introduction in philosophy essay

1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology

Philosophy, One Thousand Words at a Time

How to Write a Philosophical Essay

Authors: The Editors of 1000-Word Philosophy [1] Category: Student Resources Word Count: 998

If you want to convince someone of a philosophical thesis, such as that God exists , that abortion is morally acceptable , or that we have free will , you can write a philosophy essay. [2]

Philosophy essays are different from essays in many other fields, but with planning and practice, anyone can write a good one. This essay provides some basic instructions. [3]

1. Planning

Typically, your purpose in writing an essay will be to argue for a certain thesis, i.e., to support a conclusion about a philosophical claim, argument, or theory. [4] You may also be asked to carefully explain someone else’s essay or argument. [5]

To begin, select a topic. Most instructors will be happy to discuss your topic with you before you start writing. Sometimes instructors give specific prompts with topics to choose from.

It’s generally best to select a topic that you’re interested in; you’ll put more energy into writing it. Your topic will determine what kind of research or preparation you need to do before writing, although in undergraduate philosophy courses, you usually don’t need to do outside research. [6]

Essays that defend or attack entire theories tend to be longer, and are more difficult to write convincingly, than essays that defend or attack particular arguments or objections: narrower is usually better than broader.

After selecting a topic, complete these steps:

• Ensure that you understand the relevant issues and arguments. Usually, it’s enough to carefully read and take notes on the assigned readings on your essay’s topic.
• Choose an initial thesis. Generally, you should choose a thesis that’s interesting, but not extremely controversial. [7] You don’t have to choose a thesis that you agree with, but it can help. (As you plan and write, you may decide to revise your thesis. This may require revising the rest of your essay, but sometimes that’s necessary, if you realize you want to defend a different thesis than the one you initially chose.)
• Ensure that your thesis is a philosophical thesis. Natural-scientific or social-scientific claims, such as that global warming is occurring or that people like to hang out with their friends , are not philosophical theses. [8] Philosophical theses are typically defended using careful reasoning, and not primarily by citing scientific observations.

Instructors will usually not ask you to come up with some argument that no philosopher has discovered before. But if your essay ignores what the assigned readings say, that suggests that you haven’t learned from those readings.

2. Structure

Develop an outline, rather than immediately launching into writing the whole essay; this helps with organizing the sections of your essay.

Your structure will probably look something like the following, but follow your assignment’s directions carefully. [9]

2.1. Introduction and Thesis

Write a short introductory paragraph that includes your thesis statement (e.g., “I will argue that eating meat is morally wrong”). The thesis statement is not a preview nor a plan; it’s not “I will consider whether eating meat is morally wrong.”

If your thesis statement is difficult to condense into one sentence, then it’s likely that you’re trying to argue for more than one thesis. [10]

2.2. Arguments

Include at least one paragraph that presents and explains an argument. It should be totally clear what reasons or evidence you’re offering to support your thesis.

In most essays for philosophy courses, you only need one central argument for your thesis. It’s better to present one argument and defend it well than present many arguments in superficial and incomplete ways.

2.3. Objection

Unless the essay must be extremely short, raise an objection to your argument. [11] Be clear exactly which part of the other argument (a premise, or the form) is being questioned or denied and why. [12]

It’s usually best to choose either one of the most common or one of the best objections. Imagine what a smart person who disagreed with you would say in response to your arguments, and respond to them.

Offer your own reply to any objections you considered. If you don’t have a convincing reply to the objection, you might want to go back and change your thesis to something more defensible.

2.5. Additional Objections and Replies

If you have space, you might consider and respond to the second-best or second-most-common objection to your argument, and so on.

2.6. Conclusion

To conclude, offer a paragraph summarizing what you did. Don’t include any new or controversial claims here, and don’t claim that you did more than you actually accomplished. There should be no surprises at the end of a philosophy essay.

Make your writing extremely clear and straightforward. Use simple sentences and don’t worry if they seem boring: this improves readability. [13] Every sentence should contribute in an obvious way towards supporting your thesis. If a claim might be confusing, state it in more than one way and then choose the best version.

To check for readability, you might read the essay aloud to an audience. Don’t try to make your writing entertaining: in philosophy, clear arguments are fun in themselves.

Concerning objections, treat those who disagree with you charitably. Make it seem as if you think they’re smart, careful, and nice, which is why you are responding to them.

Your readers, if they’re typical philosophers, will be looking for any possible way to object to what you say. Try to make your arguments “airtight.”

4. Citations

If your instructor tells you to use a certain citation style, use it. No citation style is universally accepted in philosophy. [14]

You usually don’t need to directly quote anyone. [15] You can paraphrase other authors; where you do, cite them.

Don’t plagiarize . [16] Most institutions impose severe penalties for academic dishonesty.

5. Conclusion

A well-written philosophy essay can help people gain a new perspective on some important issue; it might even change their minds. [17] And engaging in the process of writing a philosophical essay is one of the best ways to develop, understand, test, and sometimes change, your own philosophical views. They are well worth the time and effort.

[1] Primary author: Thomas Metcalf. Contributing authors: Chelsea Haramia, Dan Lowe, Nathan Nobis, Kristin Seemuth Whaley.

[2] You can also do some kind of oral presentation, either “live” in person or recorded on video. An effective presentation, however, requires the type of planning and preparation that’s needed to develop an effective philosophy paper: indeed, you may have to first write a paper and then use it as something like a script for your presentation. Some parts of the paper, e.g., section headings, statements of arguments, key quotes, and so on, you may want to use as visual aids in your presentation to help your audience better follow along and understand.

[3] Many of these recommendations are, however, based on the material in Horban (1993), Huemer (n.d.), Pryor (n.d.), and Rippon (2008). There is very little published research to cite about the claims in this essay, because these claims are typically justified by instructors’ experience, not, say, controlled experiments on different approaches to teaching philosophical writing. Therefore, the guidance offered here has been vetted by many professional philosophers with a collective hundreds of hours of undergraduate teaching experience and further collective hundreds of hours of taking philosophy courses. The editors of 1000-Word Philosophy also collectively have thousands of hours of experience in writing philosophy essays.

[4] For more about the areas of philosophy, see What is Philosophy? by Thomas Metcalf.

[5] For an explanation of what is meant by an “argument” in philosophy, see Arguments: Why Do You Believe What You Believe? by Thomas Metcalf.

[6] Outside research is sometimes discouraged, and even prohibited, for philosophy papers in introductory courses because a common goal of a philosophy paper is not to report on a number of views on a philosophical issue—so philosophy papers usually are not “research reports”—but to rather engage a specific argument or claim or theory, in a more narrow and focused way, and show that you understand the issue and have engaged in critically. If a paper engages in too much reporting of outside research, that can get in the way of this critical evaluation task.

[7] There are two reasons to avoid extremely controversial theses. First, such theses are usually more difficult to defend adequately. Second, you might offend your instructor, who might (fairly or not) give you a worse grade. So, for example, you might argue that abortion is usually permissible, or usually wrong, but you probably shouldn’t argue that anyone who has ever said the word ‘abortion’ should be tortured to death, and you probably shouldn’t argue that anyone who’s ever pregnant should immediately be forced to abort the pregnancy, because both of these claims are extremely implausible and so it’s very unlikely that good arguments could be developed for them. But theses that are controversial without being implausible can be interesting for both you and the instructor, depending on how you develop and defend your argument or arguments for that thesis.

[8] Whether a thesis is philosophical mostly depends on whether it is a lot like theses that have been defended in important works of philosophy. That means it would be a thesis about metaphysics, epistemology, value theory, logic, history of philosophy, or something therein. For more information, see Philosophy and Its Contrast with Science and What is Philosophy? both by Thomas Metcalf.

[9] Also, read the grading rubric, if it’s available. If your course uses an online learning environment, such as Canvas, Moodle, or Schoology, then the rubric will often be visible as attached to the assignment itself. The rubric is a breakdown of the different requirements of the essay and how each is weighted and evaluated by the instructor. So, for example, if some requirement has a relatively high weight, you should put more effort into doing a good job. Similarly, some requirement might explicitly mention some step for the assignment that you need to complete in order to get full credit.

[10] In some academic fields, a “thesis” or “thesis statement” is considered both your conclusion and a statement of the basic support you will give for that conclusion. In philosophy, your thesis is usually just that conclusion: e..g, “Eating meat is wrong,” “God exists,” “Nobody has free will,” and so on: the support given for that conclusion is the support for your thesis.

[11] To be especially clear, this should be an objection to the argument given for your thesis or conclusion, not an objection to your thesis or conclusion itself. This is because you don’t want to give an argument and then have an objection that does not engage that argument, but instead engages something else, since that won’t help your reader or audience better understand and evaluate that argument.

[12] For more information about premises, forms, and objections, see Arguments: Why do You Believe What You Believe? by Thomas Metcalf.

[13] For a philosophical argument in favor of clear philosophical writing, and guidance on producing such writing, see Fischer and Nobis (2019).

[14] The most common styles in philosophy are APA (Purdue Online Writing Lab, n.d.a) and Chicago (Purdue Online Writing Lab, n.d.b.).

[15] You might choose to directly quote someone when it’s very important that the reader know that the quoted author actually said what you claim they said. For example, if you’re discussing some author who made some startling claim, you can directly quote them to show that they really said that. You might also directly quote someone when they presented some information or argument in a very concise, well-stated way, such that paraphrasing it would take up more space than simply quoting them would.

[16] Plagiarism, in general, occurs when someone submits written or spoken work that is largely copied, in style, substance, or both, from some other author’s work, and does not attribute it to that author. However, your institution or instructor may define “plagiarism” somewhat differently, so you should check with their definitions. When in doubt, check with your instructor first.

[17] These are instructions for relatively short, introductory-level philosophy essays. For more guidance, there are many useful philosophy-writing guides online to consult, e.g.: Horban (1993); Huemer (n.d.); Pryor (n.d.); Rippon (2008); Weinberg (2019).

Fischer, Bob and Nobis, Nathan. (2019, June 4). Why writing better will make you a better person. The Chronicle of Higher Education . 

Horban, Peter. (1993). Writing a philosophy paper. Simon Fraser University Department of Philosophy . 

Huemer, Michael. (N.d.). A guide to writing. Owl232.net .

Pryor, Jim. (N.d.). Guidelines on writing a philosophy paper. Jimpryor.net .

Purdue Online Writing Lab. (N.d.a.). General format. Purdue Online Writing Lab . 

Purdue Online Writing Lab. (N.d.b.). General format. Purdue Online Writing Lab .

Rippon, Simon. (2008). A brief guide to writing the philosophy paper. Harvard College Writing Center .

Weinberg, Justin. (2019, January 15). How to write a philosophy paper: Online guides. Daily Nous .

Related Essays

Arguments: Why do You Believe What You Believe? by Thomas Metcalf

Philosophy and its Contrast with Science by Thomas Metcalf

What is Philosophy? By Thomas Metcalf

Translation

Pdf download.

Download this essay in PDF . 

Follow 1000-Word Philosophy on  Facebook  and  Twitter  and subscribe to receive email notifications of new essays at  1000WordPhilosophy.com .

Share this:.

• Faculty of Arts
• School of Historical and Philosophical Studies
• Current students
• Undergraduate

Philosophy essay writing guide

Introduction.

This guide is intended to give new students of philosophy some preliminary advice about writing philosophy essays at university. For many of you, writing a philosophy essay will be something of a new experience, and no doubt many of you will be a little unsure of what to expect, or of what is expected of you. Most of you will have written essays in school for English, History, etc. A philosophy essay is something a little different again. However, it is not an unfathomable, mysterious affair, nor one where anything goes.

Just what a philosophy essay is will depend a lot, as you'd expect, on just what philosophy is. Defining philosophy is always a more or less controversial business, but one way to think of what is done in university philosophy departments is to think of the difference between having a philosophy and doing philosophy. Virtually everyone "has a philosophy" in the sense that we have many basic beliefs about the world and ourselves and use certain key concepts to articulate those beliefs. Many of us initially come to thus "have a philosophy" (or elements of several philosophies) often only unconsciously, or by following "what's obvious" or "what everybody knows", or by adopting a view because it sounds exciting or is intellectually fashionable.

"Doing philosophy", on the other hand, is a self-conscious unearthing and rigorous examination of these basic beliefs and key concepts. In doing so, we try to clarify the meanings of those beliefs and concepts and to evaluate critically their rational grounds or justification. Thus, rather than having their heads in the clouds, philosophers are really more under the surface of our thinking, examining the structures that support - or fail to support - those who trust that they have their feet on the ground. Such examination may even help to develop new and firmer ground.

Doing philosophy, then, begins with asking questions about the fundamental ideas and concepts that inform our ways of looking at the world and ourselves, and proceeds by developing responses to those questions which seek to gain insight into those ideas and concepts - and part of that development consists in asking further questions, giving further responses, and so on. Human beings across the world have been engaged in this sort of dialogue of question and response for many centuries - even millennia - and a number of great traditions of reflection and inquiry have evolved that have fundamentally influenced the development of religion, art, science and politics in many cultures. The influence of philosophical thinking on Western civilization, in particular, can be traced back more than 2,500 years to the Ancient Greeks.

In philosophy, a good essay is one that, among other things, displays a good sense of this dialectic of question and response by asking insightful, probing questions, and providing reasoned, well-argued responses. This means that you should not rest content with merely an unintegrated collection of assertions, but should instead work at establishing logical relations between your thoughts. You are assessed not on the basis of what you believe, but on how well you argue for the position you adopt in your essay, and on how interesting and insightful your discussion of the issues is. That is to say, you are assessed on how well you do philosophy, not on what philosophy you end up having. Nonetheless, you ought to make sure that your essay's discussion is relevant to the topic. (See Section 5.2 below on relevance.)

It is hoped that you enjoy the activity of essay writing. If you have chosen to study Arts, it is likely that you will have a particular interest in - even a passion for - ideas and the variety of forms and genres in which ideas are expressed and explored. The argumentative or discursive formal academic essay is one such form, and one which can be a pleasure to read and to write. Thus, the assessment that is set in philosophy courses is primarily an invitation to you to pursue what is already (or, hopefully, soon to be) your own interest in writing to explore ideas. However, your immediate goal in writing an academic philosophy essay ought not to be to write a personal testament, confession or polemic. Rather, you should primarily aim at articulating, clearly and relatively dispassionately, your philosophical thinking on the topic at hand. Nevertheless, the kind and degree of personal development one can gain from taking up the challenge to think and to write carefully, clearly and thoroughly is certainly something to be greatly valued.

This guide is intended to help you get started in the business of writing philosophy essays. As you practise your philosophical writing skills, you will develop your own technique, and learn what is appropriate in each particular case. So you may well come to "work around" many of these guidelines. Nonetheless, it is important that you pass through that which you seek to pass beyond.* In addition to your own writing, your reading of other philosophers will help you to develop your sense of what constitutes good philosophical writing. As you read, note the various styles and techniques that philosophical authors employ in their treatment of philosophical issues. Practice and studying good examples, then, are the most valuable ways to develop your essay writing skills.

This guide is, moreover, only one of many publications that introduce philosophy students to essay writing. Some others you may like to consult include:

• A. P. Martinich, Philosophical Writing, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997)
• J. Feinberg and R. Shafer-Landau, Doing Philosophy: A Guide to the Writing of Philosophy Papers, 2nd ed. (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2001)
• Z. Seech, Writing Philosophy Papers, 4th ed. (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2003)
• R. Solomon, "Writing Philosophy", Appendix to his The Big Questions: A Short Introduction to Philosophy, 6th ed. (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2001)
• S. Gorovitz et al., Philosophical Analysis: An Introduction to its Language and Techniques, 3rd ed. (New York: Random House, 1979)

Also, the websites of many philosophy departments in universities around Australia and the world contain downloadable essay writing guides or links to them.

*This phrase is adapted from Jacques Bouveresse, "Why I am so very unFrench", in Alan Montefiore, ed., Philosophy in France Today (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), p. 12.

What do I do in a Philosophy essay?

Philosophy essay topics are not designed to provide an intellectual obstacle course that trips you up so as to delight a malicious marker. They are designed to invite you to "grapple with" with some particular philosophical problem or issue. That is to say, they are designed to offer you an opportunity to demonstrate your understanding of a particular philosophical problem or issue, and to exhibit your own philosophical skills of analysis, argumentation, etc. These twin goals are usually best achieved by ensuring that your essay performs two basic functions (your understanding and your skills apply to both):

an exposition of the problem or issue in question (often as it is posed in some particular text); and a critical discussion of the problem or text

These two functions can, but need not always, correspond to physically or structurally distinct sections of your essay. See Section 5.1.

The expository ("setting forth") aspect of your essay is where you should make clear what the issue is and why it is an issue. Where you are dealing with an issue as it is presented in some particular text, your aim should be to make clear what it is that the author in question meant in their text, what they see as the issue and why they see it as an issue. This does not involve merely quoting or paraphrasing a text. Of course, occasional quotation and paraphrase may be appropriate - sometimes necessary - but these ought not to constitute the sole or major content of your exposition. Where you do quote or paraphrase, make sure you attribute your sources in footnotes or endnotes. (See Section 7.)

Exposition is, then, primarily a matter of developing in your own words what you think the issue is or what you think the text means. In all expository work you should always try to give a fair and accurate account of a text or problem, even when the exposition becomes more interpretive rather than simply descriptive. You ought to be patient and sympathetic in your exposition, even if you intend later to criticise heavily the philosopher in question. Indeed, the better the exposition in this regard, usually the more effective the critique.

An important part of exposition is your analysis of the text or issue. Here you should try to "break down" the text, issue or problem into its constitutive elements by distinguishing its different parts. (E.g. "There are two basic kinds of freedom in question when we speak of freedom of the will. First, … . Second, …", or "There are three elements in Plato's conception of the soul, namely... He establishes these three elements by means of the following two arguments... ") This also involves showing the relationships between those elements, relationships which make them "parts of the whole".

As well as laying out these elements within a text or issue, you can also (when appropriate or relevant) show how a text or issue "connects up with" other texts, issues, or philosophical and/or historical developments, which can help to shed further light on the matter by giving it a broader context. (eg "Freedom of the will is importantly connected to the justification of punishment", or "Plato's tripartite theory of the soul bears interesting resemblances to Freud's analysis of the psyche", or "Kant's transcendental idealism can be seen as reconciling the preceding rationalist and empiricist accounts of knowledge".)

An exposition of a text need not always simply follow the author's own view of what it means. You should, of course, demonstrate that you understand how the author themself understands their work, but an exposition can sometimes go beyond this, giving another reading of the text. (eg "Heidegger might deny it, but his Being and Time can be read as developing a pragmatist account of human understanding.") A given text or issue may well be susceptible to a number of plausible or reasonable interpretations. An exposition should aim to be sensitive to such variety. When appropriate, you should defend your interpretations against rivals and objections. Your interpretation ought, though, to be aimed at elucidating the meaning or meanings of the text or issue and not serve merely as a "coat-hanger" for presenting your own favoured views on the matter in question, which should be left to your ...

Critical discussion

This is where your thought gets more of the centre stage. Here you should attempt to develop a response to the issues which your exposition has made clear, and/or, in the case of a discussion of some particular text, attempt to give a critical appraisal of the author's treatment of the issue. In developing a response to a philosophical problem, argumentation is, again, of central importance. Avoid making unsupported assertions; back up your claims with reasons, and connect up your ideas so that they progress logically toward your conclusions. Consider some of the various objections to and questions about your views that others might or have put forward, and try to respond to them in defence of your own line of thinking. Your goal here should be to discuss what you have expounded so as to come to some conclusion or judgement about it. ("Critical" is derived from the Ancient Greek for "to decide, to judge".) Critical discussion is thus not necessarily "destructive" or "negative"; it can be quite constructive and positive.

In the case of a critical appraisal of a particular author's text, you can negatively criticise the author's arguments by pointing out questionable assumptions, invalid reasoning, etc. If, on the other hand, you think that the text is good, then your critical discussion can be positive. This can be done by revealing its "hidden virtues" (that is, by showing that there is more to the author's arguments and views than what lies on the surface) and/or by defending an author against possible and/or actual criticisms. (eg "Norman Malcolm argues that Descartes is mistaken in assuming that dreams and waking episodes have the same content.* However, Malcolm fails to appreciate the subtlety of Descartes' argument in the First Meditation, which allows Descartes to claim . . .") Just to expound an author's arguments and then say "I disagree" or "That seems right" is not really enough - you need to "have something to say" about it. Of course, by all means go on, after finding fault with some philosopher, to answer in your own way the questions tackled or raised by the author. (eg "Simone de Beauvoir's analysis of women's oppression in The Second Sex suffers from serious weaknesses, as I have shown in Section 2 above. A better way to approach the issue, I shall now argue, is to . . .".)

Where you are not primarily concerned with evaluating or responding to a particular text, your critical discussion can be more focused on your own constructive response to the issue. (eg "Having used Dworkin's account to clarify the meanings of the concepts of 'the sanctity of life' and 'voluntariness', I shall now argue that voluntary euthanasia is morally permissible because its voluntariness respects what is of value in the notion of the sanctity of life" - where you now leave Dworkin behind as a source and move on to give your own account.)

* See Norman Malcolm, "Dreaming and Skepticism", in Willis Doney, ed., Descartes: A Collection of Critical Essays (London: Macmillan, 1967), p. 56.

Guide to researching and writing Philosophy essays

5th edition by Steven Tudor , for the Philosophy program, University of Melbourne, 2003.

This fifth edition of How to Write a Philosophy Essay: A Guide for Students (previous editions titled A Guide to Researching and Writing Philosophy Essays ) was prepared in consultation with members of the Philosophy program, the University of Melbourne. For advice and assistance on this and earlier editions, thanks are due to Graham Priest, Barry Taylor, Christopher Cordner, Doug Adeney, Josie Winther, Linda Burns, Marion Tapper, Kimon Lycos, Brendan Long, Jeremy Moss, Tony Coady, Will Barrett, Brian Scarlett, and Megan Laverty. Some use was also made of materials prepared by the Philosophy Departments of La Trobe University, the University of Queensland, and The Australian National University.

Disclaimer: University, Faculty and program rules

Please note: this booklet does not provide authoritative statements of the official policies or rules of the University of Melbourne, the Faculty of Arts, or the Philosophy program with regard to student essays and examinations or any other matters. Students should, therefore, not rely on this booklet for such information, for which they should consult the various appropriate notice boards, handbooks, websites, and/or members of staff.

Essay topics

What do philosophy essay topics look like? There are, very roughly, two basic kinds of philosophy essay topics: "text-focused" topics and "problem-focused" topics. Text-focused topics ask you to consider some particular philosopher's writing on some issue. (eg "Discuss critically David Hume's account of causation in Part III of Book I of his A Treatise of Human Nature " or "Was Wittgenstein right to say that 'the meaning of a word is its use in the language', in his Philosophical Investigations, Sec. 43?"). Problem-focused topics are more directly about a particular philosophical problem or issue, without reference to any particular philosopher's text. (eg "Is voluntary euthanasia morally permissible?" or "What is scientific method?")

There is another sort of topic, one which presents a statement and asks you to discuss it, where that statement is a "made up" or, at least, unattributed quote. (eg. "'Without belief in God, people cannot be moral'. Discuss.") I shall regard these as variations of the problem-focused type of topic. Where you are asked to discuss some such statement "with reference to" some specified text or philosopher, then that topic becomes more text-focused. (eg "'Without belief in God, people cannot be moral'. Discuss with reference to J.L. Mackie's Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. ") Occasionally, a topic presents an unattributed statement, but the statement is, in fact, a quote from a particular philosopher you've been studying, or, at least, a good paraphrase of their thinking. (An example of the latter: "'All the ideas in our minds originate from either sense perception or our reflection upon sensory information.' Discuss.", in a course devoted to John Locke, whose views are summed up in the quoted statement, though those words are not actually his.) Should you take such topics as problem- or text-focused? Rather unhelpfully, I'll say only that it depends on the case. You might ask your lecturer or tutor about it. Whichever way you do take it, be clear in your essay which way you are taking it.

The difference between text-focused and problem-focused essay topics is, however, not very radical. This is because, on the one hand, any particular philosopher's text is about some philosophical problem or question, while, on the other hand, most philosophical problems (certainly virtually all those you will be given as essay topics at university) will have been written about by previous philosophers.

The basic way to approach text-focused topics, then, is to treat the nominated text as an attempt by one philosopher to deal with a particular philosophical problem or issue. The essay topic will, generally speaking, be inviting you to do philosophy with that philosopher, to engage with them in thinking about the issue, whether that engagement proves to be as an ally or an adversary. The chosen text will usually be one which has been (or deserves to be) influential or significant in the history of philosophy, but the task is not to pay homage to past masters. But, even if homage is your thing, the best way to do that here is to engage with the master philosophically.

With regard to problem-focused topics, you will often find your exploration of the problem aided by taking some text or texts which have dealt with it as reference points or prompts. This is not always strictly necessary, but many of you starting out in philosophy will find it helpful to do so - it can help you give focus to your response to the question. (Thus, you might, in an essay on the topic "Is voluntary euthanasia morally permissible?" take it upon yourself to use, for example, Ronald Dworkin's Life's Dominion and Peter Singer's Practical Ethics as reference points. Or, in an essay on the topic "What is scientific method?", you might set up your answer via a comparison of the two different accounts in Karl Popper's The Logic of Scientific Discovery and Paul Feyerabend's Against Method.*) How will you know which texts to adopt as reference points or prompts, if none is mentioned in the essay topic itself? One way is to consider what texts have already been mentioned with regard to the topic in your course reading guide and in lectures and tutorials. Another way is to do some of your own research. On this see Section 4 below.

* In this guide, in giving examples of how to go about answering an essay question, I am not necessarily giving any concrete or reliable advice for any particular topic. The examples are primarily to do with the form or style or strategy you might find helpful.

Researching your essay

To do research for your philosophy essay you need to do only two things: read and think. Actually, for problem-focused essays, thinking is the only truly necessary bit, but it's highly likely that you will find your thinking much assisted if you do some reading as well. Philosophical research at university is a little different to research in most other disciplines (especially the natural sciences), in that it is not really about "collecting data" to support or refute explanatory theories. Rather, the thinking that's involved in philosophical research (as part of one's preparation for philosophical writing) is more a matter of reflecting critically upon the problems in front of one. Researching the writings of other philosophers should, therefore, be primarily directed towards helping you with that reflection rather than aiming at gathering together and reporting on "the relevant findings" on a particular topic. In many other disciplines, a "literature review" is an important research skill, and sometimes philosophy academics do such reviews - but it is rare that philosophy students are asked to do one.

What, then, to read? It should be clear from your lectures and tutorials what some starting points for your reading might be. (All courses provide reading guides; many also have booklets of reading material.) Your tutor and lecturer are also available for consultation on what readings you might begin with for any particular topic in that subject. Independent research can also uncover useful sources, and evidence of this in your essay can be a pleasing sign of intellectual independence. Make sure, though, that what you come up with is relevant to the topic. (See Section 5.2 below on relevance.) Whichever way you proceed, your reading should be purposive and selective.

In the case of essay questions that refer to a particular text, you should familiarise yourself thoroughly with this text. Usually, such a text will be a primary text, i.e. one in which a philosopher writes directly about a philosophical issue. Texts on or about a primary text are called secondary texts. (Many philosophical works will combine these two tasks, and discuss other philosophical texts while also dealing directly with a philosophical issue.) Some secondary texts can be helpful to students. However, don't think you will only ever understand a primary text if you have a nice friendly secondary text to take you by the hand through the primary text. More often than not, you need to have a good grasp of the primary text in order to make sense of the secondary text.

How much to read? The amount of reading you do should be that which maximises the quality of your thinking - that is, you should not swamp yourself with vast slabs of text that you can't digest, but nor should you starve your mind of ideas to chew over. There is, of course, no simple rule for determining this optimal amount. Be wary, though, of falling into the vice of looking for excuses not to read some philosopher or text, as in "Oh, that's boring old religious stuff" or "She's one of those obscure literary feminist types", or "In X Department they laugh at you if you mention those authors in tutes". If someone wants a reason not to think, they'll soon come up with one.

Philosophical writings

Most philosophical writings come in either of two forms: books or articles. Articles appear either in books that are edited anthologies or in academic journals, such as Philosophical Quarterly or Australasian Journal of Philosophy. Some academic journals are also on the internet. Most articles in the journals are written by professional philosophers for professional philosophers; similarly with many books. But by no means let this put you off. Everyone begins philosophy at the deep end - it's really the only kind there is!

There are, however, many books written for student audiences. Some of these are general introductions to philosophy as a whole; others are introductions to particular areas or issues (eg biomedical ethics or philosophy of science). Among the general introductions are various philosophical dictionaries, encyclopedias and "companions". These reference works collect short articles on a wide range of topics and can be very useful starting points for newcomers to a topic. Among the most useful of the general reference works are:

• Edward Craig, ed., The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (10 vols.) (London: Routledge, 1998)
• Paul Edwards, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (8 vols.) (New York: Macmillan, 1967)
• Robert Audi, ed., The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)
• Ted Honderich, ed., The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995)
• Simon Blackburn, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)
• Thomas Mautner, ed., The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy (London: Penguin, 1998)
• J.O. Urmson and Jonathan Ree, eds., The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers (London: Routledge, 1993)
• Edward N. Zalta, ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (an internet-based reference work: plato.stanford.edu/ )

Note taking

Note taking, like your reading, should not be random, but ought to be guided by the topic in question and by your particular lines of response to the issues involved. Note taking for philosophy is very much an individual art, which you develop as you progress. By and large it is not of much use to copy out reams of text as part of your researches. Nor is it generally helpful to read a great number of pages without making any note of what they contain for future reference. But between these two extremes it is up to you to find the mean that best helps you in getting your thoughts together.

Libraries and electronic resources

The University's Baillieu Library (including the Institute of Education Resource Centre), which is open to all members of the University, contains more than 2,500 years' worth of philosophical writings. The best way to become acquainted with them is by using them, including using the catalogues (including the Baillieu's on-line catalogues and subject resources web-pages), following up a work's references (and references in the references), intelligent browsing of the shelves, etc.

In the main Baillieu Library, the philosophical books are located (mostly) between 100–199 in the Dewey decimal system, and philosophical journals are located in the basement. The Reference section on the ground floor also has some relevant works. The Education Resource Centre also has a good philosophy collection.

In addition to hard-copy philosophical writings, there is also a variety of electronic resources in philosophy, mostly internet-based. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy was already mentioned above. Links to other useful internet sites (such as the Australasian Association of Philosophy website) can be found through the Baillieu Library's web-page and the Philosophy Department's web-page.

A strong word of warning, however, for the would-be philosophical web-surfer: because anyone can put material on a website, all kinds of stuff, of varying levels of quality, is out there - and new-comers to philosophy are usually not well placed to sort their way through it. Unless you have a very good understanding of what you're looking for - and what you're not looking for - most of you will be much better off simply carefully reading and thinking about a central text for your course, eg Descartes' First Meditation, rather than wandering about the internet clicking on all the hits for "Descartes". Exercise your mind, not your index finger.

Writing your essay

Planning and structuring your essay.

It is very important that you plan your essay, so that you have an idea of what you are going to write before you start to write it. Of course, you will most likely alter things in later drafts, but you should still start off by having a plan. Planning your essay includes laying out a structure. It is very important that your essay has a clearly discernible structure, ie that it is composed of parts and that these parts are logically connected. This helps both you and your reader to be clear about how your discussion develops, stage by stage, as you work through the issues at hand.

Poor essay structure is one of the most common weaknesses in student philosophy essays. Taking the time to work on the structure of your essay is time well spent, especially since skill in structuring your thoughts for presentation to others should be among the more enduring things you learn at university. A common trap that students fall into is to start their essay by writing the first sentence, then writing another one that seems to follow that one, then another one that sort of fits after that one, then another that might or might not have some connection with the previous one, and so on until the requisite 1,500 words are used up. The result is usually a weak, rambling essay.

There are, of course, no hard and fast rules about how to structure a philosophy essay. Again, it is a skill you develop through practice, and much will depend on the particular topic at hand. Nonetheless, it might be helpful to begin by developing an essay structure around the basic distinction between your exposition and your critical discussion (as discussed above). In this it will be important that you make clear who is putting forward which point, that is, make it clear whether you are presenting your own thoughts or are expounding someone else's. (Again, confusion in this regard is a common problem in student essays.) It can often help your structuring if you provide headings for different sections (possibly numbered or lettered). Again, this helps both your reader to follow your discussion and you to develop your thoughts. At each stage, show clearly the logical relations between and the reasons for your points, so that your reader can see clearly why you say what you say and can see clearly the development in your discussion.

Another key to structuring your essay can be found in the old adage "Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em. Tell 'em. Then tell 'em what you've told 'em", which provides you with a ready-made structure: Introduction, Main Body, and Conclusion.

In your Introduction, first introduce the issues the essay is concerned with. In doing so, try to state briefly just what the problem is and (if there is space) why it is a problem. This also applies, of course, to issues covered in text-focused essay topics. Next, tell the reader what it is that you are going to do about those problems in the Main Body. This is usually done by giving a brief sketch or overview of the main points you will present, a "pre-capitulation", so to speak, of your essay's structure. This is one way of showing your reader that you have a grasp (indeed, it helps you get a grasp) of your essay as a structured and integrated whole, and gives them some idea of what to expect by giving them an idea of how you have decided to answer the question. Of course, for reasons of space, your Introduction might not be very long, but something along these lines is likely to be useful.

In your Main Body, do what you've said you'll do. Here is where you should present your exposition(s) and your critical discussion(s). Thus, it is here that the main philosophical substance of your essay is to be found. Of course, what that substance is and how you will present it will depend on the particular topic before you. But, whatever the topic, make clear at each stage just what it is you are doing. You can be quite explicit about this. (eg "I shall now present Descartes' ontological argument for the existence of God, as it is presented in his Fifth Meditation. There will be three stages to this presentation.") Don't think that such explicitness must be a sign of an unsophisticated thinker.

A distinct Conclusion is perhaps not always necessary, if your Main Body has clearly "played out" your argument. So you don't always have to present a grand summation or definitive judgement at the end. Still, often for your own sake, try to state to yourself what it is your essay has achieved and see if it would be appropriate to say so explicitly. Don't feel that you must come up with earth-shattering conclusions. Of course, utter banality or triviality are not good goals, either. Also, your essay doesn't always have to conclude with a "solution" to a problem. Sometimes, simply clarifying an issue or problem is a worthy achievement and can merit first-class honours. A good conclusion to a philosophy essay, then, will usually combine a realistic assessment of the ambit and cogency of its claims with a plausible proposal that those claims have some philosophical substance.

What you write in your essay should always be relevant to the question posed. This is another common problem in student essays, so continually ask yourself "Am I addressing the question here?" First-class answers to a question can vary greatly, but you must make sure that your essay responds to the question asked, even if you go on to argue that the question as posed is itself problematic. (eg "To ask ‘What is scientific method?' presupposes that science follows one basic method. However, I shall argue that there are, in fact, several different scientific methods and that these are neither unified nor consistent.") Be wary, however, of twisting a topic too far out of shape in order to fit your favoured theme. (You would be ill-advised, for example, to proceed thus: "What is scientific method? This is a question asked by many great minds. But what is a mind? In this essay, I shall discuss the views of Thomas Aquinas on the nature of mind.")

This requirement of relevance is not intended as an authoritarian constraint on your intellectual freedom. It is part of the skill of paying sustained and focused attention to something put before you - which is one of the most important skills you can develop at university. If you do have other philosophical interests that you want to pursue (such as Aquinas on mind), then please do pursue them, in addition to writing your essay on the set topic. At no stage does the requirement of relevance prevent you from pursuing your other interests.

Citing Philosophical "Authorities"

There might be occasions when you want to quote other philosophers and writers apart from when you are quoting them because they are the subject of your essay. There are two basic reasons why you might want to do this. First, you might quote someone because their words constitute a good or exemplary expression or articulation of an idea you are dealing with, whether as its proponent, critic, or simply its chronicler. (eg "As Nietzsche succinctly put the point, 'There are no moral phenomena at all, only a moral interpretation of phenomena'.*") You may or may not want to endorse the idea whose good expression you have quoted, but simply want to use the philosopher as a spokesperson for or example of that view. But be clear about what you think the quote means and be careful about what you are doing with the quote. It won't do all the work for you.

The second reason you might want to quote a philosopher is because you think their words constitute an "authoritative statement" of a view. Here you want to use the fact that, eg Bertrand Russell maintained that there are two kinds of knowledge of things (namely, knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description) in support of your claim that there are two such kinds of knowledge of things. However, be very careful in doing this, for the nature of philosophical authority is not so simple here. That is to say, what really matters is not that Bertrand Russell the man held that view; what matters are his reasons for holding that view. So, when quoting philosophers for this second reason, be careful that you appreciate in what exactly the authority lies - which means that you should show that you appreciate why Russell maintained that thesis. Of course, you can't provide long arguments for every claim you make or want to make use of; every essay will have its enabling but unargued assumptions. But at least be clear about these. (eg "For the purposes of this essay, I shall adopt Russell's thesis* that ...").

* Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973 [first German ed.1886]), Sec. 108.

* See Bertrand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967 [first pub. 1912]), Ch. 5.

Philosophy is by its nature a relatively abstract and generalising business. (Note that abstractness and generality are not the same thing. Nor do vagueness and obscurity automatically attend them.) Sometimes a longish series of general ideas and abstract reasonings can become difficult for the reader (and often the writer) to follow. It can often help, therefore, to use some concrete or specific examples in your discussion. (Note that there can be different levels of concreteness and specificity in examples.)

Examples can be taken from history, current events, literature, and so on, or can be entirely your own invention. Exactly what examples you employ and just how and why you use them will, of course, depend on the case. Some uses might be: illustration of a position, problem or idea to help make it clearer; evidence for, perhaps even proof of, a proposition; a counter-example; a case-study to be returned to at various points during the essay; or a problem for a theory or viewpoint to be applied to. Again, be clear about what the example is and how and why you use it. Be careful not to get distracted by, or bogged down in, your examples. Brevity is usually best.

English expression

There's another old saying: "If you can't say what you mean, then you can't mean what you say" - and this very much applies to philosophical writing. Thus, in writing philosophically, you must write clearly and precisely. This means that good philosophical writing requires a good grasp of the language in which it is written, including its grammar and vocabulary. (See Section 9.3 for advice for people from non-English speaking backgrounds.) A high standard of writing skills is to be expected of Arts graduates. Indeed, this sort of skill will last longer than your memory of, for example, the three parts of the Platonic soul (though it is also hoped that some of the content of what you study will also stick). So use your time at university (in all your subjects) to develop these skills further.

Having a mastery of a good range of terms, being sensitive to the subtleties of their meaning, and being able to construct grammatically correct and properly punctuated sentences are essential to the clear articulation and development of your thoughts. Think of grammar, not as some old-fashioned set of rules of linguistic etiquette, but rather as the "internal logic" of a sentence, that is, as the relationships between the words within a sentence which enable them to combine to make sense.

Virtually all sentences in philosophical writing are declarative (ie. make statements), as opposed to interrogative, imperative or exclamatory types of sentences. There is some place, though, for interrogative sentences, ie. questions. (Note that, in contrast, this guide, which is not in the essay genre, contains many imperative sentences, ie. commands.) As you craft each (declarative) sentence in your essay, remember the basics of sentence construction. Make clear what the sentence is about (its subject) and what you are saying about it (the predicate). Make clear what the principal verb is in the predicate, since it is what usually does the main work in saying something about the subject. Where a sentence consists of more than one clause (as many do in philosophical writing), make clear what work each clause is doing. Attend closely, then, to each and every sentence you write so that its sense is clear and is the sense you intend it to have. Think carefully about what it is you want each particular sentence to do (in relation to both those sentences immediately surrounding it and the essay as a whole) and structure your sentence so that it does what you want it to do. To help you with your own sentence construction skills, when reading others' philosophical works (or indeed any writing) attend closely to the construction of each sentence so as to be alive to all the subtleties of the text.

Good punctuation is an essential part of sentence construction. Its role is to help to display the grammar of a sentence so that its meaning is clear. As an example of how punctuation can fundamentally change the grammar and, hence, meaning of a sentence, compare (i) "Philosophers, who argue for the identity of mind and brain, often fail to appreciate the radical consequences of that thesis." and (ii) "Philosophers who argue for the identity of mind and brain often fail to appreciate the radical consequences of that thesis." In the first sentence it is asserted (falsely, as it happens) that all philosophers argue for the identity of mind and brain; in the second, only some philosophers are said to argue for the identity of mind and brain. Only the punctuation differs in the two strings of identical words, and yet the meanings of the sentences are very different. Confusions over this sort of thing are common weaknesses in student essays, and leave readers asking themselves "What exactly is this student trying to say?"

It will be assumed that you can spell - which is not a matter of pressing the "spell-check" key on a word-processor. A good dictionary and a good thesaurus should always be within reach as you write your essay.

Also, try to shorten and simplify sentences where you can do so without sacrificing the subtlety and inherent complexity of the discussion. Where a sentence is becoming too long or complex, it is likely that too many ideas are being bundled up together too closely. Stop and separate your ideas out. If an idea is a good or important one, it will usually deserve its own sentence.

Your "intra-sentential logic" should work very closely with the "inter-sentential logic" of your essay, ie. with the logical relations between your sentences. (This "inter-sentential logic" is what "logic" is usually taken to refer to.) For example, to enable sentences P and Q to work together to yield sentence R as a conclusion, you need to make clear that there are elements within P and Q which connect up to yield R. Consider the following example: "Infanticide is the intentional killing of a human being. However, murder is regarded by all cultures as morally abhorrent. Therefore, people who commit infanticide should be punished." This doesn't work as an argument, because the writer has not constructed sentences which provide the connecting concepts in the various subjects and predicates, even though each sentence is grammatically correct (and possibly even true).

If you are concerned to write not only clearly and precisely, but also with some degree of grace and style (and I hope you are), it's still best to get the clarity and precision right first, in a plain, straightforward way, and then to polish things up afterwards to get the style and grace you want. But don't sacrifice clarity and precision for the sake of style and grace - be prepared to sacrifice that beautiful turn of phrase if its presence is going to send your discussion down an awkward path of reasoning. Aim to hit the nail on the head rather than make a loud bang. What you are likely to find, however, is that a philosophy essay which really is clear and precise will have a large measure of grace and style in its very clarity and precision.

Remember that obscurity is not a sign of profundity. (Some profound thought may well be difficult to follow, but that doesn't mean that one can achieve profundity merely through producing obscure, difficult-to-read writing.) Your marker is interested in what's actually in your essay, not what's possibly inside your head (or indeed what's possibly in some book you happen to have referred to in your essay). So avoid hinting at or alluding suggestively to ideas, especially where they are meant to do some important work in your essay. Instead, lay them out explicitly and directly. Of course, you won't have space to spell out every single idea, so work out which ideas do the most important work and make sure that you at least get those ideas clearly articulated. In expounding a text or problem that ultimately just is vague, muddled, or obscure, try to convey such vagueness, muddle or obscurity clearly, rather than simply reproducing it in your own writing. That is, be clear that and how a text or problem has such features, and then perhaps do your best to make matters clearer.

Despite these stern pronouncements, don't be afraid of sometimes saying things which happen to sound a little odd, if you have tried various formulations and think you have now expressed your ideas just as they should be expressed. Philosophy is often an exploratory business, and new ways of seeing and saying things can sometimes be a part of that exploration.

The need for clarity and precision in philosophical writing sometimes means that you need to stipulate your own meaning for a term. When you want to use a particular word in a particular way for the purposes of your essay - as a "technical term" - be clear about it. (eg "In this essay, I shall intend ‘egoism' to mean ...") Also, be consistent in your technical meanings, or else note when you are not. Be wary, though, of inventing too many neologisms or being too idiosyncratic in your stipulations.

With regard to what "authorial pronoun" to adopt in a philosophy essay, it's standard to write plainly in the first person singular ("I", "me", "my", etc.) rather than use the royal "we" (as in "we shall argue that ..."), or the convoluted quasi-legal indirect form ("It is submitted that ..."), or the scientific objectivity of a physics experimental report. Nonetheless, stick closer to "I argue", "I suggest", "my definition", etc., than to "I wish", "I hate", "my feeling", etc. A philosophy essay is still something more intellectual and formal than a personal reminiscence, polemic, or proclamation. In terms of audience, it's probably best to think of your reader as someone who is intelligent, open to discussion and knows a little about the topic you're writing on, but perhaps is not quite clear or decided about the issues, or needs convincing of the view you want to put forward, or is curious about what you think about the issues.

Try also to use non-discriminatory language, ie. language which does not express or imply inequality of worth between people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, and so on. As you write, you will be considering carefully your choice of words to express your thoughts. You will almost always find that it is possible to avoid discriminatory language by rephrasing your sentences.

Other things to avoid:

• waffle and padding
• vagueness and ambiguity
• abbreviations (this guide I'm writing isn't an eg. of what's req'd. in a phil. essay)
• colloquialisms (which can really get up your reader's nose)
• writing whose syntax merely reflects the patterns of informal speech
• unnecessary abstractness or indirectness
• unexplained jargon
• flattery and invective
• overly-rhetorical questions (do you really need me to tell you what they are?) and other flourishes

There are many guides to good writing available. Anyone who writes (whether in the humanities or the sciences, whether beginners or experienced professionals) will do well to have some on hand. Most good bookshops and libraries will have some. Among the most consulted works are (check for the latest editions):

• J. M. Williams and G. C. Colomb, Style: Toward Clarity and Grace (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995)
• W. Strunk and E. B. White, The Elements of Style, 4th ed. (New York: Longman, 2000)
• E. Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, 3rd ed. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1987)
• R. W. Burchfield, ed., The New Fowler's Modern English Usage (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)
• Pam Peters, The Cambridge Australian English Style Guide (Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1995)
• Australian Government Publishing Service, Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers, 5th ed. (Canberra: AGPS, 1995)

Vocabulary of logical argument

Closely related to the above points about English expression is the importance of having a good grasp of what can rather generally be called "the vocabulary of logical argument". These sorts of terms are crucial in articulating clearly and cogently a logical line of argument. Such argumentation will, of course, be of central importance in whatever discipline you are studying, indeed in any sphere of life that requires effective thinking and communication. I have in mind terms such as these (grouped a little loosely):

all, any, every, most, some, none, a, an, the that, this, it, he, she, they if . . . , then. . . ; if and only if . . . , then . . . ; unless either . . . or . . .; neither . . . nor . . . not, is, are therefore, thus, hence, so, because, since, follows, entails, implies, infer, consequence, conditional upon moreover, furthermore which, that, whose and, but, however, despite, notwithstanding, nevertheless, even, though, still possibly, necessarily, can, must, may, might, ought, should true, false, probable, certain sound, unsound, valid, invalid, fallacious, supported, proved, contradicted, rebutted, refuted, negated logical, illogical, reasonable, unreasonable, rational, irrational assumption, premise, belief, claim, proposition argument, reason, reasoning, evidence, proof

Most of these are quite simple terms, but they are crucial in argumentative or discursive writing of all kinds. (Many are themselves the subject of study in logic, a branch of philosophy). The sloppy use of these sorts of terms is another common weakness in students' philosophy essays. Pay close and careful attention to how you employ them. Moreover, pay close and careful attention to how the authors you read use them. For further discussion of some of these terms and others, see:

• Basic Philosophical Vocabulary, prepared by the staff of the Philosophy Department and available from the programs Office
• Wesley C. Salmon, Logic, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1973)
• Antony Flew, Thinking About Thinking (London: Fontana, 1985)
• Graham Priest, Logic: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)
• Joel Rudinow and Vincent E. Barry, Invitation to Critical Thinking, 4th ed. (Fort Worth, Texas: Harcourt Brace, 1999)

Revising your essay

It is virtually essential that you write a first draft of your essay and then work on that draft to work towards your finished essay. Indeed, several drafts may well be necessary in order to produce your best possible work. It is a rare philosopher indeed who can get things perfectly right on the first attempt, so be prepared to revise and re-develop what you write. Don't be too precious about what you have written, if it appears that it should be sacrificed in the revision process. There is usually a very marked difference between essays which are basically first draft rush-jobs done the night before they are due and those which have been revised and polished. Give yourself time to revise by starting writing early on. For most philosophy students, the greater part of the work in essay writing is in the writing, not in the preliminary researches and planning stages. So be wary of thinking "I've done all the research. I only need to write up my notes, which I can do the night before the essay's due". This is likely to lead to a weak, perhaps non-existent, essay (and very likely a sleepless night).

Stick to the word limit given for your essay. Why are word limits imposed? First, to give the markers a fair basis for comparing student essays. Second, to give you the opportunity to practise the discipline of working creatively under constraints. Skill in this discipline will stand you in very good stead in any sphere where circumstances impose limitations. Again, word limits are not constraints on your intellectual freedom. Outside your essay you are free to write without limit. But even there you'll probably find that your creativity is improved by working under a self-imposed discipline.

As a general rule, most student essays that fall well short of the word limit are weak or lazy attempts at the task, and most essays that go well over the limit are not much stronger or the result of much harder work - the extra length is often due to unstructured waffle or padding which the writer hasn't thought enough about so as to edit judiciously. If you structure your essay clearly, you'll find it easier to revise and edit, whether in order to contract or expand it. ("Hmm, let's see: section 2 is much longer than section 4, but is not as important, so I'll cut it down. And I should expand section 3, because that's a crucial step. And I can shift that third paragraph in the Introduction to the Conclusion.")

Plagiarism and originality

Plagiarism is essentially a form of academic dishonesty or cheating. At university level, such dishonesty is not tolerated and is dealt with severely, usually by awarding zero marks for a plagiarised essay or, in some cases, dismissing a student from the university.

When you submit your essay, you are implicitly stating that the essay is your own original and independent work, that you have not submitted the same work for assessment in another subject, and that where you have made use of other people's work, this is properly acknowledged. If you know that this is not in fact the case, you are being dishonest. (In a number of university departments, students are in fact required to sign declarations of academic honesty.)

Plagiarism is the knowing but unacknowledged use of work by someone else (including work by another student, and indeed oneself - see below) and which is being presented as one's own work. It can take a number of forms, including:

• copying : exactly reproducing another's words
• paraphrasing : expressing the meaning of another's words in different words
• summarising : reproducing the main points of another's argument
• cobbling : copying, paraphrasing or summarising the work of a number of different people and piecing them together to produce one body of text
• submitting one's own work when it has already been submitted for assessment in another subject
• collusion : presenting an essay as your own independent work when in fact it has been produced, in whole or part, in collusion with one or more other people

None of the practices of copying, paraphrasing, summarizing or cobbling is wrong in itself, but when one or more is done without proper acknowledgment it constitutes plagiarism. Therefore, all sources must be adequately and accurately acknowledged in footnotes or endnotes. (See Section 7.) Plagiarism from the internet in particular can be a temptation for a certain kind of student. However, be warned: there is a number of very good internet and software tools for identifying plagiarism.

With regard to collusion, it's undoubtedly often very helpful to discuss one's work with others, be it other students, family members, friends or teachers. Indeed, philosophy thrives on dialogue. However, don't kid yourself that you would simply be extending that process if you were to ask your interlocutor to join with you in the writing of your essay, whether by asking them to tell you what you should write or to write down some of their thoughts for you to reproduce in your essay. At the end of the day, you must be the one to decide what goes into your essay.

Originality

Students sometimes worry about whether they will be able to develop "original ideas", especially in light of the fact that nearly every philosophical idea one comes up with seems to have been thought of before by someone else. There is no denying that truly original work in philosophy is well rewarded, but your first aim should be to develop ideas that you think are good and not merely different. If, after arguing for what you believe is right, and arguing in way that you think is good, you then discover that someone else has had the same idea, don't throw your work away - you should feel vindicated to some extent that your thinking has been congruent with that of another (possibly great) philosopher. (If you have not yet handed your essay in when you make this discovery, make an appropriately placed note to that effect.) Don't be fooled, however, into thinking that plagiarism can be easily passed off as congruent thinking. Of course, if that other philosopher's ideas have helped you to develop your ideas, then this is not a matter of congruent ideas but rather of derivative ideas, and this must be adequately acknowledged. If, after developing your ideas, you discover that they are original, then that is an added bonus. But remember that it is more important to be a good philosopher than an original one.

Quotations, footnotes, endnotes and bibliography

Quotations in your essay should be kept to a minimum. The markers know the central texts pretty well already and so don't need to have pages thereof repeated in front of them. Of course, some quotation will usually be important and useful - sometimes essential - in both exposition and critical discussion.

When you quote the words of someone else directly, you must make the quotation clearly distinct from your own text, using quotation marks . (eg "Descartes said that 'it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once.'* He makes this claim …" - where the words quoted from Descartes are in 'single quotation marks'. Note that it is relatively arbitrary whether one uses 'single' or "double" quotation marks for "first order" quotations, but whichever style you adopt, use it consistently in the one essay.) Alternatively, where the quoted passage is greater than three lines, put the quoted words in a separate indented paragraph , so that your essay would look like this:

In his First Meditation , Descartes argues as follows:

Whatever I have up till now accepted as most true I have acquired either from the senses or through the senses. But from time to time I have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once.* In this essay I shall argue that prudence does not in fact require us to distrust our senses and that Descartes's sceptical method is therefore seriously flawed.

In both cases, the quotations must be given proper referencingin a footnote or endnote.

When you are not quoting another person directly, but are still making use of their work - as in indirect quotations (eg "Descartes says that it is wise not to trust something that has deceived us before"*), paraphrases, summaries, and cobblings - you must still acknowledge your debts, using footnotes or endnotes.

* Rene Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy , trans. John Cottingham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986 [first French ed., 1641]), p. 12.

Footnotes and endnotes

Footnotes appear at the foot of the same page on which the cited material appears, clearly separated from the main body of the text, each one clearly numbered. Endnotes appear at the end of the essay, again clearly separated from the main body of text, numbered and headed "Endnotes" or "Notes". Either method is acceptable, but you should choose one and stick with it throughout the one essay.

Below are some examples of how to put the relevant referencing information in footnotes and endnotes. This is not intended as an exercise in pedantry, but as a guide to how to provide the information needed for adequate referencing. The reason we provide this information is to enable our readers to find the sources we use in order to verify them and to allow them to pursue the material further if it interests them. In your own researches you will come to value good referencing in the texts you read as a helpful source of further references on a topic. Again, it is this sort of research skill that an Arts graduate will be expected to have mastered.

There are various conventions for writing up footnotes and endnotes. The Philosophy Department does not require that any particular convention be followed, only that you be consistent in your use of the convention that you do choose. For other conventions see the style guides mentioned above, or simply go to some texts published by reputable publishers and see what formats they employ.

Imagine, then, that the following are endnotes at the end of your essay. I will explain them below.

• James Rachels, The Elements of Moral Philosophy , 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993), p. 25.
• Philippa Foot, "Moral Relativism", in Michael Krausz and Jack W. Meiland, eds., Relativism: Cognitive and Moral (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982), p. 155.
• Ibid., p. 160.
• Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. H. J. Paton (New York: Harper and Row, 1964 [first German ed., 1785]), p. 63.
• Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, (London: Dent, 1973 [first pub. 1651]),p. 65.
• Rachels, The Elements, p. 51.
• Peter Winch, "The Universalizability of Moral Judgements", The Monist 49 (1965), p. 212.
• Antony Duff, "Legal Punishment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2001 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2001/entries/legal-punishment/ at 15 June 2003, sec. 6.

Notes explained

• This is your first reference to a book called The Elements of Moral Philosophy. The title is given in full and in italics. If you are unable to use italics, then you should underline the title. The book's author is James Rachels. It's the 2nd edition of that book, which was published in New York, by the publishers McGraw-Hill, in 1993. The page you have referred to in your main text is page 25
• This is your first reference to Philippa Foot's article, "Moral Relativism", the title of which is put in "quotation marks". This article appeared in a book (title in italics) which is an anthology of different articles, and which was edited by Krausz and Meiland (names in full). The rest is in the same style as note (1)
• "Ibid." is short for "ibidem", which means "in the same place" in Latin. Use it on its own when you want to refer to exactly the same work and page number as in the immediately preceding note. So here the reference is again to Foot's article at page 155
• Ditto, except this time you refer to a different page in Foot's article, namely page 160
• This is reference to a book by Kant. Same book details as per note (1), except that, because this is a translation, you include the translator's name, and the date of the first edition in the original language
• This is a book reference again, so it's the same as note (1), except that, because it's an old book, you include the date of the original edition. (How old does a book have to be before it merits this treatment? There is no settled view. Note, though, that this convention is not usually followed for ancient authors)
• Here you are referring to Rachels' book again, but, because you are not in the very next note after a reference to it, you can't use "ibid.". Simply give the author's surname and a short title of the book, plus page reference. There is also a common alternative to this, whereby you give the surname, and write "op. cit." (which is short for "opere citato", which is Latin for "in the work already cited") and page reference (eg "Rachels, op. cit., p. 51.") Your reader then has to scan back over the notes to see what that "op." was exactly. The first option (author plus short title) is usually easier on the reader
• This is a reference to an article by Peter Winch in a journal called The Monist. The article's title is in "quotes", the journal title is in italics. The volume of the journal is 49, the year of publication is 1965, the page referred to is p. 212
• This is a reference to an article in the internet-based Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The article is titled "Legal Punishment" and was written by Antony Duff. The Encyclopedia was edited by Edward N. Zalta. Note that I have basically followed the mode of citation that the Encyclopedia itself recommends. (This is one sign of the site being a reputable one. Where a site makes such a recommendation, it's best to follow it.) I have, however, also added the date on which the article was retrieved from the site, and put the author's given name first, to be consistent with the other footnotes. I have also added the reference to section 6, in an effort to be more precise as to where in the article the material I used came from. Since web pages aren't numbered in the manner of hard copy works, it will help if you are able to refer to some other feature, such as paragraphs or sections, so as to pin-point your reference. In the absence of a site recommending a mode of citation to its own material, the basic information needed for adequate citation of internet-based material is (where identifiable) the author, the document title, the year the document was created, the website name, the uniform resource locator (URL) in <arrow-brackets>, date of retrieval, and a pin-point reference*

* I am here following the mode of citation of internet materials recommended in Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc, Australian Guide to Legal Citation , 2nd ed. (Melbourne: Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc, 2002), pp. 70-73. I have, though, added the desirability of a pin-point reference.

Bibliography

At the end of your essay (after your endnotes, if used) you should list in a bibliography all of the works referred to in your notes, as well as any other works you consulted in researching and writing your essay. The list should be in alphabetical order, going by authors' surnames. The format should be the same as for your notes, except that you drop the page references and should put surnames first. So the bibliography of our mock-essay above would look like this:

• Duff, Antony, "Legal Punishment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2001 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2001/entries/legal-punishment/ at 15 June 2003
• Foot, Philippa, "Moral Relativism", in Michael Krausz and Jack Meiland, eds., Relativism: Cognitive and Moral (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982)
• Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan (London: Dent, 1973 [first pub.1651])
• Kant, Immanuel, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals , trans. H.J. Paton (New York: Harper and Row, 1964 [first German ed. 1785])
• Rachels, James, The Elements of Moral Philosophy , 2nd ed., (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993)
• Winch, Peter, "The Universalizability of Moral Judgements", The Monist 49 (1965)

Presentation of essays and seeking advice

Generally, you should present an essay that is legible (hand-writing is OK, but typed or word-processed essays are preferable), in English, on one side of pieces of paper that are somewhere in the vicinity of A4 size and are fixed together . You should attach a completed Cover Sheet provided by the Philosophy program. Plastic document covers, spiral binding and other forms of presentational paraphernalia are not necessary (nor are they usually even desirable, as they mostly just get in the marker's way).

Late essays

Late essays are penalised . (For details of penalties consult the Philosophy program's notice board.)

Essays not handed in

Essays not handed in at all get zero marks. An essay that is handed in but gets a mark below 50 (and so is technically a "failed" essay) still gets some marks. (At least, it will so long as it's not so extremely late that the deducted marks wipe out all the marks it would have received if handed in on time.) All marks received for your essay (whether pass or fail) go toward your final score in the subject. Therefore, even if you think your essay is bound to fail (but please let your marker be the judge of that), or the due date has already passed, or both, it is still in your interests to hand your essay in .

Tutors and lecturers

Philosophy staff are not there just to be listened to by you; they are also there to listen to you. So don't hesitate to contact your tutor or lecturer to discuss questions or problems you have concerning your work.

If you have a legitimate excuse, you may be granted an extension on the due date for your essay by the lecturer in charge. Similarly, special consideration may also be granted when illness or other circumstances adversely affect your work. Applications for special consideration are made online via the Special Consideration web page.

Student counselling

Some personal or non-philosophical academic difficulties you might have you might want to discuss with someone other than your tutor or lecturer. Student Counselling and Psychological Services are there for you to discuss all sorts of problems you might encounter. Please consult your student diary for details on the counselling service.

English language assistance

As noted above, good philosophical writing requires a good grasp of the language in which it is written. If you are from a non-English speaking background and are having difficulties with your English expression in an academic context, you might like to make use of the services provided by Student Services Academic Skills . Many native English speakers, too, can benefit from short "refresher" courses and workshops run by the Centre. Please consult your student diary for details about this service.

A bit on Philosophy exams

Essays of the sort discussed so far in this guide are not the only form of assessment in the Philosophy program - examinations are also set. What is to be said about them?

First, not much that is different from what's been said above about philosophy essays. This is because what you write in a philosophy exam is none other than a philosophy essay . Have a look at past philosophy exam papers, in the Gibson and Baillieu libraries, to get a feel for them. The only basic difference between essays and exams is the matter of what constraints you're working under. Essays have word limits; exams have time limits . Again, stick to them. (Actually, you'll be made to stick to them by the exam invigilators.)

It's best, then, to think about how long to spend writing on an exam essay topic, rather than about how many words to write on it. Simple arithmetic will tell you how much time to spend on each exam question. (eg if you have a 2-hour exam and have to answer 3 questions, each worth one-third of the exam mark, then spend 40 minutes on each question.) Avoid the trap of "borrowing time" from a later question in order to perfect your answer to an earlier question, and then working faster on the later questions to catch up on lost time - this is likely to get you in a tangle. There are no word limits in philosophy exam essays, but don't think that the more you scrawl across the page, the more marks you'll get. Nonetheless, use the time you've got so as to maximise your display of your philosophical understanding and skills in answering the question.

Planning and structuring remain very important in exam essays. With regard to the niceties of footnotes, endnotes and bibliographies, etc., these are not necessary, so don't waste time on these. However, if you quote or refer to a specific passage from a text, do indicate clearly that it is a quotation or reference. (The principle of being clear as to who is saying what remains central.) If you have the reference handy, just put it briefly in the text of your exam essay. (eg "As Descartes says in Meditation I (p. 12), . . ." or "'[I]t is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once' (Descartes, Meditation I, p. 12)".) Generally speaking, you will show your familiarity with any relevant texts by how you handle them in your discussion. This is also true for your non-exam essays.

Your preparation for the exam should have been done well before entering the exam hall. Note that various subjects have restrictions on what texts and other items can be brought into the exam hall. (Consult the Philosophy program's notice board for details.) Many subjects will have "closed book" exams. Even if an exam is "open book", if you are properly prepared, you should not need to spend much time at all consulting texts or notes during the exam itself.

You won't have time for redrafting and revising your exam essay (which makes planning and structuring your answers before you start writing all the more important). If you do want to delete something, just cross it out clearly. Don't waste time with liquid paper or erasers. Write legibly . Don't wr. "point form" sav. time. Diff. kn. mean. use incomp. sent.

Finally, read the instructions at the beginning of the exam paper. They are important. (eg it's not a good strategy to answer two questions from Part A, when the Instructions tell you to answer two questions, one from Part A and one from Part B.) Note the (somewhat quaint) University practice of starting Reading Time some time before the stated time for the exam. Philosophy exams usually have 15 minutes of reading time. (Check for each of your exams.) So, if your exam timetable says the exam is at 2.15 pm, with reading time of 15 minutes, then the reading time starts at 2.00 pm and the writing time starts at 2.15pm - so get to the exam hall well before 2.00 pm. Reading time is very important. Use it to decide which questions you'll answer and to start planning your answers.

Checklist of questions

• Do I understand the essay question ? Do I know when the essay is due ?
• Do I know which texts to consult? Do I know where to find them?
• Have I made useful notes from my reading of the relevant texts?
• Have I made a plan of how I'll approach the question in my essay?
• Have I given myself enough time to draft and redraft my essay?
• Have I written a clearly structured essay? Is it clear what each stageis doing? Do I do what I say I'll do in my Introduction?
• Have I clearly distinguished exposition and critical discussion ? Have I given a fair and accurate account of the author(s) in question?
• Is my response to the topic relevant ? Do I answer the question? Have I kept my essay within the general bounds of the topic?
• Have I displayed a good grasp of the vocabulary of logical argument ? Are my arguments logically valid and sound? Are my claims supported by reasons ? Am I consistent within my essay?
• Is my English expression clear and precise ? Are my grammar, punctuation and spelling correct? Have I said what I meant to say? Is my writing legible?
• Have I fully acknowledged all my sources in footnotes or endnotes? Are my quotations accurate? Have I included a bibliography ?
• Do I need to revise any part of my essay again?
• Have I made a copy or photocopy of my essay for myself?
• Have I kept the receipt for my handed-in essay?

How to Write a Philosophy Essay: Ultimate Guide

What Is a Philosophy Essay: Definition

Philosophical writing isn't your typical assignment. Its aim isn't to provide an overview of professional philosophers' works and say whether you agree with them.

Philosophy demands becoming a philosopher for the time of writing, thinking analytically and critically of ideas, pondering the Big Questions, and asking 'Why?'. That's why it requires time and energy, as well as a lot of thinking on your part.

But what is philosophy essay, exactly? If you're tasked with writing one, you'll have to select a thesis in the philosophical domain and argue for or against it. Then, you can support your thesis with other professional philosophers' works. But it has to contain your own philosophical contribution, too. (This is only one definition of philosophy essay, of course.)

What's a Good Philosophy Paper Outline?

Before you start writing your first line, you should make a philosophy essay outline. Think of it as a plan for your philosophy paper that briefly describes each paragraph's point.

As for how to write a philosophy essay outline, here are a few tips for you:

• Start with your thesis. What will you be arguing for or against?
• Read what philosophical theory has to say and note sources for your possible arguments and counterarguments.
• Decide on the definitions of core concepts to include precise philosophical meanings in your essay.
• After careful and extended reflection, organize your ideas following the structure below.

How To Structure a Philosophy Paper?

Like any other essay, a philosophy paper consists of an introduction, a main body, and a conclusion. Sticking to this traditional philosophy essay structure will help you avoid unnecessary stress.

Here's your mini-guide on how to structure a philosophy essay:

• Introduction - Clarify the question you will be answering in your philosophy paper. State your thesis – i.e., the answer you'll be arguing for. Explain general philosophical terms if needed.
• Main body - Start with providing arguments for your stance and refute all the objections for each of them. Then, describe other possible answers and their reasoning – and counter the main arguments in their support.
• Conclusion - Sum up all possible answers to the questions and reiterate why yours is the most viable one.

What's an Appropriate Philosophy Essay Length?

In our experience, 2,000 to 2,500 words are enough to cover the topic in-depth without compromising the quality of the writing.

However, see whether you have an assigned word limit before getting started. If it's shorter or longer than we recommend, stick to that word limit in writing your essay on philosophy.

What Format Should You Use for a Philosophy Paper?

As a service we can attest that most students use the APA guidelines as their philosophy essay format. However, your school has the final say in what format you should stick to.

Sometimes, you can be asked to use a different college philosophy essay format, like MLA or Chicago. But if you're the one to choose the guidelines and don't know which one would be a good philosophy argumentative essay format, let's break down the most popular ones.

APA, MLA, and Chicago share some characteristics:

• Font: Time New Roman, 12 pt
• Line spacing: double
• Margins: 1" (left and right)
• Page number: in the header

But here's how they differ:

• A title page required
• Sources list: 'References' page
• No title page required
• Sources list: 'Works cited' page
• Sources list: 'Bibliography' page
• Footnotes and endnotes are required for citations

Have a Tight Deadline?

Our PRO writers will quickly produce a unique paper for you based on your specifications!

Guideline on How to Write a Philosophy Essay

If you still don't feel that confident about writing a philosophy paper, don't worry. Philosophical questions, by definition, have more than one interpretation. That's what makes them so challenging to write about.

To help you out in your philosophical writing journey, we've prepared this list of seven tips on how to write a philosophy essay.

• Read Your Sources Thoughtfully

Whether your recommended reading includes Dante's Divine Comedy or Jean-Paul Sartre's Existentialism Is a Humanism , approach your sources with curiosity and analytical thinking. Don't just mindlessly consume those texts. Instead, keep asking yourself questions while you're reading them, such as:

• What concepts and questions does the author address?
• What's the meaning behind key ideas and metaphors in the text?
• What does the author use as a convincing argument?
• Are there any strange or obscure distinctions?

As for which sources you should turn to, that all depends on your central question; philosophy topics for essay are diverse and sometimes opposed. So, you'll have to do your fair share of research.

• Brainstorm & Organize Your Ideas

As you're reading those texts, jot down what comes to your mind. It can be a great quote you've stumbled upon, an idea for an argument, or your thoughtful, critical responses to certain opinions.

Then, sort through and organize all of those notes into an outline for your essay in philosophy. Make sure that it holds up in terms of logic. And ensure that your arguments and counterarguments are compelling, sensible, and convincing!

Now, you might be wondering how to write a philosophy essay introduction. Don't worry: there's an explanation right below!

• Craft Your Introductory Paragraph

Think of your introduction as a road map preparing your reader for the journey your essay will take them on. This road map will describe the key 'stops' in your essay on philosophy: your topic, stance, and how you will argue for it – and refute other stances.

Don't hesitate to write it out as a step-by-step guide in the first or third person. For example: 'First, I will examine... Then, I will dispute... Finally, I will present….'

Need an example of an excellent introduction for a philosophy paper? You’ll be thrilled to know that we have one of our philosophy essay examples below!

• Present Your Key Arguments & Reflections

Philosophy papers require a fair share of expository writing. This is where you demonstrate your understanding of the topic. So, make your exposition extensive and in-depth, and don't omit anything crucial.

As for the rest of the main body, we've covered how to structure a philosophy essay above. In short, you'll need to present supporting arguments, anticipate objections, and address them.

Use your own words when writing a philosophy paper; avoid pretentious or verbose language. Yes, some technical philosophical terms may be necessary. But the point of a philosophical paper is to present your stance – and develop your own philosophy – on the topic.

• Don't Shy Away from Critical Ideas

Whenever you examine a philosophical theory or text, treat it with a fair share of criticism. This is what it means in practice – and how to structure a philosophy essay around your critical ideas:

• Pinpoint what the theory's or idea's strengths are and every valid argument in its support;
• See the scope of its application – perhaps, there are exceptions you can use as counterarguments;
• Research someone else's criticism of the theory or idea. Develop your own criticism, as well;
• Check if the philosopher already addressed those criticisms.
• Ponder Possible Answers to Philosophical Questions

Writing an essay in philosophy is, in fact, easier for some students as the topic can always have multiple answers, and you can choose any of them. However, this can represent an even tougher challenge for other students. After all, you must consider those possible answers and address them in the paper.

How do you pinpoint those possible answers? Some of them can come to your mind when you brainstorm, especially if you'll be writing about one of the Big Questions. Others will reveal themselves when you start reading other philosophers' works.

Remember to have arguments for and against each possible answer and address objections.

• Write a Powerful Conclusion

The conclusion is where you sum up your paper in just one paragraph. Reiterate your thesis and what arguments support it. But in philosophical writing, you can rarely have a clear, undebatable answer by the end of the paper. So, it's fine if your conclusion doesn't have a definitive verdict.

Here are a few tips on how to write a conclusion in a philosophy essay:

• Don't introduce new arguments or evidence in conclusion – they belong in the main body;
• Avoid overestimating or embellishing the level or value of your work;
• Best conclusions are obvious and logical for those reading the paper – i.e.; a conclusion shouldn't be surprising at all;
• Stay away from poorly explained claims in conclusion.

Philosophical Essay Example

Sometimes, it's better to see how it's done once than to read a thousand guides. We know that like no one else, so we have prepared this short philosophy essay example to show you what excellent philosophy papers look like:

Like this example? Wondering how to get a perfect philosophy essay as great as it is? You're in luck: you can leave " write my philosophy paper " request and buy online essay at EssayPro without breaking the bank! Keep in mind: this example is only a fraction of what our writers are capable of!

30 Philosophy Paper Topic Ideas

Philosophical writing concerns questions that don't have clear-cut yes or no answers. So, coming up with philosophy essay topics yourself can be tough.

Fret not: we've put together this list of 30 topics for philosophy papers on ethics and leadership for you. Feel free to use them as-is or tweak them!

15 Ethics Philosophy Essay Topics

Ethics deals with the question of right and wrong. So, if you're looking for philosophy essay topic ideas, ethics concerns some of the most interesting – and most mind-boggling – questions about human behavior.

Here are 15 compelling philosophy essay topics ethics has to offer you:

• Is starting a war always morally wrong?
• Would it be right to legalize euthanasia?
• What is more important: the right to privacy or national security?
• Is justice always fair?
• Should nuclear weapons be banned?
• Should teenagers be allowed to get plastic surgery?
• Can cheating be justifiable?
• Can AI algorithms behave ethically?
• Should you abide by an unfair law?
• Should voting become mandatory?
• When can the right to freedom of speech be limited?
• Is it the consumers' responsibility to fight climate by changing their buying decisions?
• Is getting an abortion immoral?
• Should we give animals their own rights?
• Would human gene editing be immoral?

15 Leadership Philosophy Essay Topics

You're lucky if you're tasked with writing a leadership philosophy essay! We've compiled this list of 15 fresh, unconventional topics for you:

• Is formal leadership necessary for ensuring the team's productivity?
• Can authoritative leadership be ethical?
• How do informal leaders take on this role?
• Should there be affirmative action for formal leadership roles?
• Is it possible to measure leadership?
• What's the most important trait of a leader?
• Is leadership an innate talent or an acquired skill?
• Should leadership mean holding power over others?
• Can a team function without a leader?
• Should you follow a leader no matter what?
• Is leader succession necessary? Why?
• Are leadership and power the same?
• Can we consider influencers contemporary leaders?
• Why do people follow leaders?
• What leadership style is the most ethical one?

7 Helpful Tips on Crafting a Philosophical Essay

Still, feeling stuck writing a philosophical essay? Here are seven more tips on crafting a good philosophy paper that can help you get unstuck:

• Write the way you would talk about the subject. This will help you avoid overly convoluted, poor writing by using more straightforward prose with familiar words.
• Don't focus on having a definitive answer by the end of your philosophical essay if your conclusion states that the question should be clarified further or that there are multiple answers.
• You don't have to answer every question you raise in the paper. Even professional philosophers sometimes don't have all the answers.
• Get straight to the point at the start of your paper. No need to warm up the reader – and inflate your word count.
• Avoid using quotes. Instead, explain the author's point in your own words. But if you feel it's better to use a direct quote, explicitly state how it ties to your argument after it.
• Write in the first person unless your assignment requires you to use the third person.
• Start working on your philosophical essay well in advance. However much time you think you'll need, double it!

7 Common Mistakes to Avoid in Philosophy Writing

Sometimes, knowing what you shouldn't do in a philosophical essay is also helpful. Here are seven common mistakes that often bring down students' grades – but are easily avoidable:

• Appealing to authority – in philosophy, strive to develop your own stance instead;
• Using convoluted sentences to appear more intelligent – instead, use simpler ways to deliver the same meaning;
• Including interesting or important material without tying it to your point – every piece of evidence and every idea should explicitly support your arguments or counterarguments;
• Inflating your word count without delivering value – in the writing process, it's crucial to 'kill your darlings';
• Making poorly explained claims – explicitly present reasons for or against every claim you include;
• Leaving core concepts undefined – explain what you mean by the words like 'free will' or 'existentialism' in the introduction;
• Worrying about being wrong – no one can be proven wrong in philosophy!

Realize that your draft contains those mistakes, and it's too late to fix them? Then, let us help you out! Whether you ask us, 'Fix my paper' or ' Write my paper from scratch,' our philosophy writers will deliver an excellent paper worth the top grade. And no, it won't cost you a fortune!

Worried About All of the Approaching Assignments?

We provide the top writing services you've been searching for! Our experts can deliver your coursework swiftly!

Daniel Parker

is a seasoned educational writer focusing on scholarship guidance, research papers, and various forms of academic essays including reflective and narrative essays. His expertise also extends to detailed case studies. A scholar with a background in English Literature and Education, Daniel’s work on EssayPro blog aims to support students in achieving academic excellence and securing scholarships. His hobbies include reading classic literature and participating in academic forums.

is an expert in nursing and healthcare, with a strong background in history, law, and literature. Holding advanced degrees in nursing and public health, his analytical approach and comprehensive knowledge help students navigate complex topics. On EssayPro blog, Adam provides insightful articles on everything from historical analysis to the intricacies of healthcare policies. In his downtime, he enjoys historical documentaries and volunteering at local clinics.

Related Articles

The Writing Place

Resources – how to write a philosophy paper, introduction to the topic.

The most common introductory level philosophy papers involve making an original argument (“Do you believe that free will exists?”) or thinking critically about another philosopher’s argument (“Do you agree with Hobbes’ argument about free will?”). This short checklist will help you construct a paper for these two types of assignments.

The Basics of a Philosophy Paper

1. introduction and thesis.

There is not a need for a grand or lofty introduction in a philosophy paper. Introductory paragraphs should be short and concise. In the thesis, state what you will be arguing and how you will make your argument.

2. Define Terms

It is important to define words that you use in your argument that may be unclear to your reader. While it may seem like words like “morality” and “free will” have an obvious definition, you need to make clear to your audience what those words mean in the context of your paper. A generally useful rule is to pretend that your reader does not know anything about your course or the subject of philosophy and define any words or concepts that such a reader may find ambiguous.

In a philosophy paper, you need to give reasons to support the argument you made in your thesis. This should constitute the largest portion of your paper. It is also important here to name preexisting conditions (premises) that must exist in order for the argument to be true. You can use real-world examples and the ideas of other philosophers to generate reasons why your argument is true. Remember to use simple and clear language and treat your readers as if they are not experts in philosophy.

4. Objections and Responses to Objections

Unlike other types of persuasive essays, in a many philosophy papers you should anticipate criticisms of your argument and respond to those criticisms. If you can refute objections to your argument, your paper will be stronger. While you do not have to address every potential counterargument, you should try to cover the most salient problems.

5. Conclusion

Like the introduction, you should be simple and concise. In the final paragraph you should review and summarize what your paper has established. The conclusion should tell readers why your argument is relevant. It answers the question, “Why do I care?”

General Tips

• Do not overstate or over generalize your ideas.
• Do not try to argue for both sides of an issue. Be clear about where you stand or your reader will be confused.
• Be specific. Do not try to tackle a huge issue, but rather, aim to discuss something small that can be done justice in just a few pages.
• Be wary of using religious or legal grounds for your argument.

A Quick Practice Exercise...

Practice: what is wrong with this paragraph.

This paragraph contains 5 major errors that you should try to avoid in a philosophy paper. Can you find them all?

“In his argument from design, Paley uses the example of a watch that he finds upon a road that has dozens of pieces that work together to make the clock function.  He asserts that this watch is too perfect of a creation not to have a creator and that it would be obvious to conclude that the timepiece must have a maker. Similarly, the Bible proves that God must exist because he made the world beautiful in seven days.  Paley notes, “There cannot be design without a designer; contrivance, without a contriver; order, without choice; arrangement without anything capable of arranging” (Paley 49). This reasoning is strong because it is apparent that beings found in nature have a complex design.  For example, the iris, retina, lens and ocular muscles of the eye all work together to produce sight in the human eye and without any one of these mechanisms, one would be blind.  For all of these tiny pieces that are required for a functioning eye to have randomly come together seems impossible. Therefore, it is logical that there had to be a designer who created a world in which DNA replicates and dozens of small parts create a functioning human or animal.  By simply viewing the natural world, it is highly plausible to see that Paley’s theory is correct.”

1.  “Similarly, the Bible proves that God must exist because he had the power to make the flood happen in Noah’s Ark.”  Arguments based off religious texts, such as the Bible, are generally frowned upon and only weaken an essay.

2. The writer does not define what he means by “God.” Is God a benevolent overseer of the earth? Or is God a vengeful figure? Although it may seem as though everyone knows who God is, in reality, people have different perspective and the writer needs to define God’s character for the reader.

3.  “For all of these tiny pieces that are required for a functioning eye to have randomly come together seems impossible.”  The phrase “ seems impossible ” is weak and unclear. In a philosophy paper, you should take a strong stance and avoid words that weaken your argument like “probably” or “seem.” Additionally, the phrase “ highly plausible ” appears at the end of the paragraph, which is also a phrase that weakens the argument.

4. The writer gives not premises for Paley’s argument to be true. A stronger paper would name the preexisting conditions that must exist in order for the argument to stand.

5. The “real world” example of the human eye is not the best. The writer neglects strong counterarguments such as evolution and the existence of blindness in humans. A good philosophy paper would be more careful when considering real world examples.

Developed by Ann Bruton

Adapted from:

Harvard University’s Short Guide to Philosophical Writing

Kenneth Seeskin’s “How to Write a Philosophy Paper,” Northwestern University

Click here to return to the “Writing Place Resources” main page.

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

2.6: Writing Philosophy Papers

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 162139

• Nathan Smith et al.

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Identify and characterize the format of a philosophy paper.
• Create thesis statements that are manageable and sufficiently specific.
• Collect evidence and formulate arguments.
• Organize ideas into a coherent written presentation.

This section will provide some practical advice on how to write philosophy papers. The format presented here focuses on the use of an argumentative structure in writing. Different philosophy professors may have different approaches to writing. The sections below are only intended to give some general guidelines that apply to most philosophy classes.

Identify Claims

The key element in any argumentative paper is the claim you wish to make or the position you want to defend. Therefore, take your time identifying claims, which is also called the thesis statement. What do you want to say about the topic? What do you want the reader to understand or know after reading your piece? Remember that narrow, modest claims work best. Grand claims are difficult to defend, even for philosophy professors. A good thesis statement should go beyond the mere description of another person’s argument. It should say something about the topic, connect the topic to other issues, or develop an application of some theory or position advocated by someone else. Here are some ideas for creating claims that are perfectly acceptable and easy to develop:

• Compare two philosophical positions. What makes them similar? How are they different? What general lessons can you draw from these positions?
• Identify a piece of evidence or argument that you think is weak or may be subject to criticism. Why is it weak? How is your criticism a problem for the philosopher’s perspective?
• Apply a philosophical perspective to a contemporary case or issue. What makes this philosophical position applicable? How would it help us understand the case?
• Identify another argument or piece of evidence that might strengthen a philosophical position put forward by a philosopher. Why is this a good argument or piece of evidence? How does it fit with the philosopher’s other claims and arguments?
• Consider an implication (either positive or negative) that follows from a philosopher’s argument. How does this implication follow? Is it necessary or contingent? What lessons can you draw from this implication (if positive, it may provide additional reasons for the argument; if negative, it may provide reasons against the argument)?

Think Like A Philosopher

The following multiple-choice exercises will help you identify and write modest, clear philosophical thesis statements. A thesis statement is a declarative statement that puts forward a position or makes a claim about some topic.

• How does Aristotle think virtue is necessary for happiness?
• Is happiness the ultimate goal of human action?
• Whether or not virtue is necessary for happiness.
• Aristotle argues that happiness is the ultimate good of human action and virtue is necessary for happiness.
• René Descartes argues that the soul or mind is the essence of the human person.
• Descartes shows that all beliefs and memories about the external world could be false.
• Some people think that Descartes is a skeptic, but I will show that he goes beyond skepticism.
• In the meditations, Descartes claims that the mind and body are two different substances.
• Descartes says that the mind is a substance that is distinct from the body, but I disagree.
• Contemporary psychology has shown that Descartes is incorrect to think that human beings have free will and that the mind is something different from the brain.
• Thomas Hobbes’s view of the soul is materialistic, whereas Descartes’s view of the soul is nonphysical. In this paper, I will examine the differences between these two views.
• John Stuart Mill reasons that utilitarian judgments can be based on qualitative differences as well as the quantity of pleasure, but ultimately any qualitative difference must result in a difference in the quantity of pleasure.
• Mill’s approach to utilitarianism differs from Bentham’s by introducing qualitative distinctions among pleasures, where Bentham only considers the quantitative aspects of pleasure.
• J. S. Mill’s approach to utilitarianism aligns moral theory with the history of ethics because he allows qualitative differences in moral judgments.
• Rawls’s liberty principle ensures that all people have a basic set of freedoms that are important for living a full life.
• The US Bill of Rights is an example of Rawls’s liberty principle because it lists a set of basic freedoms that are guaranteed for all people.
• While many people may agree that Rawls’s liberty principle applies to all citizens of a particular country, it is much more controversial to extend those same basic freedoms to immigrants, including those classified by the government as permanent residents, legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, and refugees.

1.d 2.c 3.c 4.a 5.c

Write Like A Philosopher

Use the following templates to write your own thesis statement by inserting a philosopher, claim, or contemporary issue:

• [Name of philosopher] holds that [claim], but [name of another philosopher] holds that [another claim]. In this paper, I will identify reasons for thinking [name of philosopher]’s position is more likely to be true.
• [Name of philosopher] argues that [claim]. In this paper, I will show how this claim provides a helpful addition to [contemporary issue].
• When [name of philosopher] argues in favor of [claim], they rely on [another claim] that is undercut by contemporary science. I will show that if we modify this claim in light of contemporary science, we will strengthen or weaken [name of philosopher]’s argument.

Collect Evidence and Build Your Case

Once you have identified your thesis statement or primary claim, collect evidence (by returning to your readings) to compose the best possible argument. As you assemble the evidence, you can think like a detective or prosecutor building a case. However, you want a case that is true, not just one that supports your position. So you should stay open to modifying your claim if it does not fit the evidence. If you need to do additional research, follow the guidelines presented earlier to locate authoritative information.

If you cannot find evidence to support your claim but still feel strongly about it, you can try to do your own philosophical thinking using any of the methods discussed in this chapter or in Chapter 1. Imagine counterexamples and thought experiments that support your claim. Use your intuitions and common sense, but remember that these can sometimes lead you astray. In general, common sense, intuitions, thought experiments, and counterexamples should support one another and support the sources you have identified from other philosophers. Think of your case as a structure: you do not want too much of the weight to rest on a single intuition or thought experiment.

Consider Counterarguments

Philosophy papers differ from typical argumentative papers in that philosophy students must spend more time and effort anticipating and responding to counterarguments when constructing their own arguments. This has two important effects: first, by developing counterarguments, you demonstrate that you have sufficiently thought through your position to identify possible weaknesses; second, you make your case stronger by taking away a potential line of attack that an opponent might use. By including counterarguments in your paper, you engage in the kind of dialectical process that philosophers use to arrive at the truth.

Accurately Represent Source Material

It is important to represent primary and secondary source material as accurately as possible. This means that you should consider the context and read the arguments using the principle of charity. Make sure that you are not strawmanning an argument you disagree with or misrepresenting a quote or paraphrase just because you need some evidence to support your argument. As always, your goal should be to find the most rationally compelling argument, which is the one most likely to be true.

Organize Your Paper

Academic philosophy papers use the same simple structure as any other paper and one you likely learned in high school or your first-year composition class.

Introduce Your Thesis

The purpose of your introduction is to provide context for your thesis. Simply tell the reader what to expect in the paper. Describe your topic, why it is important, and how it arises within the works you have been reading. You may have to provide some historical context, but avoid both broad generalizations and long-winded historical retellings. Your context or background information should not be overly long and simply needs to provide the reader with the context and motivation for your thesis. Your thesis should appear at the end of the introduction, and the reader should clearly see how the thesis follows from the introductory material you have provided. If you are writing a long paper, you may need several sentences to express your thesis, in which you delineate in broad terms the parts of your argument.

Make a Logical and Compelling Case Using the Evidence

The paragraphs that follow the introduction lay out your argument. One strategy you can use to successfully build paragraphs is to think in terms of good argument structure. You should provide adequate evidence to support the claims you want to make. Your paragraphs will consist of quotations and paraphrases from primary and secondary sources, context and interpretation, novel thoughts and ideas, examples and analogies, counterarguments, and replies to the counterarguments. The evidence should both support the thesis and build toward the conclusion. It may help to think architecturally: lay down the foundation, insert the beams of your strongest support, and then put up the walls to complete the structure. Or you might think in terms of a narrative: tell a story in which the evidence leads to an inevitable conclusion.

CONNECTIONS

See the chapter on logic and reasoning for a developed account of different types of philosophical arguments.

Summarize Your Argument in the Conclusion

Conclude your paper with a short summary that recapitulates the argument. Remind the reader of your thesis and revisit the evidence that supports your argument. You may feel that the argument as written should stand on its own. But it is helpful to the reader to reinforce the argument in your conclusion with a short summary. Do not introduce any new information in the conclusion; simply summarize what you have already said.

The purpose of this chapter has been to provide you with basic tools to become a successful philosophy student. We started by developing a sophisticated picture of how the brain works, using contemporary neuroscience. The brain represents and projects a picture of the world, full of emotional significance, but this image may contain distortions that amount to a kind of illusion. Cognitive illusions produce errors in reasoning, called cognitive biases. To guard against error, we need to engage in effortful, reflective thinking, where we become aware of our biases and use logical strategies to overcome them. You will do well in your philosophy class if you apply the good habits of mind discussed in this chapter and apply the practical advice that has been provided about how to read and write about philosophy.

An Introduction to Philosophy

(7 reviews)

Russ W. Payne

Copyright Year: 2023

Publisher: BCcampus

Language: English

Formats Available

Conditions of use.

Learn more about reviews.

Reviewed by Glenn Tiller, Professor of Philosophy, Texas A&M University-Corpus Christi on 4/22/24

The text is suitably comprehensive and has chapters on the main branches of philosophy: logic, epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. The author does a good job of discussing some of the main philosophical issues in these areas, such as logical... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 4 see less

The text is suitably comprehensive and has chapters on the main branches of philosophy: logic, epistemology, metaphysics, and ethics. The author does a good job of discussing some of the main philosophical issues in these areas, such as logical arguments, the nature of scientific inquiry, free will, and how we should live our lives. It does not have an index, but terms are easily searchable with an e-text, and the text has a mini glossary at the end of each chapter with key terms for review. The text also does a decent job of providing historical context and a sense of the development of Western philosophy. Some significant topics are omitted, such as personal identity. On the other hand, some topics that are often not discussed (e.g., metaethics) are discussed at length.

Content Accuracy rating: 4

The text engages with most of the standard philosophical issues and questions that students encounter in a typical Introduction to Philosophy course. The author seems to have no major biases or philosophical axes to grind. The author’s tone is teacherly, though not overly formal, and similar (at times, very similar) to many other introductions to philosophy in the analytic tradition. Broad in scope and short on detail, the text is meant to be supplemented, so it may be a useful basis for many teachers of first-year philosophy. The historical overview of philosophy is welcome, and the supplementary readings (e.g., Aristotle, Russell, and Chalmers) are well chosen. Some of the objections to traditional problems, such as Descartes’s Cogito argument, are somewhat narrow and do not plumb the depths of skepticism and the difficulties with Descartes's program of methodological doubt.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 4

The author states in the introduction that "Philosophy has progressed dramatically as the sciences over the last century" (p.3). He also states that he aims to "remedy" the situation of a general lack of introductory texts that pay heed to recent developments in philosophy. However, the text is very much grounded in philosophy's history- in the Classic, Medieval, and Modern eras - and comparatively little attention to 20th and 21st C authors. This is not a fault of the text, but it is much more of a standard introduction to philosophy text than one that emphasizes current trends and philosophers. I believe this is a good pedagogical practice for a general introduction to philosophy.

Clarity rating: 5

Philosophy is often daunting to the newcomer, and it has its share of technical jargon, much of which must be explained so that issues can be inquired into. The text is written in a lucid, accessible manner that should appeal to newcomers to philosophy. Major terms (e.g., "Metaphysics") are put in bold and always defined (or at least given a working definition). Each chapter has a vocabulary section at the end, along with review and discussion questions and (in some chapters) "exercises." All of this is helpful. If supplementary definitions, instructors can easily link the text to, say, the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy or the (more challenging) Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.

Consistency rating: 4

The book is internally consistent in its use of terminology and its organization of thematic chapters. The sequencing of the chapters is helpful, with a nice introduction to the nature of philosophy given first, followed by a primer on logical reasoning, a quick tour through some major eras in philosophy, and later chapters building on the preceding ideas and articulation of historical trends. I think it would have been helpful to have a more detailed section on the so-called "linguistic turn" in philosophy and note other 20th-century trends in philosophy, such as Existentialism. The latter would have been particularly helpful for the sections on, say, "Love and Happiness." Of course, the topics and themes can be easily added with an open-source text like this.

Modularity rating: 4

The text's "modularity" is fine. Major thematic chapters are divided into smaller sections, each with a subheading. At the start of each chapter, a summary of what's to follow is briefly outlined, sometimes using bullet points for concision. Overall, the reader is guided through the thicket of philosophy in a nicely organized manner. Chapters could, I think, be read individually, but the sequencing of the books is purposeful, and later chapters build on earlier chapters, so readers are rewarded if they follow the book from start to finish.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 4

The text is well organized, and the topics covered are given lucid overviews. The opening chapters are especially strong. It might have been more helpful to fully integrate the historical sections into the topics sections. As it is, the text is something of a hybrid. Again, the historical sections are welcome and will benefit students who often need a timeline of ideas to grasp the ongoing philosophical conversations and philosophy's perennial issues.

Interface rating: 5

The interface is excellent. There were no problems with external links, and the external readings and resources provided are top-notch (such as Early Modern Texts). Some chapters do not have links or as many as one might like, but again, these can be easily supplemented.

Grammatical Errors rating: 5

I found no significant grammar or prose problems, and the book appears to be generally well-edited.

Cultural Relevance rating: 4

Like most texts, it pays little attention to the philosophizing of women, minorities, and others who have generally been excluded from Western philosophy. The author rightly notes that "women in Descartes’ time were rarely given a thorough education or allowed to participate fully in intellectual life." To help correct persistent biases, it would have been beneficial to include more women philosophers, be they historically well-known figures such as Mary Wollstonecraft or contemporary philosophers such as Martha Nussbaum. The text also mentioned Hindus and Buddhists, but a few more words on the nature of Eastern philosophy - even if to point the reader in the right direction - would enhance the text (esp., say if there was a section on Personal Identity). In addition, sometimes a phrase here or there is a bit unnecessarily jarring. Spinoza is referred to as the “God intoxicated Jew,” for example, and there is a line stating that "Such was the influence of the outcast Jew of Amsterdam." I am not sure about the weight of emphasizing Spinoza being Jewish. Of course, it's a historical fact, but how does the last line, particularly, call for racial and/or cultural identification? Last, there is little to nothing discussing (or mentioning) current issues in philosophy and gender and sexuality.

Again, given that the book is open source and easily modifiable, all of the above criticisms can be remedied. The author has done many a philosophy professor a service by providing a free text that can at least be used as a helpful point of departure for teaching an introduction to philosophy course.

Reviewed by Sean Gould, Adjunct Professor, College of Western Idaho on 4/28/22

An Introduction to Philosophy provides a survey of central themes within the western, analytic tradition of philosophy. The book presents the fundamentals of logic and critical thinking, the Socratic method, and approaches to knowledge based in... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 3 see less

An Introduction to Philosophy provides a survey of central themes within the western, analytic tradition of philosophy. The book presents the fundamentals of logic and critical thinking, the Socratic method, and approaches to knowledge based in the Rationalist an Empiricist movements. Through following a historical approach, topics including Plato’s Forms, Cartesian Dualism, Pantheism, and Idealism are introduced in the context of their development. The chapter of Philosophy of Mind further discusses the Mind/Body, while the Philosophy of Science section rounds out the epistemological theme of the initial chapters. The final four chapters focus on Ethics, Metaethics, and Social Philosophy. Utilitarianism, Kantianism, Virtue Ethics, Relativism, Social Contract Theory, and Divine Command Theory are all discussed, either in these final chapters or at points fitting a historical appearance in the early chronologically based chapters. Payne provides a comprehensive introduction to the boarder topics of Epistemology, Metaphysics, Logic, and Ethics as they are studied in the western, analytic tradition.

The survey of western philosophy provided by An Introduction to Philosophy is quite brief. Even within the adopted bounds of this tradition, large jumps over time periods and movements are made for the sake of compactness. For example, discussion of Descartes follows quickly upon Aristotle after a brief 2-page transition glossing over the Roman and Medieval contributions to the story. Kant does not appear until his ethical theory is picked up in the chapters on Metaethics and Right Action. There is little or no discussion of Existentialism, Feminism, movements within a broadly Continental Eurocentric tradition, or of any non-western philosophical traditions.

There is no glossary to the text; however, when viewed electronically the “find” function serves as a proxy tool for locating key words.

In general, the text remains safely within the bounds of established scholarship in its presentation of material. There are a few points where the author interjects some personal commentary into the material, but these are generally presented in a transparent way and can be isolated and treated as one would wish. However, an exception to the safe presentation of ideas occurs in the Meta Ethics chapter. Here, the chapter takes a thinly veiled argumentative approach promoting metaethical realism against anti-realism and relativism. As an introductory text, this approach risks portraying the subject in an overly simplistic and decisive manner to introductory students.

The safe and roughly historical approach of the text ensures that the content will not be dated for some time. The material of the text is highly relevant within the field of philosophy it the perennial issues it addresses, although there is little explicit reference to contemporary and topical issues.

Clarity rating: 4

An Introduction to Philosophy proceeds with a clear and approachable tone. The ideas are presented in a language that does not require prior familiarity with philosophical study and should be appropriate to most first-year college students.

Consistency rating: 5

The text is consistent throughout in its style, difficulty, and presentation of content.

Modularity rating: 3

The text can easily be divided into modular units to be adopted or passed over at an instructor’s discretion without harming the value of any given section’s use. However, the first five chapters do flow together into a historical narrative of ideas that some might find beneficial insofar as it helps provide some added structure to the introduction to the concepts. This beneficial structure would be lost were these early chapters to be taken in isolation. The Philosophy of Mind chapter also utilizes some reference to the prior section on Descartes.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 3

The individual chapters of the text flow from chapter to chapter in a reasonable way. The presentation of material and tone of the text remains structurally consistent throughout. However, the text has detectable sections to its content.

An Introduction to Philosophy begins by providing a subject overview, while the second chapter on critical thinking supplies some methodological sideboards for the student. After this, the text moves through three phases. First, chapters 3-5 present a historical approach of Ancient Philosophy, Rationalism, and Empiricism. Concepts are organized by their association with a particular philosopher and that philosopher’s broad historical context. Chapters 6 and 7 roughly fit into the chronology established by presenting 20th C discussions of the Philosophy of Science and Mind.

Chapters 8-11 break this pattern and focus on ethics. Here, the ideas are presented thematically. Both in the focus ethic and the topical organization, the structure of the book changes. If one wanted to use the entire text for a course but did not want isolate discussion of ethics into one single block, then attempting to reintegrate these following, topic-centered chapters into a sequence parallel to the first would be challenging.

Interface rating: 4

An Introduction to Philosophy is all text. There are no images, figures, or other learning aids. The format of the text functions like a book. The table of contents does not contain internal links. There are some hyperlinks to further readings and materials, but these are often broken. When viewed through a web-browser, the browser’s page selection and “find” features can assist in navigating the material.

Grammatical Errors rating: 4

There are a few typos or grammatical errors in the text, but generally the text is clean and presented to professional standards.

Cultural Relevance rating: 3

With some exceptions, the text primarily presents the views of dead, white, male Europeans, and its cultural relevance suffers from faults of omission. As an introduction to philosophy, greater transparency regarding its limited content would have helped the text inform readers that this narrowness reflects a decision for the text rather than speaking to the scope of philosophy itself. There are no explicitly insensitive or offensive remarks in the text. When mentioned explicitly, the few acknowledgements of diversity from the narrow scope of the text are done appropriately, with one minor exception that warrants flagging. Elizabeth Simmern van Pallandt is given due attention for her critical correspondence with Descartes regarding the Mind/Body problem. At this point, Payne provides a well-intentioned interjection to identify and condemn the patronizing nature of some of Descartes’s communications with Pallandt. Payne also suggests that Pallandt, “provides a brilliant illustration of how to deal most effectively with patronizing behavior whether it is of sexist variety or some other kind: just be competent and this will show that you deserve to be taken seriously” (p 72). Rather than place full responsibility and condemnation for patronizing behavior on the perpetrator, some might worry that Payne’s interjection places some responsibility for patronizing behavior upon those who have yet to prove they deserve being taken seriously. This is an issue with the text that people might want to be aware of. I have had to interject on this passage for my students and have repeatedly received thankful comments from students for doing so. However, besides this gaffe and the narrowness of scope, An Introduction to Philosophy remains appropriate in what it does present.

Reviewed by Shalon van Tine, Adjunct Instructor, Thomas Nelson Community College on 4/9/21

Payne has written a solid introduction to philosophy for students with little to no background in the subject matter. His text covers the core ancient philosophers, basic logical reasoning, explorations in the philosophy of science and mind, and... read more

Payne has written a solid introduction to philosophy for students with little to no background in the subject matter. His text covers the core ancient philosophers, basic logical reasoning, explorations in the philosophy of science and mind, and the main branches of ethics. It is a short text, so therefore Payne has left out some key branches of thought, such as aesthetics, structuralism, or critical theory. Additionally, there is no index or glossary with this text. Still, he does a good job introducing the basics within his limited space.

As far as accuracy is concerned, there were no glaring mistakes, although sometimes the author’s personal views are embedded within the text.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 3

There are some instances within the book that are dated, such as examples that point to public figures at the time the book was written. Additionally, Payne’s lack of Marxist or sociological analysis in his section on social justice is a stark oversight. This omission leaves him struggling to explain atrocities like racism or genocide in individualistic ethical terms, as if these social problems are the cause of individuals with personal bad ethics rather than products of larger-scale structural realities. In light of recent world events and uprisings, this text would be more relevant if it took societal analyses into consideration.

A benefit of Payne’s book is its conversational tone. Too often students new to philosophy can get lost in the jargon. Payne does a good job using natural, easy-to-understand language.

The text is consistent with its organization. Payne keeps most chapters to a reasonable and readable length.

At times, the author refers to his own life as examples. While this tactic works well in a classroom setting, it does not work as well in a textbook that other professors will use. Shifting the textbook to a third-person narrative would solve this issue.

Regardless, Payne has organized his text well, and readers can easily navigate it.

Interface rating: 2

One major problem with this book, however, is its lack of images, charts, etc. Rather than revise charts to fit his text, Payne has included hyperlinks to outside web sources for information. Unfortunately, about half of all links included were either non-secure websites or dead links. The information he linked to could have been easily rewritten into his own book rather than linking outside the text to questionable sites.

While there are some minor grammatical errors, they do not interfere with the overall readability of the text.

Payne makes some references outside of Western philosophy, such as a brief exploration into Confucianism, but mainly this book sticks to the classics of the Western canon. As stated earlier, a main problem is his lack of philosophers who deal with social and cultural problems. Students interested in real-life issues, especially those that deal with race, gender, or class, will not find many solutions in this textbook.

Overall, Payne has written a useable introduction to the basic ideas in philosophy for 100-level students. The book is not organized like a traditional textbook and is lacking some core ideas that should be explored in an introductory philosophy class. Including more real-life examples and illustrations would help students grasp the concepts presented better.

Reviewed by Sally Parker-Ryan, Adjunct Assistant Professor, University of Texas at Arlington on 12/13/20

Every introduction to philosophy is a reflection of the author’s opinionated view about what the most important topics are that should serve as a student’s first taste of college level philosophy. As this is often a student’s first taste of... read more

Comprehensiveness rating: 5 see less

Every introduction to philosophy is a reflection of the author’s opinionated view about what the most important topics are that should serve as a student’s first taste of college level philosophy. As this is often a student’s first taste of philosophy simpliciter, it is an important decision to make. W. Russ Payne’s choices are at once careful to appeal to the interests of students, and comprehensive enough to cover a wide swathe of philosophical landscape. It should be said that the approach is definitely historical; and indeed the progression through philosophical topics follows a roughly chronological order (and often referring back to the ancients for the locus classicus of a particular philosophical view or problem). For some, like me, this works well. I like to give philosophical problems an historical context, and I like to introduce students to the writing of past thinkers. Other teachers, however, might find the historical bent a bit tedious and frustrating, perhaps preferring to introduce problems through more contemporary writers and treatments. At any rate, Payne’s text covers all of the major branches of philosophy: metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind and ethics (normative and meta), and socio-political philosophy, and the main philosophical problems that each branch treats of. The classic problems are presented through the classic texts (but you will not find, for example, much on contemporary epistemology such as the Gettier issues, nor more modern philosophical questions in mereology or personal identity etc.) However, I think that as an introduction to the discipline, the topics covered offer the right level and the right emphasis to furnish the student new to it with a range of philosophical concepts, views and questions that they may move on to more advanced, contemporary topics well prepared. As with any Introduction, it curates topics according to the author's editorial and pedagogical decisions, so it doesn't cover every topic one might be interested in teaching. Nor does it have an index or glossary (but I find these are available everywhere on the web, and can be added to one's class materials separately). I should also mention that the book approaches philosophy from within the analytic tradition, and thus has limited reference to the more 'continental' texts, authors and issues. Many will find this disappointing (but not surprising, as this distinction is unfortunately fairly standard within the discipline itself). Everything I say below about supplementing this basic textbook with the instructors' own choice of topics and materials applies here, of course.

Content Accuracy rating: 5

As far as I can see, the content is quite accurate; at least I did not notice any glaring errors. The content is also unbiased; there appears to be nothing in the language or ideas that takes anything but a neutral, inclusive line.

Relevance/Longevity rating: 5

This book will be relevant for some time, as it does take an historical approach and does not pretend to be offering the latest, most cutting-edge views on things. As a solid historical introduction, it has a fairly long shelf-life. As with all textbooks, one should regularly ensure that the material reflects current thought, where it does mention contemporary authors, approaches or views. It is especially important to update with breakthrough work, when it happens. This text is pretty well up to date on the latter, and I would imagine it to stay so for at least 5 - 10 years, at the current pace of philosophical development.

Written very clearly, with a conversational style that is sensitive to the requirement to explain jargon and technical terms, when they arise. The tone is direct and simple, and aimed at the curious and intelligent freshman (so, not overly difficult and not unchallenging or condescending).

The book is consistent, and maintains a sense of flow and direction, and all the parts hang together as a whole.

Modularity rating: 5

The chapters, and certain subsections, of the book are easily used as separate modules. There is some self-reference - to a certain degree, this book is written as a course to follow in order. But it is possible to treat each section separately, to mix and match with other topics and materials, and to rearrange the order of presentation of the chapters if one wanted. Some editing or re-writing may be need for this, but not a lot.

Organization/Structure/Flow rating: 5

I find the topic organization quite logical. Again, the order of topics and philosophical problems and text is ordered along roughly historical lines, and I personally find this arrangement a good one, for introductory purposes. For example, the course begins with a general introduction to to the discipline; then turns to some issues in argumentation and logic, followed by the ancients, rationalism and empiricism, philosophy of science (which connects back to the earlier topics), philosophy of mind; and then it turns to the more normative philosophical topics: philosophy of love and happiness, meta-ethics and normative ethical theories, and finally, to some social and political issues. Of interest here is the inclusion of the chapter on the philosophy of science, and the breadth of normative topics included in the last chapters. Firstly, I have found it rare to find an introduction to philosophy that includes topics in the philosophy of science. This part of philosophy might be passed over in introduction because it is thought too difficult for freshman, or those new to philosophy, or at least that it presupposes a lot of other philosophy before it can be approached. This can be true, but it is also true that this topic is foundational, and it can be introduced in a way as not to confuse students or to have them lose interest. Particularly if it is introduced in the context, as Payne does, of historical empiricism. It is also an area that gestures to more contemporary philosophical issues, and provides a good basis for moving on to those for future students. Secondly, the wide choice of topics in the normative branches of philosophy is a positive, in my view. There are students who are more attracted to these topics, but they are often treated in a very perfunctory fashion i.e. often just he meta-ethics part, or just some quick treatment of normative ethical theories. The four chapters here go together quite well, and give a more complete exploration of the issue that can arise in these parts of philosophy.

Interface rating: 3

The pdf version is not 'clickable' throughout, meaning that one has to scroll through to find parts of the text. Of course, it could be printed and used simply as a traditional book. There are links in the text to other open-source materials and texts, which is very helpful (although the links should always be checked regularly). It might have helped to make at least the table of contents clickable, to navigate directly to chapters.

No grammatical errors that I detected, although there are a few typos throughout.

The text is not culturally insensitive or offensive in any way that I could detect. I found the examples used were culturally diverse, as well as gender-neutral and appropriate. Here is probably the place to mention that this textbook fails to include many examples of female or other minority philosophers or texts. As a discipline, we all need to do more to undermine this view of the philosophical canon as white, western, male and privileged. I would be supplementing this textbook with readings from female philosophers, and I would consider introducing a topic from a non-traditional perspective such as asian or african philosophy. No textbook can include everything, but introductions to a discipline need to be at the forefront in making sure students don't think the subject is only for white, male people and interests.

This textbook takes an interesting introductory route through philosophy. It is both fairly traditional in terms of its topic range, and yet also a bit fresher in its inclusion of the philosophy of science, and a more extensive than usual treatment of the normative areas of philosophy. In my view, this is a solid, reliable introductory text for freshman philosophy. As a CC license, one can use this as one prefers, which might mean editing in or out certain topics and rearranging the order etc. I would definitely supplement it with topics I think need to be included. Dealing as it does with historical texts might require the teacher to create more readable excerpts of the longer, difficult texts. It might also be supplemented with a choice of further readings, or even other kinds of media like podcasts ( at least one is mentioned, and linked, by Payne), discussions, interviews, videos, blogs etc. But overall, this textbook is terrific and if it means a student can have access to the materials need for a class without being sent broke, then it is a great choice.

Reviewed by Kyle Hirsch, Adjunct Instructor, Community College of Aurora on 6/28/20

Please see overall review below. read more

Please see overall review below.

Cultural Relevance rating: 2

This is a highly usable and economical introduction to philosophy textbook. It covers the definition, branches and application of philosophy as well as the major theories and issues of epistemology, metaphysics and ethics in the history of Western philosophy from the Ancient Greeks to Rawlsian theories of justice and Chalmers’ contributions to the philosophy of mind. Such a textbook always requires making difficult decisions regarding topical inclusion, and the author does an excellent job tracing the evolution of major philosophical thought to help students see the connections and influences between prominent thinkers as well as the relevant differences and departures. The chapters are succinct, clear, while rigorously dense which both novice and intermediate students will appreciate. While the author employs college-level vocabulary and subject-specific terminology throughout, he often will present numerous relevant examples to help contextualize the more abstract concepts. A great example of this is in the section on critical thinking and logical argumentation. The author provides ample homework exercises as well as an external link to a great resource on learning logical fallacies replete with everyday examples. Indeed, each chapter contains external links to primary readings and supplemental resources for students to access and dig deeper into content. Instructors would be wise to preview all of the externally linked resources and determine which they would like to feature in their course. For example, there are links to entire Socratic dialogues and essays when assigning only a particular section might be sufficient for the needs of the course. Additionally, there are links to encyclopedic biographies of particular thinkers that may have particular sections worth reading; one suggestion for the author is to be more consistent in linking thinkers’ biographies as there doesn’t seem to be a rhyme or reason why some are included and others aren’t. Overall, the inclusion of external links provides flexibility that is a tremendous asset of this textbook since it allows for instructors to curate content to fit their syllabus. Furthermore, a few of these links are currently broken, and the author has asked readers to let him know which ones need repair so that he can fix them (which I will do) The discussion questions and possible quiz questions found at the end of each chapter are excellent tools for both instructor and student. . Moreover, I would recommend that instructors who wish to supplement these chapters with additional resources do so to enrich the experience for their students and add their personality and particular areas of expertise and interest to the curriculum.

Some other feedback for the author is that the text lacks significant inclusion of minoritized and culturally relevant thinkers. There are several female philosophers, including an excellent section on Princess Elizabeth of Bohemia are her devastating critiques of Descartes’ substance dualism. However, the text would benefit from an inclusion of more female philosophers, thinkers of color and from the eastern hemisphere. Also, the text lacked visual aids aside from those included in the external links. Including more pictures

It is an excellent foundational source that when combined with other OER material is sufficient for an introductory philosophy course.

Reviewed by Ivan Guajardo, Ph.D., Assistant Professor of Philosophy, Virginia Western Community College on 4/1/19

There are different ways of introducing philosophy to newcomers, one is to present it as a living discipline defined by problems made more intelligible and relevant by tracing their historical roots. W. Russ Payne’s An Introduction to Philosophy... read more

There are different ways of introducing philosophy to newcomers, one is to present it as a living discipline defined by problems made more intelligible and relevant by tracing their historical roots. W. Russ Payne’s An Introduction to Philosophy takes this approach and does a good job at it. The first two chapters describe the nature of philosophy and the place of logic and concepts like ‘truth’, while subsequent chapters focus on two key periods in the history of philosophy (Ancient Greece and Early Modernity), and core themes in the philosophy of mind, philosophy of science, love, happiness, metaethics, and the question of social justice in political philosophy. Although exclusively from an Analytic perspective, the textbook does provide a fairly comprehensive and sound overview of what it does covers. It does not have a glossary or an index. The first chapter lists some undefined key terms, but this convention is abandoned thereafter. The book does provide review and discussion questions at the end of each chapter, which can be used in a variety of different ways.

The textbook is fairly accurate in its presentation and definition of key issues, concepts, and themes, but again, it strictly follows an analytic approach to the discipline, which means that Continental thinkers, feminist perspectives, and non-European traditions are excluded. Unless it is complemented with material from these non-Analytic traditions, this textbook by itself will be of little use to someone planning to teach philosophy in a more global or pluralistic manner.

The textbook presents classic theories, arguments, and examples that should stand the test of time. Its content shouldn't require much updating. The book’s format and organization allows for easy incorporation of revisions and updates.

Explanations are clear and concise. The author uses technical jargon sparingly and defines technical terms well. Adding a glossary would help, however.

The textbook's narrative flows consistently. It moves from historical roots to the present in ways that helps readers see the historical and contemporary relevance of the issues being covered.

The textbook is divided into chapters and sections that stand on their own, and thus lend themselves to easy revision, reorganization, remixing, and so on. It can be used as a whole or only in part. Chapters can be read in different orders and still be understood.

The textbook is well organized. Key concepts are explained and material is appropriately divided into easily digestible units. The examples given in each chapter illustrate well their concepts. Transitions are easy to follow and allow the reader to make important connections within and between chapters.

Students have access to PDF copies. Printed copies of the whole or parts can be made easily. The textbook is published under a CC By license, which permits the greatest freedom to retain, reuse, revise, remix, and redistribute its contents. Most chapters contain links to readings, but they must be checked to avoid broken hyperlinks.

No recognizable grammatical errors, but typographical errors were found throughout the text. For example, page 6 says, “the reality” rather than “reality”.

The author does not use offensive or culturally insensitive language. However, the exclusion of continental, feminist, and non-European approaches can arguably be construed as insensitive to these traditions.

Overall this is a good textbook and may be combined with other sources to deal with its limitations.

Reviewed by Bassam Romaya, Philosophy Instructor , Bloomsburg University of Pennsylvania on 3/7/19

As with most disciplines, philosophy comes with its own vast array of key terms, concepts, and vocabulary, which introductory students must learn in order to make sense of the discipline’s contributions and key debates (both past and present). The... read more

As with most disciplines, philosophy comes with its own vast array of key terms, concepts, and vocabulary, which introductory students must learn in order to make sense of the discipline’s contributions and key debates (both past and present). The text does not contain an index or glossary. The reader must sort through the chapter/s in order to find the relevant definitions or explanations. In Chapter 1, four vocabulary words are listed at the end of the chapter (which is helpful), but that convention is not repeated in other chapters, which introduce additional vocabulary.

The content that is covered is represented accurately. However, it should be noted that the text does not contain the entire breadth or history of the discipline. For instance, one will not find coverage of global or world traditions in philosophy, feminist philosophy (apart from very brief mention of care ethics in Chapter 10), or contributions of the continental tradition in philosophy. The treatment of the text (and themes) is predominately representative of the analytic tradition in philosophy. Of course, this does not mean that an introductory text must cover everything, but merely that the reader should be aware of its approach.

The text is up-to-date, and may easily be updated as needed.

The text is written in a clear and accessible style geared toward introductory students; the use of any relevant jargon (when present) is commonly followed by a definition and/or explanation of the key term, movement, or theory.

The text is internally consistent, in its terminology/ies and framework/s.

The book’s individual chapters may easily be assigned individually and out of order, without reliance on referential material that might come before or after any specific chapter. It is thus possible to both build on knowledge base acquired within a specific chapter (by covering supplementary chapters from this text or another), as well as covering one or more standalone chapters without assigning the entire text.

To some readers, it might seem confusing that the text features four chapters devoted to ethical issues (Chapters 8-11), while one chapter might more clearly and succinctly address the leading range of problems and questions in moral philosophy. There is also the concern that since they come at the end of the book, a beginning student might get the impression that the content in those chapters is less significant or less central to the study of philosophy, which would certainly not be the case. Additionally, Chapter 11 might be better titled “Political Philosophy” or “Social and Political Philosophy,” as the range of issues covered there are not exclusively social justice topics.

No interface issues recognized; although it might be a good idea to check the hyperlinks that refer the reader to live websites (to avoid sending the reader to a broken/outdated link).

No recognizable grammatical errors; however, typographical errors may be found in the text. For example, in Chapter 9, the spelling of “Divine” shifts to “Devine” throughout the chapter, and on page 104, one finds both spellings in that section. Another example, see page 93 for “mght” and “constrasting.” Also, in the book’s description, there’s an extra “first” (“Students are first invited first”).

The text is not culturally insensitive. The text does make use of examples that are inclusive to gender (this may be observed by reviewing examples and exercises used in Chapter 2).

Terrific text! Its versatility allows for coverage of standalone chapters as well as building on knowledge acquired in previous chapters. The embedded links to online primary source texts provide the reader with a valuable opportunity to explore the original texts that frame the discussion and background material to the topics and themes of the book.

Table of Contents

• Introduction
• Chapter 1: What Philosophy Is
• Chapter 2: Critical Thinking I, Being Reasonable
• Chapter 3: Critical Thinking II: Logic
• Chapter 4: Ancient Philosophy
• Chapter 5: Rationalism
• Chapter 6: Empiricism
• Chapter 7: Philosophy of Science
• Chapter 8: Philosophy of Mind
• Chapter 9: Love and Happiness
• Chapter 10:  Meta Ethics
• Chapter 11: Right Action
• Chapter 12: Social Justice

Ancillary Material

About the book.

The goal of this text is to present philosophy to newcomers as a living discipline with historical roots. While a few early chapters are historically organized, the goal in the historical chapters is to trace a developmental progression of thought that introduces basic philosophical methods and frames issues that remain relevant today. Later chapters are topically organized. These include philosophy of science and philosophy of mind, areas where philosophy has shown dramatic recent progress. This text concludes with four chapters on ethics, broadly construed. Traditional theories of right action is covered in a third of these. Students are first invited first to think about what is good for themselves and their relationships in a chapter of love and happiness. Next a few meta-ethical issues are considered; namely, whether they are moral truths and if so what makes them so. The end of the ethics sequence addresses social justice, what it is for one's community to be good. Our sphere of concern expands progressively through these chapters. Our inquiry recapitulates the course of development into moral maturity. Over the course of the text, the author has tried to outline the continuity of thought that leads from the historical roots of philosophy to a few of the diverse areas of inquiry that continue to make significant contributions to our understanding of ourselves and the world we live in.

About the Contributors

W. Russ Payne, Bellevue College

Contribute to this Page

Introduction to Philosophy

Gaura Rader

• Sample Essays

Here is a good example a what an “A” paper should look like. The paper’s strengths are its focus, clarity, and organization. This paper could have been a bit more ambitious as it doesn’t do much more than explain the difference between act and rule utilitarianism and Smart’s argument against rule utilitarianism. But what it does it does really well and this is sufficient at this level for an A, as these are the basic skills that you are supposed to be developing at this level.  What it does do, beyond merely summarizing Smart, is offer a supporting example and considering a possible objection, which together make the paper an A paper. If it didn’t do those things it would only be a high B paper. One very nice thing about this paper is how well everything is referenced.

A Defense of Smart’s Critique of Rule Utilitarianism

I intend to argue that J.J.C. Smart’s criticism of rule utilitarianism is correct because, as he argues, there are clearly some cases where it is optimific to break a generally optimific rule. I will show this by first explaining rule utilitarianism. Then, I will explain J.J.C. Smart’s critique of rule utilitarianism, including the hypothetical example of “the dying promise,” and provide explanations as to why his criticisms are correct. Finally, I will provide another hypothetical example, one that Smart did not use, in support of Smart’s argument.

I will begin by explaining rule utilitarianism and how it differs from act utilitarianism. Act utilitarianism is the process by which one judges the morality of a given action based on the net positive utility gained by that particular action’s consequences. This is a troubling ethical theory due in part to the daunting nature of attempting to ascertain all the consequences of any given action, something which can not realistically be done. Because of this, the act utilitarian must make estimations to the best of his/her ability, never truly knowing how far off he/she is from having acted on the most optimific choice. As an answer to this problem, a related theory called rule utilitarianism was put forth. Rule utilitarianism is the process by which one judges the morality of a given action based on whether or not it follows a generally optimific rule. In “The Fundamentals Of Ethics,” Russ Shafer-Landau describes rule consequentialism as “the view that an action is morally right just because it is required by an optimific social rule. An optimific social rule is a rule that meets the following condition: if (nearly) everyone in a society where to accept it, then the results would be optimific.” (Shafer-Landau, Page 149). In rule utilitarianism, moral agents are obligated to follow these generally optimific rules.

I will now explain J.J.C. Smart’s objection to rule utilitariansim. Smart believes that generally optimific rules are useful “rules of thumb” for act utilitarians, as they will often allow us to act in optimific ways when there is not time available to carefully weigh out the consequences of a particular action (Smart,94). Smart believes that rule utilitarianism simply takes these common sense guidelines too far, and that doing so can have disastrous results (Shafer-Landau, The Ethical Life , 96). Smart provides an example of a hypothetic rule entitled “R” (Smart, 96). 99% of the time, following R will produce optimific results, while 1% of the time it will not; Rule utilitarianism states that all moral agents are required to follow R, even if they know with complete certainty that doing so will not produce optimific results (Smart, 96). Smart said of such a scenario that it would be “monstrous to suppose that if we have worked out the consequences and if we have perfect faith in the impartiality of our calculations, and if we know that in this instance to break R will have better results than to keep it, we should nevertheless obey the rule” (Smart, 96). As Smart suggested, it is completely irrational to believe in an ethical theory meant to promote overall net happiness, and then to choose to follow through on an action that you know will decrease said happiness, simply for the sake of following a rule that will usually promote happiness. It is a clear sign of a flawed ethical theory when following its guidelines of morality actually contradicts its intended results.

Smart provides another hypothetical example commonly referred to as “the dying promise.” I will now present Smart’s dying promise example from my perspective. Imagine that I am on a desert island, and the only other person on this island is my dying friend, to whom I promise that, should he die, I will donate his entire fortune (which I control) to a jockey club if I am rescued (Smart, 98). When I am rescued, though, I decide that more good can be done by giving his fortune to a hospital instead of to a jockey club (Smart, 98). The idea of giving this money to a hospital, though it will most likely produce the greatest amount of net happiness over unhappiness, will most likely conflict with one or more generally optimific rules. For example, there could be a generally optimific rule that it is never morally permissible to tell a lie; or that it is never morally permissible to deny a dying man his last request, so long as no one will be harmed in following through with it; or that it is never morally permissible to spend the wealth of others in a way that contrasts with their wishes. All of these potentially generally optimific rules would prevent a rule utilitarian from donating the money to the hospital. They would be morally obligated to donate it to the jockey club, despite the fact that this would certainly be the less optimific of the two options. Once again, rule utilitarianism is proven to be flawed, as its generally optimific rules prevent moral agents from acting to produce the intended consequences of the theory itself, maximum utility.

Another example that supports Smart’s argument against rule utilitarianism, but that he did not use himself, is the hypothetical situation known as “the inquiring murderer.” This hypothetical is often used to discredit Kantian ethics and other ethical systems that employ absolute moral laws. I will present this example from my perspective. Imagine that a murderer knocks on my door and asks if I know the location of a man that he is bent on murdering; further imagine that I do know the location of the intended victim and that I must decide whether to lie in order to save the life of an innocent man or tell the truth and aid in an innocent man being murdered (Shafer-Landau, 166). One could easily imagine that a rule which stated that it is never morally permissible to tell a lie would be generally optimific; or an even more extreme rule which stated that it is never morally permissible to withhold the truth, which would also be optimific in a majority of cases. In the case of the inquiring murderer, however, such rules would oblige the rule utilitarian to divulge the location of the murderer’s intended victim, aiding in his demise.

I will now point out a reasonable argument against my use of the inquiring murderer and will go on to prove the validity of the example. There is certainly an argument against this example in that a generally optimific rule which stated the following could exist: It is never morally permissible to aid in the murder of an innocent man. If such a rule did exist, it would lead to a conflict of two rules, in which case the rule utilitarian would be expected to judge his action based solely on its consequences. While it is true that this specific example can be accounted for within the guidelines of rule utilitarianism, we can not assume that a rule will be in place to conflict with every rule that ends up requiring a moral agent to act in a way which produces less than optimific results. It is likely that a majority of moral rules, if thought through to conclusion, would end up having exceptions that would require a conflicting rule to be made. Additionally, every instance that presents a conflict of two moral rules and requires the rule utilitarian to essentially be an act utilitarian further discredits rule utilitarianism. These instances discredit rule utilitarianism because its entire purpose is to not have to judge each action on its own consequences, and so each instance in which a rule utilitarian must act as an act utilitarian discredits rule utilitarianism.

I have argued that J.J.C. Smart’s criticisms of rule utilitarianism are correct. There are certainly many cases where, as Smart argues, it is optimific to not follow a generally optimific rule. This simple truth makes rule utilitarianism self-defeating as its guidelines do not consistently produce, and will sometimes even specifically hinder, its intended results.

Works Cited

Shafer-Landau, Russ. The Fundamentals of Ethics . 2nd ed. New York, NY: Oxford University      Press, 2012. Print

Smart, J.J.C., “Extreme and Restricted Utilitarianism” The Ethical Life . 2nd ed. Ed. Russ Shaffer-Landau. New York, NY: Oxford University Press, 2012.

Share this:

Leave a comment cancel reply, course overview.

• Some General Tips for writing a Philosophy Paper
• More good advice on writing a philosophy paper
• Even More Good Advice About Writing a Philosophy Paper
• The Elements of Style by Strunk and White
• Logic for Intro to Philosophy: Deductive Reasoning, Validity, and Soundness
• Essay Grading Rubric
• How to Cite in a Philosophy Paper (MLA)
• Unit 1: Introduction
• Unit 2: The Science of Morality
• Unit 3: Philosophy and Morality
• Unit 4: Social Contract Theory
• Unit 5 : Kantian Ethics
• Unit 6 : Utilitarianism
• Unit 7: Marxism
• Unit 8: Egalitarianism
• Unit 9: Libertarianism
• Unit 10: Abortion and Animal Rights
• Unit 11: Criminal Justice
• Unit 12: Racism and the #BlackLivesMatter Movement
• Unit 13: Feminism and the #MeToo Movement
• Unit 14: Sex and Marriage
• Unit 15: Climate Change
• Unit 16: Is Utopia Possible?
• Lesson 1 Introduction
• Lesson 2: Utilitarianism
• Lecture 3 Notes (Contractarianism/Hobbesian Social Contract Theory)
• Lecture 4 Notes (Contractualism/Kantian Ethics)
• Lecture 5 Notes: Judith Jarvis Thomson and Don Marquis
• Lecture 6 Notes (Warren and Singer)
• Lecture 7 (Tooley and English)
• Lecture 8 (Norcross and Regan)
• Lecture 9 (Machan and Cohen)
• Lecture 10 (Rawls and Nozick)
• Lecture 11 (Singer)
• Lecture 12 (Occupy the Future)
• Final Exam Review
• Course Readings
• Euthyphro: Summary
• Euthyphro: Dialogue
• Euthyphro: Notes
• Apology: Summary
• Apology: Dialogue
• Apology: Notes
• Crito: Summary
• Crito: Dialogue
• Crito: Notes
• Phaedo: Summary
• Phaedo: Dialogue
• Phaedo: Notes
• Gorgias: Summary
• Gorgias: Dialogue
• Gorgias: Notes
• Plato’s Allegory of the Cave
• Allegory of the Cave Notes
• SEP – The Cosmological Argument
• The No Infinite Regress Argument
• The Contingency Argument
• Russell and Copleston Debate
• The Inductive Argument
• Overview of Design Arguments
• SEP: Design Arguments
• Hume Reading Intro and Notes
• Paley Reading Intro and Notes
• Behe Reading Intro and Notes
• Kitcher Reading Intro and Notes
• SEP: The Ontological Argument
• Ontological Argument Notes
• IEP: The Problem of Evil
• Dostoyevsky’s Rebellion Chapter from The Brothers Karamazov
• Rebellion Notes
• Mackie and Swinburne Reading Notes and Intro
• SEP: Pascal’s Wager
• Pascal’s Wager Notes
• SEP: Mind-Body Dualism
• Parallelism and Occasionalism
• SEP: Mind-Body Dualism Notes
• Foster and Churchland Notes
• Physicalism: Mind Brain Identity Theory (Type Identity Theory)
• Smart and Place Notes
• Multiple Realizability and Functionalism
• Token Identity Theory and Token Physicalism
• Searle Notes
• Jackson Notes
• Chalmers Notes
• Descartes’ Meditations 1 & 2
• Descartes’ Meditations Notes
• Skepticism Notes
• Notes on Moore’s Proof of the Existence of the an External World
• Naive Realism and Representational Realism
• Transcendental Idealism
• Logical Positivism
• The Euthyphro Dilema Notes
• Thomas Hobbes’ Leviathan
• SEP: Hobbes’s Political and Moral Philosophy
• Leviathan Notes
• Gauthier Notes
• Objections: The Fool Argument
• Lesson 1 Lecture Notes
• Immanuel Kant – What is Enlightenment?
• Lesson 2 Lecture Notes
• Lesson 3 Lecture Notes
• Lesson 4 Lecture Notes (Kantian Ethics part I)
• Lesson 5 Lecture Notes (Kantian Ethics part II)
• Allen Wood – Kantian Ethics (excerpts)
• Lesson 6 Lecture Notes (Social Contract Theory par I)
• Lesson 7 Lecture Notes (Social Contract Theory part II)
• Jean-Jacques Rousseau – The Social Contract
• Lesson 8 Lecture Notes (Applied Ethics part 1)
• Lesson 9 Lecture Notes (Applied Ethics part II)
• Peter Singer – Unsanctifying Human Life
• Mary Anne Warren – On the Legal and Moral Status of Abortion
• Lesson 10 Lecture Notes (Applied Ethics part III)
• Lesson 11 Lecture Notes (Metaethics)
• Reagan – The Case for Animal Rights
• Lesson 12 Lecture Notes (Political Philosophy)
• John Rawls – A Theory of Justice (excerpts)
• Robert Nozick – Anarchy, State, Utopia
• Cumulative Final Review
• Cumulative Final

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Study at Cambridge

About the university, research at cambridge.

• Undergraduate courses
• Events and open days
• Fees and finance
• Postgraduate courses
• How to apply
• Postgraduate events
• Fees and funding
• International students
• Continuing education
• Executive and professional education
• Courses in education
• How the University and Colleges work
• Term dates and calendars
• Visiting the University
• Annual reports
• Equality and diversity
• A global university
• Public engagement
• Give to Cambridge
• For Cambridge students
• For our researchers
• Business and enterprise
• Colleges & departments
• Email & phone search
• Museums & collections
• Current Students
• Undergraduate Writing Skills
• Faculty of Philosophy
• About Us overview
• Academic Visitors
• Administration overview
• Accessible Documents Checklist
• Video conferencing accessibility assessment guide
• Cambridge Women Philosophers
• Disability Access Guide
• Health and Safety
• How to find us

Important Dates

• Information Technology overview
• Using Google Meet
• Zoom User Guide
• Skype & PhoneConference Call and Screen Sharing
• Microsoft Teams getting started
• Panopto Recording & Publishing Overview
• Zoom Security Tips for public meetings
• Job Opportunities
• Newsletters
• Philosophy Green Team overview
• Waste & Recyling
• Green Team Events
• Welfare overview
• Welfare for Students
• Welfare for Staff
• People overview
• Teaching & Research Staff
• Director of Studies Area overview
• Director of Studies Part 1B
• Director of Studies Part II
• Postgraduate Advisors Area
• Support Staff
• Current Academic Visitors
• Academic Staff Administrative Roles
• Paper Co-Ordinators
• Research overview
• Research Projects and Networks
• Seminars and Discussion Groups
• Employment destinations of recent Faculty PhD students
• Research Funding Opportunities
• Recent Faculty books
• Open access at Cambridge
• Current Students overview
• Postgraduates overview
• MPhil Course Information (Includes examination protocols)
• PhD Course Information
• Organisational Matters
• Supervision
• Lectures and Seminars
• Faculty Resources
• Advice and Support
• PG Training Guide
• Room Booking Guidance
• Working Away
• Working While Studying
• Financial Support
• Postgraduate Calendar
• Deposit of Electronic PhD Theses
• Postgraduate Forms overview
• Appointment of PhD Examiners Form
• Risk assessment form RA1
• Risk assessment examples
• Conference expenses funding application form
• Postgraduate hardship funding application form
• MPhil Essays and Dissertations (Raven Login)
• MPhil Data Retention
• University Timetable
• Part IA Seminar (Discussion Group) Readings
• Undergraduate Tripos Students Information
• Lecture List
• Course Outlines and Reading Lists (for Philosophy Students and Staff)
• Course Outlines and Reading Lists (for auditors)
• Undergraduate Exams overview
• Sample Answers
• Craig Taylor Prize
• Extended Essays & Dissertations
• Data Retention Policy
• Part IA Past Exam Papers
• Faculty Plagiarism Policy
• Part IB Past Exam Papers
• Part II Past Exam Papers
• Guidelines for Examiners & Assessors (including Marking Criteria)
• Sample paper for Part II paper 9
• IB5 Sample Exam
• Undergraduate Writing Skills overview
• Tackling the Philosophy Essay Guide
• Tackling the Philosophy Essay Guide (mobi version)
• Tackling the Philosophy Essay Guide (epub version)
• Tackling the Philosophy Essay Guide (Word version)
• 09 Plagiarism 2018revJuly18
• Student Feedback & Support overview
• Student Representation & Student-Staff Committee
• Philosophy Student-Staff Committee Meeting Minutes
• SSC minutes 1May18
• Final SSCMinutes 30Oct18
• SSC Unconfirmed minutes 05 Feb 19
• SSC unconfirmedminutes 7May19
• Student Complaints Procedure
• SSC unconfirmed minutes 5Nov19
• SSC minutes 04 Feb 2020 4
• SSC minutes 5May2020 1
• Philosophy Faculty Guidelines for Discussion Sessions
• Prospective Students overview
• Prospective Postgraduates
• Prospective Undergraduates
• Suggested Preliminary Readings
• Prospective Undergraduate students - Frequently asked questions
• Prospective Postgraduate students – Frequently asked questions
• Events overview
• Past Events overview
• Past Events - Conferences, Workshops and Special Lectures
• The Roles of Knowledge
• The Roles of Knowledge Abstracts
• Limits of Duty programme
• The Limits of Duty
• Decision Theory Seminar
• No-platform and Hate Speech
• What is Domination?
• 6th Cambridge Graduate Conference on the Philosophy of Logic and Mathematics
• Universals_v2.pdf
• JohnSearle Lecture
• Immateriality, Thinking and the Self in the Long Middle Ages
• Papers Heal Metaphysical atomism and the attraction of materialism
• Oelze Summary of Talk
• WIP Conference Poster
• GoodmakersandgoodtakersTextsHO2.pdf
• Minorities and Philosophy (MAP) Cambridge Conference 2018
• Shyane Personal Identity handout 6th form conf 2019
• Richard Holton Handout 6th form conf 2019
• Library overview
• Accessibility
• Joining the library
• Borrowing from the library
• Philosophy eresources
• IT, printing and copying facilities
• Resources for undergraduates
• Resources for researchers
• Contact the library
• Intranet overview
• Undergraduate Teaching and Support Arrangements (including exam updates)
• Director of Studies Area
• Academic Teaching Resources and Protocols. 
• Samples for MPhil Examiners overview
• Philosophy File Share overview
• Postgraduates
• Undergraduate Exams
• Student Feedback & Support

Latest news

View all news

Quick links

All News Items

Moral Sciences Club

Philosophy Lecture List

Philosophy Podcasts

Moodle Undergraduate Site

Intranet Teaching and Examining Arrangements

Follow us on Twitter

Tweets by @CambridgePhilos

Information

• Privacy Policy
• Terms of Use
• Photos by Ben Colburn displayed with his permission
• Philosophy Contact Details
• [email protected]
• Map of Sidgwick Site
• University Map

Other Links

• Email & Phone Search

© 2024 University of Cambridge

• Contact the University
• Freedom of information
• Privacy policy and cookies
• Statement on Modern Slavery
• Terms and conditions
• University A-Z
• Undergraduate
• Postgraduate
• Research news
• About research at Cambridge
• Spotlight on...

• Department of Philosophy

University | A to Z | Departments

• Current staff and students
• Current students

Writing Philosophy essays

• Current undergraduates
• Current research students
• Current taught MA and Graduate Diploma students
• Visiting students
• Elective Modules
• Current staff

Preparation

Referencing & help.

• Good essay writing begins with good course preparation. You should remember that just attending courses is not enough. You will engage with the lectures and seminars only if you do the required primary and secondary reading. By the time you come to write your first essay you should already know enough to approach the subject confidently.
• Make sure you have properly understood the question. If you do not, ask. Review your lecture notes and the course outline in order to put the question into context and to relate it to other aspects of the subject. If you can break down the question into parts, do so. Decide which are the most important and weight each part accordingly.
• Read the suggested texts with your question or questions in mind. If you find the reading hard to understand, try reading a whole article or chapter to get the gist and then re-read slowly, making notes.
• Think for yourself. Don't borrow thought or ideas without giving yourself time to digest them. Discuss them with your fellow students. It can be very helpful to discuss the articles and books you read with others. Also, when you take notes, don't simply excerpt long passages, write them in your own words.
• Always start from a plan, however rudimentary; but you will inevitably find your argument developing a dynamic of its own, so do not be afraid to revise your plan as you go along. As Socrates says in Plato's Republic: 'Where the argument takes us, like a wind, hither we must go.'
• Write a draft, leave it for a while, then come back and revise it. On the first draft concentrate on getting the content and structure right and do not dwell on the style. Do not be held up by the precise formulation of a sentence, jot down a phrase and move on.
• Write the final draft. Check the spelling, grammar and make sure all the bibliographical details are correct. leave a wide margin on the right hand side of your page for the marker's comments. Be kind on your marker: use a font that is easy to read and a line spacing of at least 1.5 or 2. Make a photocopy of your essay as a precaution, since they sometimes can go astray.
• Your essay should contain a clear exposition of the theory you are studying, a detailed discussion and critical assessment of that theory. The criticisms you look at may be your own, or those of other philosophers.
• Make sure you indicate when you are expounding the view of someone else and when you are writing in your own voice. Don't just write a long list of objections to a particular argument. Indicate whether you endorse or reject them and give your reasons.
• Use examples to illustrate your point. Preferably, choose your own examples. Always make the point of your example clear to the reader.
• Don't worry too much about the 'originality' of the content of your essay. Nobody expects you to come up with a new philosophical theory in your first four pages of writing. Your essay will be original enough if you think for yourself, use your own words, give your own examples and always provide reasons for accepting or rejecting a particular view.
• Avoid rambling introductions and conclusions. Some books begin with a portentous opening sentence e.g., 'Philosophy, from the earliest times, has made greater claims, and achieved fewer results, than any other branch of learning.' (B. Russell) You can get away with such a sentence as the opening line of a 400 page book, but not as the opening line of a 4 page essay. State briefly what you think the question involves, if this is not obvious, and get stuck in to your answer. With conclusions, sum up your argument if you want to and leave it at that.
• Think small or be methodical. There is a gap between your brain's ability to grasp something and your ability to express in writing what you have already understood. It is as if your intuition can leap up whole flights of stairs at once, whereas your written explanations climb one step at a time. This means that you can easily get ahead of yourself, producing the illusion that your ideas are far more lofty than they really are. Only by patiently stepping through the details of an argument can you avoid such illusions. So be patient! If you are not sure whether you have made your point, try putting it another way; 'The upshot of this argument is...', 'the point of this example is...'. Do not simply repeat yourself, try instead to look at your subject from different angles. Sometimes it will feel as if your point is trivial and not worth making. But a trivial point can be a solid step in an interesting argument. The ability to tease out the subtleties of a small point will serve you better than a grand philosophy of life, the universe and everything.
• One way to structure your essay is to outline an argument, consider an objection, then reply to the objection and then move on to the next point. Avoid the two extremes of length and unbroken paragraphs on the one hand, and staccato sound bytes on the other. Divide your essay into clearly defined paragraphs and devote a whole paragraph to each point. Make the connections between them explicit, by telling the reader what they are. Write things like, 'There are two major objections to this line of thought...' or 'what this example shows is...' Think of these connections as signposts telling the reader where she is, where she has been or reminding her where she is heading.
• 'Style is the feather in the arrow, not the feather in the cap.' Do not worry about repeating important words or phrases. In philosophy it is more important to be consistent in your terminology than to find new and imaginative ways of saying the same thing. Clear prose has its own elegance, wordiness can sometimes cloud the issue.
• Empathise with your reader. Once you understand something, you forget what it was like not to understand it; but doing just this will help you to get your point across. To write clearly you have to put yourself in the place of your reader. Imagine the reader is someone who knows nothing about the subject. What would you have to do firstly to convince them and secondly to maintain their interest. Generally speaking a concrete example will get you much further than a passage of purple prose or a string of high-falutin' epithets. One useful way to attain clarity and simplicity of style is to write in short sentences. It is easier to waffle in long rambling sentences.
• Use 'signposts' to let the reader know what you are trying to do. You can say things like , 'one objection is...', 'A possible reply to this is...', 'What this example shows...', 'This importance of this point is that...', 'What X is assuming is that...'. Be explicit about what you are arguing and why.
• Stylistically it is vital to use your own words. Quite apart from the dangers of plagiarism, if you borrow chunks of text from another author and then insert them into your essay, you will end up with a patchwork of different styles that reads awkwardly. By all means paraphrase someone else's view, although make it clear that you are paraphrasing. This will help you to understand the position you are adumbrating; and there is a lot of skill involved in a lucid and concise exposition of somebody else's argument.
• Occasionally you will want to cite somebody else's words directly. Be sparing in your use of quotation. There is much less skill to quotation than to paraphrase or précis. When you select a passage for quotation, make sure it is both brief and relevant. There is nothing worse than reading a string of long quotations interspersed with brief and gnomic comments.
• Use a dictionary (or spell check) and a grammar. Good spelling and good grammar are not wholly unrelated to the content of your essay. The thread of an essay is easier to follow if the reader does not have to guess the word which you actually meant to write. Good grammar makes not only for elegant but for precise prose. So do not be ashamed to use a dictionary. I prefer the Chambers to the Collins single volume dictionary, but both are good. (Webster's and M.S. Word dictionaries are American.) Michael Dummet, the philosopher, has written an excellent little English grammar for his students, published by Duckworth.

Use of sources

• All verbatim quotations, whether long or short should be enclosed in inverted commas or indented, and the precise source given. Make sure that you give enough information for the reader to find the passage, i.e. author, work, edition page number or section.
• Passages of close paraphrase should be acknowledged, and the purpose of these paraphrases made clear e.g. as a summary of a view to be discussed disputed or agreed with.
• When a point has been derived directly from an author, even though it mode of expression may be original, this should be acknowledged in a footnote or parenthesis.
• Extensive use of an essay written by another student should be acknowledged. This applies to essays borrowed from the 'Essay Bank' and to essays which are borrowed on a personal basis. Just as the rule that you should acknowledge your dependence on published sources is not supposed to discourage you from reading widely, the rule that you should acknowledge your dependence where it exists, on other students' essays, is not supposed to discourage you from reading each others' essays. In the end however the only thing of value to you and of interest to us is work in which you express and develop your own thoughts.
• At the end of any essay to be submitted for formal assessment (not tutorial essays) write a list in alphabetical order of all the works consulted or read during the preparation and writing of the essay, as well as those from which you quote directly (see Referencing).

Referencing

The Philosophy Department accepts the Harvard or MLA styles of referencing.  Please refer to the specific information below on each permitted style.

Additional help

You may find the extra help below useful when writing Philosohy essays.

This guide to writing Philosophy essays was written by Gordon Finlayson

Department of Philosophy University of York , York , YO10 5DD , UK Tel: work +44 (0)1904 323251 | Fax: fax +44 (0)1904 324023 | [email protected]

Legal statements | Privacy | Cookies | Accessibility © University of York | Modify | Direct Edit

How to Write a Philosophy Paper: Bridging Minds

Table of contents

• 1 What is a Philosophy Paper?
• 2.1 Philosophy Research Paper Introduction
• 2.2 Body Sections
• 2.3 Writing a Philosophy Paper Conclusion
• 3 Template for a Philosophy Essay Structure
• 4 How to Format a Philosophy Research Paper
• 5.1 Choose a Topic
• 5.2 Read the Material and Take Notes
• 5.3 Think about Your Thesis
• 5.4 Make an Outline
• 5.5 Make a First Draft
• 5.6 Work on the Sections
• 5.7 Engage with Counterarguments
• 5.8 Don’t Niglet Citations
• 5.9 Check Formatting Guidelines.
• 5.10 Revise and Proofread
• 6 How to Select the Best Philosophy Essay Topic?
• 7.1 Argumentative Philosophy Essay Topics
• 7.2 Plato Essay Topics
• 7.3 Worldview Essay Topics
• 7.4 Transcendentalism Essay Topics
• 7.5 Practical Philosophy Essay Topics
• 7.6 Enlightenment Essay Topics
• 8 Let Your Philosophy Paper Shine

As a college student who has decided to take a philosophy course, you may be new to this science. A philosophy assignment may seem hard, and this subject is indeed pretty difficult. You read some text, but what you read is just one level of the text, as you need to think critically and analyze what the author is trying to get across. It also involves a lot of analytical and deep thinking. Thus, it is difficult to do an assignment unless you fully understand the text. Don’t freak out if you have little experience with this subject, as we have prepared a comprehensive guide on how to write a philosophy paper, from which you will know:

• The essence of philosophy paper, its structure and format
• Why it is important not to omit the outline stage
• Practical tips on writing a philosophy research paper.

What is a Philosophy Paper?

A philosophy research paper is an academic work that presents a comprehensive exploration of a specific philosophical question , topic, or thinker. It typically involves the analysis of arguments, the articulation of one’s own positions or perspectives, and the evaluation of philosophical texts and ideas. The primary objective of such a paper is to contribute to the understanding of philosophical issues by critically examining existing views, offering new interpretations, or developing novel arguments. The paper is characterized by rigorous logical reasoning, clear articulation of ideas, and grounding in relevant philosophical literature.

Drafting a philosophy essay begins with appreciating precisely what a philosophy research paper entails. It involves taking a definite position on a philosophical topic and defending that viewpoint with a logical, irrefutable claim. A good research essay generally uses rational arguments to lead readers down a path to a conclusive, hard-to-contradict resolution.

Philosophy Paper Outline Structure

Writing a quality philosophy paper means beginning with a first-rate outline. The best philosophy paper outline is straightforward in its intent, takes up a position, and is uncomplicated in its language. A proper outline makes drafting easier and less time-consuming. Moreover, philosophical writing with a clear-cut outline will lend assurance that your end result is condensed yet enlightening.

After determining a format, you are ready to begin writing out your philosophy paper outline. The first step in this process is to determine how to choose a topic for a paper. Great papers are those that the writer is most interested in. Once your topic has been chosen, your outline can be written with specific details and facts. Said specifics will take your introduction, body, and conclusion through an easy-to-follow guide.

Philosophy Research Paper Introduction

Your research essay should begin with a striking and  attention-grabbing hook . It should identify your topic of focus in some way and ensure that readers have the desire to continue on. The hook is intended to smoothly transition to your thesis statement, which is the claim your thesis is venturing to prove. Your thesis statement should lead readers to  the question of research – the distinct question that will be wholly explained in the body of writing. Finally, your  introduction for the research paper will close with your stance on the question.

Body Sections

The body aspect of a philosophy thesis is considered the meat of any paper. It is hard unless you find someone to  write my philosophy paper for me . This element is where most of the logic behind your stance is contained. Typically, bodies are made up of 3 sections, each explaining the explicit reasoning behind your position. For instance, the first chunk of the body will directly and logically answer the question posed.

In your second body section, use statements that argue why your position is correct. These statements should be informed, prudent, and concise in their reasoning, yet still presented without overly fancy lingo. The explanation of your argument should not be easily opposed. It should also be succinct and without fluff, insulating the explanatory material.

The third portion of the body section should defend your thesis against those that may have counterarguments. This will be the backbone of the essay – the portion that is too hard to refute. By ensuring that criticisms are properly and utterly denounced and the thesis is ratified, philosophical writing will begin to reach its end – the conclusion.

Writing a Philosophy Paper Conclusion

The conclusion is ultimately meant to tie the entire work together in a nice, coherent fashion. It should start with a brief rehash of the body section of your essay. Then, it will move into explaining the importance of the thesis and argument as a whole.  Quality conclusions are ones that will offer a sense of closure.

Template for a Philosophy Essay Structure

A suggested template to help guide you when writing out a philosophy outline is as follows:

The use of the above outline template is sure to help with the overall drafting procedure of philosophical writing. Understanding the proper use of the outline is ideal for the best end product.

Putting an outline to use makes the process of writing a philosophy paper much more simple. By using an outline to navigate your thoughts as you write, your essay nearly composes itself. The addition of detail to an outline as it is written provides pronounced facts and a full outline. Take the outline chock full of thoughts and ideas, add words and transitions, and you have a complete paper.

How to Format a Philosophy Research Paper

Formatting a philosophy paper starts with choosing a citation style . The choice between APA, MLA, and Chicago styles simply lay out citations in contrasting manners for your philosophical writing. Each of these styles requires a differing method of citing sources and varying types of organization. Most commonly, philosophy research paper citations are done in MLA or Chicago. While both are accepted, it may be best to choose which your supervisor requires.

Luckily, you can  APA research papers for sale and forget about this stress.

10 Steps to Write a Great Philosophy Paper Like a Pro

Learning how to write a philosophy research paper outline is a skill that can be carried over to numerous other subjects. While philosophical writing is a bit different than most other topics of discussion, the outline can be applied to others fairly easily. Proper utilization of outlines makes for a well-thought-out and structured thesis work that a writer can be proud of.

Choose a Topic

One of the primary steps is choosing a topic, and that is the first thing college students get stuck on. If you can not choose a topic you are interested in, talk to your university professor. You can also take a look at different lists of ideas on the Internet.

Read the Material and Take Notes

Read all materials carefully and take notes of important ideas. It is a good idea to read the material a couple of times as there will always be something you don’t notice at first. It is important to have a clear understanding of what you read to nail your assignment. If you feel like you don’t understand anything, then Google ‘ write my philosophy paper for me ’ and get help from real professionals.

Think about Your Thesis

Before you start writing, realize what you are going to show. Your work should have a strong thesis that states your position. The central component of the work is a clear thesis statement followed by supporting claims.

Make an Outline

An outline should include your ideas for the introduction, your thesis, main points, and conclusion. Having a philosophy paper outline before working on the assignment can help you stay focused and ensure you include all major points.

Make a First Draft

Don’t worry about perfection at this stage. Instead, focus on getting your ideas on paper. Following your outline, start building your arguments. Make sure to provide evidence or reasons for your claims.

Work on the Sections

Introduction: An introduction for a research paper is an essential part of any assignment because it gives your readers an overview of your work. It is your opportunity to grab their attention, so take this step seriously. Remember the thesis statement? You should present it here.

Main body: In this part, you need to present arguments and support your thesis. Start with providing a clear explanation of the philosopher’s ideas and move to the evaluation. Support your thesis by using examples.

Conclusion: A conclusion for any research paper is where you restate your central thesis. It should look like a mirror image of the introduction. Here you need to summarize the major points of your work.

Engage with Counterarguments

A good philosophy paper acknowledges opposing views. Make sure to address these counterarguments and provide reasons for why you believe your stance is more compelling.

Don’t Niglet Citations

Citations serve as a bridge. They link your ideas to the broader world of philosophical discourse, allowing readers to trace back your sources and delve deeper if they wish. Always remember, that citations are more than a mere formality. They correspond to specific ideas, arguments, or facts you present in your paper. This means every claim, idea, or quote you borrow from a philosopher needs to be clearly linked to its source. In this way, you will be sure that your work will be free of plagiarism .

Check Formatting Guidelines.

It’s also crucial to maintain consistency in your citation style. Whether you use APA, MLA, or Chicago, stick to one style throughout your paper.

Revise and Proofread

Once you finish your masterpiece, it is time to  edit and proofread the research paper . We recommend you put your work aside for a few days to have a fresh perspective when start editing it.

How to Select the Best Philosophy Essay Topic?

First of all, we recommend deciding on a direction that interests you more. It can be a theoretical aspect, applicative use of philosophy or even the integration of this science with others – for example, ontology or metaphysics. After all, it is essential to reflect your thoughts correctly in writing for any direction. You will need to use writing tools for students to show your judgments accurately in the essay. Sometimes this can be a difficult task when the authors of the papers get into a so-called flow state.

Secondly, choosing a good topic that can be compared with the opinions of already-known thinkers is necessary for a deeper justification of your point of view. To do this, use the appropriate essay quotation format to make your paper easy to read. After all, while we are not recognized philosophers, proving our claims will be helpful to get the highest score.

If you still need to get philosophy essay ideas, continue reading this article. Here you will find 70 interesting topics that you can use as a topic for your essay or get inspired to create your own.

Easy Philosophy Paper Topics

Often we want to avoid reinventing the wheel. We are interested in writing an exciting but easy essay. So, if you were looking for simple philosophical essay topics, here is the list of the top 10 topics in philosophy for your paper:

• Human Responsibilities in Different World Religions: Why are They Distinct?
• Good and Evil: Do They Have Anything in Common? Will They Be Able to Insulate One without the Other?
• Advantages and Disadvantages of a Hedonistic Approach to Life
• Life after Death: Should We Endure the Circumstances of the X-axis for a Better Future on the Y-axis?
• Why Ancient People Asked Themselves the Same Questions as We Do: Isn’t Humanity Progressing?
• Do We Fulfill Our Moral Obligation to Parents by Helping Children?
• Three Features: Each from an Animal and an Angel. What is the Nature of Man?
• Is Genetic Engineering Ethical with Respect to the Laws of Nature?
• How Society Can Influence the Personal Choice of the Sense of Life for Each of Us
• Self-Determination of a Person & the Formation of our Microuniverse

Argumentative Philosophy Essay Topics

If you think more analytically, use it to your advantage. The argumentative type of philosophy essay is an unusual and exciting option for such papers since it requires strong thesis statement points. If you want to write exactly this sort of essay, these essay topics ideas will come in handy to decide on the topic of your work:

• Peaceful Protests/Desperate Battle: a Critical Analysis of the Philosophy of Resistance
• The Borderland Situation and Absurdity: Analytical Review.
• Explanation of the Path of any Subject to the Point of No Return. A Critical Analysis of “The Myth of Sisyphus” 1942.
• The Paradox of Absurdity and How to Find a Way Out of It: Follow the Rules or Set Yours
• Comparative Analysis of Forms of Globalization from the Point of View of Philosophy
• E. Leroy, P. Teilhard de Shader and Volodymyr Vernandskyi: Together About the Noosphere, Separately About its Functioning.
• Analysis of the Origins of the First Thinkers from the Point of View of Metaphysics.
• The Legal Aspect of Organ Cloning and Entire Human Cloning. Does it Make a Difference?
• Are People Obliged to Always Tell the Truth and Nothing But the Truth?
• Is Experience Acquired through Lived Years or Situations? Explanation of Each of the Parties.

Plato Essay Topics

Plato and Aristotle were the founders of philosophy in their classical sense. That is why writing an essay that will outline or refute Plato’s reasoning is a surefire option to impress your teacher and stand out from the rest of the group. If you still don’t know what to write about, below are the topics in the philosophy type of paper:

• Understanding a Being as a Multiplicity of Organic Elements According to Plato’s Postulates.
• Reflection of the Philosophy of Truth As an Idea: Plato’s Teaching
• Plato’s way of Familiarizing themself with the Truth through Memories
• Is It Possible to Trace the Influence of Socrates on Plato’s Philosophy: a Detailed Analysis
• Truth Exists, but It does not Exist until Being Developed – the Main Contradiction of Plato’s System of Philosophy Understanding
• “Phaedo”: Philosophy is the Science of Death.
• Plato’s Dialectic: Philosophy is the Cornice that Crowns All Our Knowledge
• Platonic Vision of Four Types of Dialectics as Four Modes of the Soul Activity
• A Move Against Democracy from the Platonic Postulates of Understanding the State and Society According to Personal Philosophy
• Plato and the “Ladder of Love” in the “Banquet”: Beautiful Bodies, Souls, Tempers and Sciences.

Worldview Essay Topics

Worldview and philosophy are similar concepts; they are rooted in the history of the human race. That is why this type of essay is interesting for both writing and reading. Choose your worldview essay topic from the options below to create your perfect piece of writing:

• Three-Aspect Structure of Worldview: Elements, Levels, Main Subsystems
• Mythological and Religious Types of Worldview: What do They Have in Common?
• Worldview as an Individual Prism of Multilevel Interaction Between Man and the World
• The Influence of Previous Generations on Modern Prejudices of our Outlook
• Ideological Form of Globalization. How does Social Media Affect It?
• The Noosphere as a Part of Countering Global Warming
• Modern Beauty Standards and the Bodily Phenomenon of Existence: What is the Connection between Them?
• Human Rights. Philosophy and Ethics
• Religious Beliefs as a Form of Philosophy Existence
• A Complex and Fragmented Approach to Studying the Worldview of Different Nations

Transcendentalism Essay Topics

Transcendentalism, as a new stage in the formation of philosophy, played a key role in its modern appearance. If you are more inclined towards more modernist lines of philosophy, these topics will suit you perfectly:

• Classical German Philosophy. Rational and Intelligent Thinking
• Subjectively Realistic Description of the Environment According to Categories of Philosophy
• The Influence of Transcendentalism on the Ongoing Development of Philosophy Accordingly to the Categories of Multiplicity and Necessity
• 10 Categories Denoting Deep Connections in being Relative to Transcendentalism: What Unites and Distinguishes Them
• Scientific Contemplation as a Mental Category through the Prism of the 20s Years of the 20th Century
• Life at the Intersection of the Past and the Future: Influence on Currents of American Transcendentalism Philosophy
• Modes of Perception of Time & Time as Duration: New ideas of Transcendentalists or Paraphrasing of Hegel’s Postulates?
• Ontological Doctrines and their Essential Characteristics: Henry David Thoreau
• Concepts of Understanding Space and their Qualitative Changes Relative to New Views on Philosophy
• Nature for Self-Sufficiency as the Main Myth of Philosophy Currents at the Beginning of the 20th Century

Practical Philosophy Essay Topics

The theory is great. However, any science’s practical and applied meaning is interesting for each of us. If you are interested in delving into the use of philosophy in modern society, these topics will not leave you indifferent:

• Everyday/Life Level of Philosophy
• Philosophy of Principles. What does It Mean to be Guided by a Certain Life Principle?
• Approach of Philosophy to the Life of Tibetan Monks – does It Correlate with Reality?
• Prejudice against Residents of Third World Countries: Reasons for Contempt for Their Mentality and Lifestyle
• Unpreparedness of College Teachers for Changes in the Education System: What are They Afraid of?
• Truth as the Last Instance of Communication with People. Is It Always Necessary?
• The Philosophy of Excessive Consumption in the USA. What Basis does it Have?
• Does the Concept of One’s Opinion Exist in the Era of Oversaturation of Information?
• The use of Ancient Greek Postulates in Philosophy Today – is the Appeal to Classical Canons Still Relevant?
• The Concept of Ethical and Moral Principles in the Era of Excessive Permissiveness.

Enlightenment Essay Topics

Enlightenment played a huge role in all sciences and spheres of human life. It’s a mind-blowing theme to write about. So, if you were looking for some ideas for your Enlightenment essay topic, we’ve prepared the best ones for you:

• Does the Urge to Study and Develop the Beautiful in Man Still Influence Modern Philosophy?
• Empiricism and Rationalism: Julien Aufre de Lametre’s Attempt to Unite Them
• The Concept of Atheistic Speech of Enlightenment: Religious Dogmatics Debunktion by Voltaire
• Voltaire: Ignorance, Fanaticism, Delusion and Lies Are Cultivated by Christianity
• The State as a Level of Inequality between the Rich and the Poor, According to Rousseau’s Views.
• The Immense Book of Nature as an Object of Knowledge According to Denis Diderot
• The Structure of Existence through Its Concepts: Elements, Substratum, Substance, Objective Reality beyond Human Consciousness and the Condition of Multiplicity.
• Concepts of Understanding Space and Time in Enlightenment Philosophy
• “Molecular Motion” by Paul Holbach: What is It?
• Social Life Based on the Principles of Reason and Justice – “About Reason” Andrian Helvetius

Let Your Philosophy Paper Shine

Good philosophy research paper writing requires some craft and care. Edit your work until it feels right, and make sure you are confident about your claims. If this science is just not your thing, or you struggle to understand it and doing assignments is sheer torture for you, then order a philosophical work crafted by real professionals! The best way to do your assignment is to leave it to experts and forget about your problems.

Readers also enjoyed

WHY WAIT? PLACE AN ORDER RIGHT NOW!

Just fill out the form, press the button, and have no worries!

We use cookies to give you the best experience possible. By continuing we’ll assume you board with our cookie policy.

Teaching Philosophy

Ai generator.

Teaching philosophy is grounded in one’s beliefs, core values , and views on teaching , learning , and action plan for educators . Whether you adhere to a single approach or adapt over time, understanding diverse perspectives on teaching philosophy is invaluable. This article explores various teaching philosophies, offering insights into how different educators approach their practice, and highlighting the importance of reflecting on and articulating one’s own teaching philosophy. By examining these different views, teachers can gain a broader understanding of effective teaching strategies and the underlying principles that guide them.

What is Teaching Philosophy?

A teaching philosophy statement in simple terms is principle-based mainly on how a person views teaching. Teaching philosophy statements are written documents that describe  personal values , professional values, personal beliefs, and personal and professional views. This is regarding both teaching and learning.

Teaching Philosophy Statement Examples

1. student-centered learning.

“I believe that education should be student-centered, focusing on each student’s unique learning style and strengths. My goal is to create a classroom environment where students feel valued and motivated to engage deeply with the material.”

2. Active Learning

“My teaching philosophy is rooted in active learning. I strive to create interactive lessons that encourage students to participate, ask questions, and collaborate with their peers. This approach helps students develop critical thinking skills and retain information more effectively.”

3. Inclusive Education

“I am committed to creating an inclusive classroom where all students feel welcome and supported. I use diverse teaching strategies to accommodate different learning needs and ensure that every student has the opportunity to succeed.”

4. Growth Mindset

“I believe in fostering a growth mindset in my students. I encourage them to view challenges as opportunities for growth and to persist in the face of difficulties. By promoting a positive attitude towards learning, I help students build resilience and confidence.”

5. Real-World Connections

“My teaching philosophy emphasizes the importance of connecting classroom learning to real-world experiences. I incorporate practical examples and hands-on activities to help students see the relevance of what they are learning and apply it to their lives.”

6. Collaborative Learning

“I believe that learning is a social process. I create a collaborative classroom environment where students work together on projects, share ideas, and learn from each other. This approach not only enhances their understanding but also develops their communication and teamwork skills.”

7. Critical Thinking

“My goal as a teacher is to develop my students’ critical thinking skills. I encourage them to question assumptions, analyze information, and consider multiple perspectives. By fostering a critical mindset, I prepare students to become thoughtful and informed citizens.”

8. Reflective Practice

“I believe that reflection is a key component of learning. I regularly ask my students to reflect on their learning experiences, set goals, and identify areas for improvement. This practice helps them take ownership of their education and become self-directed learners.”

9. Technology Integration

“I integrate technology into my teaching to enhance student learning and engagement. I use a variety of digital tools and resources to create interactive lessons, provide immediate feedback, and facilitate collaboration. Technology also allows me to differentiate instruction and meet the diverse needs of my students.”

10. Culturally Responsive Teaching

“I am dedicated to culturally responsive teaching. I incorporate diverse perspectives into my curriculum and create a classroom environment that respects and values cultural differences. By doing so, I help students develop a deeper understanding of the world and prepare them to thrive in a multicultural society.”

11. Hands-On Learning

“I believe in the power of hands-on learning. I design lessons that involve experiments, projects, and real-life applications to make learning more engaging and meaningful. This approach helps students develop practical skills and a deeper understanding of the subject matter.”

12. Lifelong Learning

“I aim to instill a love of learning in my students. I encourage curiosity, exploration, and a willingness to take risks. By modeling a passion for learning myself, I inspire students to become lifelong learners who continuously seek knowledge and personal growth.”

13. Supportive Environment

“My teaching philosophy centers on creating a supportive and nurturing classroom environment. I build strong relationships with my students, provide emotional support, and create a safe space where they feel comfortable taking risks and expressing themselves.”

14. Interdisciplinary Approach

“I believe in an interdisciplinary approach to teaching. I connect concepts from different subjects to help students see the interconnectedness of knowledge. This approach not only broadens their understanding but also encourages them to think critically and creatively.”

15. Assessment for Learning

“I use assessment as a tool for learning rather than just a measure of performance. I provide regular, formative feedback to help students understand their progress and identify areas for improvement. This approach encourages a growth mindset and helps students take charge of their learning.”

Teaching Philosophy Essay

Teaching is a dynamic and transformative endeavor, grounded in the belief that education is the cornerstone of personal and societal growth. My teaching philosophy is rooted in the conviction that every student possesses the potential to learn and thrive when provided with the right environment, support, and encouragement. My approach is shaped by several core principles: fostering a growth mindset, creating an inclusive and supportive classroom environment, and integrating real-world applications into the learning process.

Fostering a Growth Mindset

Central to my teaching philosophy is the concept of a growth mindset, as advocated by psychologist Carol Dweck. I believe that intelligence and abilities are not fixed traits but can be developed through dedication and hard work. This perspective is essential in encouraging students to embrace challenges, persist in the face of setbacks, and view effort as a pathway to mastery. To nurture a growth mindset, I emphasize the importance of effort, strategy, and progress over innate ability. I provide constructive feedback that focuses on specific strategies and behaviors, rather than labeling students’ abilities, and celebrate improvements and perseverance alongside achievements.

Creating an Inclusive and Supportive Classroom Environment

An inclusive and supportive classroom environment is vital for student engagement and success. I am committed to creating a space where all students feel valued, respected, and empowered to express their ideas and perspectives. This involves recognizing and addressing diverse learning needs, backgrounds, and experiences. I employ differentiated instruction strategies to cater to varied learning styles and provide multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression. By fostering a culture of mutual respect and collaboration, I encourage students to learn from one another and develop a sense of community and belonging.

Integrating Real-World Applications

Connecting classroom learning to real-world applications is crucial in making education relevant and meaningful. I strive to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical experience by incorporating real-life examples, case studies, and problem-solving activities into my lessons. This approach not only enhances students’ understanding and retention of concepts but also equips them with critical thinking and problem-solving skills essential for their future endeavors. By demonstrating the practical implications of academic content, I aim to inspire students to see the value and relevance of their education beyond the classroom.

Reflective Practice and Continuous Improvement

As an educator, I am committed to reflective practice and continuous improvement. I regularly assess and refine my teaching methods based on feedback from students, colleagues, and self-reflection. I stay informed about current educational research and best practices and seek professional development opportunities to enhance my skills and knowledge. By modeling a commitment to lifelong learning, I aim to inspire my students to adopt a similar mindset.

In conclusion, my teaching philosophy is grounded in the belief that every student has the potential to succeed when provided with a supportive, inclusive, and engaging learning environment. By fostering a growth mindset, creating a sense of community, integrating real-world applications, and continuously reflecting on and improving my practice, I strive to empower my students to become confident, curious, and capable learners. Education is not merely about imparting knowledge but about inspiring a lifelong love of learning and equipping students with the skills and mindset needed to navigate and contribute to an ever-changing world.

How to Write a Teaching Philosophy?

1. reflect on your beliefs about teaching and learning.

Consider what you believe about:

• The purpose of education.
• How students learn best.
• The role of a teacher in the learning process.
• The most important outcomes of education.

2. Identify Your Teaching Methods

Think about the strategies and techniques you use or plan to use:

• How do you engage students?
• How do you assess student understanding and progress?
• What instructional methods do you prefer (e.g., lectures, group work, hands-on activities)?

3. Provide Examples

Use specific examples to illustrate your teaching methods and beliefs:

• Describe a successful lesson or activity.
• Share anecdotes or experiences that highlight your approach.
• Explain how you’ve adapted to meet the needs of diverse learners.

4. Discuss Your Goals for Students

What do you hope students gain from your teaching?

• Critical thinking skills .
• Subject-specific knowledge.
• Lifelong learning habits.

5. Explain How You Assess and Reflect on Your Teaching

How do you measure your effectiveness as a teacher?

• Student feedback.
• Self-reflection.
• Professional development activities.

6. Keep It Personal and Specific

Your teaching philosophy should reflect your unique approach and experiences. Avoid generic statements; instead, focus on what makes your teaching style distinctive.

7. Structure Your Statement

A well-organized teaching philosophy might include:

• Introduction : Brief overview of your teaching beliefs.
• Body : Detailed description of your teaching methods, goals, and examples.
• Conclusion : Summary of your teaching philosophy and its implications for your future practice.

8. Revise and Edit

• Ensure clarity and coherence.
• Seek feedback from colleagues or mentors.
• Revise for conciseness and impact.

Why teaching Philosophy is Important?

A teaching philosophy is important for several reasons, serving as a foundational element for educators. Here are key reasons why it’s important:

1. Clarifies Your Teaching Approach

• Articulates Beliefs : It helps you articulate your beliefs about education, learning, and teaching.
• Defines Methods : It clarifies the methods and strategies you use in the classroom.

2. Guides Professional Development

• Reflection : Writing a teaching philosophy encourages self-reflection on your teaching practices and experiences.
• Improvement : It highlights areas for professional growth and improvement.

3. Enhances Communication

• Transparency : It provides transparency to students, colleagues, and administrators about your approach to teaching.
• Expectations : It sets clear expectations for your students about what they can expect from you as an educator.

4. Supports Career Advancement

• Job Applications : A well-crafted teaching philosophy is often required in job applications for teaching positions.
• Promotion and Tenure : It can be a critical component of promotion and tenure dossiers in academic settings.

5. Improves Student Learning

• Consistency : A teaching philosophy helps maintain consistency in teaching practices, which can improve student learning outcomes.
• Alignment : It ensures that your teaching methods are aligned with your educational goals and objectives.

1. Teaching Philosophy Template

2. Teaching Philosophy Sample

3. Teaching Philosophy Statement

4. Components of Teaching Philosophy Statement

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

• Boredom Makes Us Human

I n a recent article in the Financial Times, Markham Heid shares with us a peculiar life crisis. At 41, he has built what many would regard as the good life: he has a family; he is healthy, productive, and creative; he has time to travel, read, exercise, and see friends. Yet, he feels that “something is off.” He gives this state a variety of names, including mid-life melancholy, ennui, and despair. He also diagnoses it in others all around him. To fight against it, some of his friends have turned to ayahuasca retreats, others to fitness. What renders Heid’s malaise somewhat strange is that it does not seem to arise from anything specific. If Heid had lost his job, had no time for himself, or was struggling in his marriage, some of these feelings would seem less puzzling. 

In the history of philosophy, there have been many attempts to understand such powerful but objectless feelings. Boredom , anxiety , and despair are some of the descriptions these moods have received. In the novel Nausea , the French existentialist philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre describes someone who mysteriously experiences that feeling whenever they are confronted with ordinary objects, like a pebble on the beach. The German philosopher Martin Heidegger describes an uncanny unease we may feel when we are bored and searching desperately for distractions. The Danish philosopher Søren Kierkegaard speaks of a silent despair in the background of our lives, a sense of discord or dread of an unknown something that can grab us momentarily.

Sadly, the philosophical descriptions of such moods have often been misunderstood as sombre or romantic moments of existential reflection where we recognize our mortality or the meaninglessness of life. Pictured in this way, these moments are bound to stay isolated from the anxiety, despair, and melancholy that we face in our ordinary life and seek help for. But if we look beyond the existentialist clichés, the philosophical ideas on such moods can offer a new way forward. What could Heid have learnt from the philosophers?

Moods of nothing

Despite Heid’s references to Heidegger, we do not read anything about the philosopher’s own ruminations of a very similar experience of flatness: a feeling that all things (and we ourselves) sink into indifference; a sense that things around us slip away or we slip away from ourselves; a malaise related to a vacant stillness. What is remarkable, for Heidegger, is that such intense affects arise despite the fact that nothing may have changed in our lives: one is still surrounded by the same people, events, and activities, but these do not engage us as they used to. It is this feature that makes him describe what he calls “anxiety” as a mood generated by nothing in particular.

This makes such feelings doubly unwelcome. Most of us can tolerate negative emotions if we see them as instrumental to something desirable—we do not run to a therapist to treat a fear if we think that it holds us back from doing something obviously risky. But unlike fear, what Heidegger calls anxiety and what Heid’s article describes do not protect us from anything specific. No wonder why Sigmund Freud called anxiety a “ riddle .”

But this view is too simplistic for Heidegger. It risks concealing both the value and meaning of the feelings he describes. First, the human emotional life is much more complex than a simple battle between positive and negative feelings, or useful and useless emotions. Second, objectless moods can teach us something significant not about specific risks or problems in our lives but about the fact that we have a life to live at all. Learning from them can allow us to find what Heidegger describes as a sense of peace and joy within the malaise.

What’s missing?

Heid says that “some essential aspect of life is missing or not sufficiently represented.” He ends up attributing his melancholy to the lack of new experiences. Kierkegaard calls this the illusion of “crop rotation,” the idea that changing the soil frequently can save us from boredom and despair. 

But what really drives such moods is not the need for new experiences. It is not even the particulars of our individual lives or the culture we belong to, but that we have been given a life to live in the first place, the taste of possibility that comes with being alive. The kinds of questions that arise are not questions like “have I married the right person?” “will parenthood enrich my life?” or “do I have enough hobbies?” It is the more fundamental questions like “what does it mean to be human?” “what am I supposed to do with the fact that I was given a life?” and “what kind of life is possible for me?” that best explain our human tendency for anxiety, despair, or boredom .

This is why such moods are likely to appear as a mid-life crisis. With many of our life goals fulfilled, we start to wonder what life is for, what is possible for human existence, and what we are doing for it. Humans are inherently ambivalent toward possibility, attracted but also repelled by it. On one hand, we can experience it as a radical openness, an appreciation of our life as a gift. On the other, the open-endedness of possibility, the sense that one could always be doing more with their life, can create a great sense of agony about who we are and how we should go on. 

Throwing us out of our everyday lives, such moods make us ponder existence itself. They are cases where who we are and what we are for becomes an issue for each one of us. These questions never assume a final answer. Hovering over our lives, they can always leave us with a sense of unease. Recognizing that these questions are there, and that they matter, can at least allow us to know what may be missing, even when all is good.

More Must-Reads from TIME

• The New Face of Doctor Who
• Putin’s Enemies Are Struggling to Unite
• Women Say They Were Pressured Into Long-Term Birth Control
• Scientists Are Finding Out Just How Toxic Your Stuff Is
• John Mulaney Has What Late Night Needs
• The 100 Most Influential People of 2024
• Want Weekly Recs on What to Watch, Read, and More? Sign Up for Worth Your Time

Contact us at [email protected]

• New Paper: Dynamically rational judgment aggregation

LSE Philosophy Visiting Professor Christian List has published his new paper ‘Dynamically rational judgment aggregation’ in Springer.

Abstract: Judgment-aggregation theory has always focused on the attainment of rational collective judgments. But so far, rationality has been understood in static terms: as coherence of judgments at a given time, defined as consistency, completeness, and/or deductive closure. This paper asks whether collective judgments can be dynamically rational, so that they change rationally in response to new information. Formally, a judgment aggregation rule is dynamically rational with respect to a given revision operator if, whenever all individuals revise their judgments in light of some information (a learnt proposition), then the new aggregate judgments are the old ones revised in light of this information, i.e., aggregation and revision commute. We prove an impossibility theorem: if the propositions on the agenda are non-trivially connected, no judgment aggregation rule with standard properties is dynamically rational with respect to any revision operator satisfying some basic conditions. Our theorem is the dynamic-rationality counterpart of some well-known impossibility theorems for static rationality. We also explore how dynamic rationality might be achieved by relaxing some of the conditions on the aggregation rule and/or the revision operator. Notably, premise-based aggregation rules are dynamically rational with respect to so-called premise-based revision operators.

Link to the paper.

Share This Story, Choose Your Platform!

Leave a comment.

Click here to cancel reply.

Notify me of follow-up comments by email.

Connect with us

Forthcoming events, philosophy live: ‘living in the past: exploring memory in humans, animals, and artificial agents’, workshop: episodic memory – uniquely human, choice group seminar by mike otsuka (rutgers university): ‘equal chances versus equal outcomes: when are lotteries fair and justified’, ai, animals, and digital minds conference, catherine robb (tilburg university): ‘the metaphysics of collective talent’.

View All Events

Help | Advanced Search

Astrophysics > Cosmology and Nongalactic Astrophysics

Title: an introduction to map-making for cmb experiments.

Abstract: The cosmic microwave background (CMB) anisotropies are a powerful probe of the early universe, and have largely contributed to establishing the current standard cosmological model. To extract the information encoded in those tiny variations, one must first compress the raw, time-domain data collected by a telescope into maps of the sky at the observed frequencies, in a procedure known as map-making. I provide a general introduction to this problem, and highlight a few specificities of the MAPPRAISER implementation.

Submission history

Access paper:.

• HTML (experimental)
• Other Formats

References & Citations

• INSPIRE HEP
• Google Scholar
• Semantic Scholar

BibTeX formatted citation

Bibliographic and Citation Tools

Code, data and media associated with this article, recommenders and search tools.

• Institution

arXivLabs: experimental projects with community collaborators

arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.

Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.

Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs .

Introduction

Chapter outline.

For most college students, an Introduction to Philosophy course is their first encounter with the study of philosophy . Unlike most of your other courses, philosophy is not something usually covered in high school. Yet you are probably familiar with the term philosophy and may have some preconceived notion about what philosophy is and what philosophers do. Perhaps you have stayed up late at night talking with friends or family about topics like free will or the existence of God. Maybe you have a friend who always talks about big ideas or asks tough questions that sound like riddles. Perhaps you think of them as “philosophical”; you might be right.

In this chapter, we will provide a brief introduction to the field of philosophy as a historical and academic discipline. This first chapter should prepare you for your philosophy course and give you a better idea of what it means to be a philosopher. As with all introductions, this one is just a start. Your job is to explore more, think more, read more, and write more like a philosopher. Soon you may even find that you are doing philosophy.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Nathan Smith
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Philosophy
• Publication date: Jun 15, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction

© Dec 19, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.