ADVICE ON WRITING PHILOSOPHY ESSAY
(Adapted from Dr. Tony Chu of The Metropolitan State College of Denver)
“What can be said at all can be said clearly,
and what we cannot
talk about we must pass over in silence.”
L. Wittgenstein, Preface
to Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus
A. Pay careful attention to the questions asked. They are usually asked the way they are asked for a reason.
B. Do not place high priority on writing a smooth essay; that is, an essay that gives the impression that you see no difficulties in the subject. At least if you see difficulties, don’t try just to get around them. On the contrary, try to articulate the difficulties. Putting difficulties explicitly in what you write is one of the best possible ways to learn -- especially because it puts pressure on you to resolve the difficulties. As I see it, there is no comparison between a difficulty ignored or glossed over or missed on the one hand, and, on the other hand, a difficulty that is articulated clearly -- or failing that even not too clearly. This is true whether or not you can think of a successful solution. And it is true even if you can think of a solution one might think would work, though you can show that it won’t. (If the instructor is doing his job, he won’t miss the difficulty even if you gloss over it: the only thing is, you will have missed the opportunity to articulate and learn from the difficulty in the best possible way, namely by starting on it from where you yourself are at.)
C. In examining the writings of a particular philosopher, be hard on him or her. If what they say seems wrong, say so, and say WHY you think they’re wrong. But don’t merely leave the matter there. Make that a challenge to see how the philosopher might have responded to your challenge. So construct as sympathetic a response as you can to your own objection. (But don’t leave it there: be hard on this sympathetic response. Then construct as sympathetic a response ..., and so on as long as it proves profitable.) As you will discover by experience, this procedure is the most likely to yield philosophically and exegetically convincing readings of what a philosopher believes.
D. Do not place a high priority on writing something just because you think that is what I think. In general, I tend to see through this. If it is grades you are worried about, you’re much more likely to do well in this course by disagreeing with me rather than by agreeing with me. (But of course what is important is how you argue for your positions). Also, you tend to learn more if you disagree, provided of course that it is genuine disagreement and not just the old ‘dig in the heels’ routine. Most of all, just try to be straight with me about what you think and what your difficulties and objections are. That’s the best way to learn.
E. Motivate the positions of the philosophers you are interpreting. If an actor crosses the stage at certain point without conveying a motive to the audience, but, merely because the director told him or her to make such a cross, the audience is mystified, and the play is on its way to ruin. If I want to know what a certain stone-age people believe and you tell me that they think a certain stone is god, I will have learned nothing from you until I have got some idea of just HOW they can believe such a thing. And such an idea I cannot get till I have some idea what reasons they have for thinking this particular stone so different from other stones. Unless the beliefs of the stone-age people in question have been motivated, to tell me they believe a god is a stone is to just play at the study of primitive religion. The philosophers you are studying with us are in general worth studying. They usually have something in mind when they say something. If what they say sounds queer, then that is not just an ultimate fact you can just report. You need to try to figure out for yourself (and for us) just how -- starting from something that is halfway reasonable in the circumstances -- the philosophers should have got to the queer-looking position they ended up with. (It goes without saying that the same sorts of remarks apply to the study of primitive religions).
F. Don’t write for me -- knowing what I know, believing what I do. (‘Oh, he knows that stuff, I don’t have to explain it to him.) Instead write for an intelligent person with no specialist background. Write for yourself two years down the road. Make sure your ideas are well enough explained that if you pick up the essay two years hence without having done any philosophy interim, you will still be able to understand what you were saying in your essay. Don’t write in a PRIVATE CODE of your own or a private code that you think someone in this class (or the instructor) will understand. If an intelligent student, not in this class but with some interest in the subject, reads your essay, they should be able to understand the issues you are discussing and where you stand on those issues.
G. Don’t forget to NUMBER your pages.
