is really popular, but there is probably some domer out there who doesn’t like it. Consequently, the second premise is false, and our argument is not sound.

The medium of philosophy writing can provide a fun opportunity to challenge the arguments of the great thinkers, but make sure you do so in a way that preserves your ethos. Adhere to the principle of charity of interpretation—when the wording of an argument is unclear, interpret it in the way that makes it as strong as possible rather than nitpick its deficiencies.