Planning to Write:

1) Fully understand the topic before beginning to write: if you are unclear as to what you are writing about, your paper will be unclear.  Not knowing your topic will also encourage you to ramble out several pages instead of crafting a complete paper.

2) Plan the structure of the paper: consider constructing an outline of your argument, or, at least, acknowledge and reflect on several points that must be addressed before you begin writing.

3) Clarity must come before creativity: while having a non-linear narrative or innovative section numbering may make a methodologically interesting or visually attractive paper, these stylistic developments will fail if they obscure your main points or the flow of your argument.  Once you have constructed a clear and concise paper, one may return to embellish it; when proofreading, consider using new adjectives instead tired ones (great, big, small, good, bad, etc.), also consider adding an example or textual evidence to your argument. 

The Parts of a Paper:

A solid paper will be composed of the following parts: the Introduction, the Body, and the Conclusion.  Socrates’ Phaedrus likens the best argument to an animal: it must have a strong head, full body, and distinct tail.  These parts may be expanded or added to, yet no complete paper will entirely lack one of these parts. 

1) The most basic form of an academic paper is called “The Five-Paragraph Essay:”

Paragraph One: The Introduction, which includes your thesis statement.  Paragraphs Two, Three, and Four: The Body, each argues one of the three supports for your thesis.  Paragraph Five: The Conclusion, which reiterates your thesis and how you have proved it.

An example: Your thesis (¶1) is that Aristotle’s ethical theory is relevant today.  Your three body arguments are: (¶2) there is no substantial aspect of his theory proven wrong by historical or theoretical developments; (¶3) his ethics are different but not incompatible with current, popular ethical theories; (¶4) his ethics would benefit the people today because we have lost touch with essential meaning.  Your conclusion (¶5) is that Aristotle’s ethical theory is relevant today because it is still historically valid, compatible, and beneficial.

Note that it may actually take three paragraphs to effectively demonstrate each of your body arguments; this does not effect the basic structure from being in the form of the “Five-Paragraph Essay.” 

2) A useful variation on this form is “The Devil’s Advocate Essay,” which employs a pros-and-cons debate: 

After your introduction paragraph, which includes your thesis and an identification of the argument’s two sides, your first body paragraph will argue for side one, the second body paragraph will argue for side two, and the third body paragraph will reconcile the argument by explaining why one or two is stronger; finally, the conclusion will restate the thesis, the two sides, and why the chosen one is the strongest option.

An example:  Your thesis (¶1) concerns the legalization of marijuana where one side is for it and the other side is against it.  Your first body argument is: (¶2) we should legalize marijuana because (a) it has no worse long-term health effects than alcohol, (b) research shows it to be medically beneficial for some health problems, and (c) decriminalizing it will alleviate the over-crowding in our prison systems.  Your second body argument is: (¶3) we should keep marijuana illegal because (a) there is insufficient proof that it doesn’t have long-term health effects, (b) there is insufficient proof that it benefits some patients more than other pharmaceuticals, and (c) decriminalization will simply move inmates from over-crowded prisons to over-crowded rehab clinics.  Your third body argument is: (¶4) marijuana should be legalized because the deficits of our research are not grave enough to harm the populace, instead our knowledge can be more readily expanded by making it legal and, if overcrowding is a guarantee, the greater benefit for humanity would be in expanding our health and human services rather than our criminal justice departments.  Your conclusion is: (¶5) the debate about the legalization of marijuana has two opposing sides; the first ultimately proves to be more rational because it encourages further medical study and embraces a more humanistic ideal for society. 

Note that this version can also be lengthened beyond five paragraphs.  Regardless of length, the most solid form will parallel the individual argument claims between the ‘pros’ and ‘cons’ sections; in other words, each point (health, medical benefit, overcrowding) is addressed as to its positive and its negative implication.  This creates a fair argument, permits actual dialogue between the sides, and allows for an easier reconciliation of the points.  

3) Another common variation of the college philosophy paper is “The Critical Reflection Paper,” which is composed of two parts: textual analysis and critical reflection. 

Textual Analysis is the written transcription of the process of carefully reading a philosophic work in order to understand its overarching meaning by being able to dissect the meaning of each of its steps or stages of argumentation.  Herein, you seek details and how they follow, one from another, as opposed to only conclusions or a grand summation.  The purpose is to reveal potential flaws or benefits of a particular theory (because a conclusion may be correct and the path to it incorrect or vice versus and these steps of intermediate knowledge may have more relevance to other questions than a sole conclusion) and, generally, how philosophy operates by both content and its means of conveyance (in other words, how something is said is often as important as what is said).  Textual analysis will appear more objective: i.e., this is what the text says and this is how it says it…

Critical Reflection is the active reflection on the previous textual analysis in order to critique and judge it.  If the first step is the objective this is what the text says and how, reflection offers the why for the text and why for me?  Therefore, critical reflection will proceed very logically, with consistent arguments, yet appear more subjective in its content: i.e., this is what I think the passage is doing and why…

General Instructions for a critical reflection paper: Read the assigned material.  As you read, make note of passages that: are confusing, seem important to the argument, or catch your attention for any number of reasons (literary, personal, philosophic, etc.).  Select one of these passages for the focus of your paper (on average, 15-20 lines of text is ideal; less than ten lines will require too much extra-textual explication and more than a page says too much for a short paper).  Before you begin writing, answer a few questions about your passage: what is it saying, how does it fit into what is before and after it, is it a central step in an argument or an aside or something in between, why did you select it, what do you think about it or what does it provoke you to think?  Your writing may either divide itself between analysis (explication of the passage) and reflection (your thoughts upon it) or it may do these two activities simultaneously; if having difficulty, begin by doing them in two parts.

Tips and Reminders when Writing:

1) Clarity is preferred to sophistication: academics tend to use long sentences with many clauses but this permits greater opportunity to have run-on sentences or a general lack of clarity.  Use the shortest sentence that is effective to convey your point. 

2) Consistency is always key: harmony and balance are integral in all parts of life and especially in the academic essay.  Try to maintain roughly the same length in your sentences and in each of your paragraphs.  If you support one argument with three points, try to support all your claims with roughly three points.  Don’t use five examples or quotes in one argument and none in the next; try to balance your use of supplementation.  If you decide to use italics in one section, do not switch to underlining in the next.  If you offer a bibliographic comment on one thinker, include such on each other thinker addressed. 

Tips and Reminders when Proofreading:

1) Our minds naturally offer us closure: in between receiving the sensory data and comprehending its meaning, our minds correct small flaws: we see the scrawl on the board as a circle even if its not geometrically worthy of such designation or we flip letters around to correct minor typographical errors.  This is most common when we are reading our own work shortly after having completed the assignment.  Therefore, it is always best to allow a little time to pass between finishing a draft and proofreading it.  Another person can also be more adept at spotting our errors then we may be.  If time and others are lacking, a nearly-foolproof way to proofread is to read it in reverse.  Begin at the end of the paper and the end of its last sentence.  Look at each punctuation mark and word, moving from the right-hand side of the line to the left.  This focuses attention on typographical and grammatical concerns; a regular read-through is then required for checking the logic and flow of the content.

2) Always seek help: dictionaries, thesauruses, style-books, grammar books, and so forth are exceedingly helpful for every level of writing sophistication.  The physical books often and greatly surpass the quality of the computer and on-line versions.  The only hesitation in this recommendation concerns books of quotations; a quote can add infinite depth to a work, but, beware of not knowing the context of that which you cite.  For example, Hitler may have said something very adept about art, but would one want the baggage implicit with a citation of his?  Thus, even if you may not know the author of a quote, your reader might; since you cited him/her, the reader will expect you to have intended all of the implicit connotations. 

Model for References and Bibliography:

This model is the University of Chicago Method of Reference and Bibliography; it is standard within philosophy, but other models, so long as correct and consistent are acceptable, including the MLA and APA models.  Use either parenthetical or footnotes, not both. 

Parenthetical (In-Text) References:

(Author’s Last Name, Book Title, pages).

(Author’s Last Name, “Article Title,” pages).

Example:

Marx writes at length about Shakespeare’s depiction of money; notably, he argues that the playwright “depicts the real nature of money” (Marx, Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts of 1844, 137).

Note: If the title of the work is long, one may abbreviate it so long as it remains identifiable; for example, this Marx work could be shortened to: Economic and Philosophic Manuscripts or just Manuscripts, but one should always err on the side of caution and not over-abbreviate.  If your work has only one source per author, one may use this method (Author’s Last Name, pages).  Always put the final punctuation for the sentence after the closing parenthesis.  This method requires a bibliography.

Footnote References:

(Original Language Books):

Author’s Name, Book Title (City: Publisher, date), pages.

Example:

Robert Mugerauer, Heidegger’s Language and Thinking (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press International, 1990), 7.

Note: Include state abbreviation if city is comparatively unknown.

(Translated Books):

Author’s Name, Book Title, trans. First and Last Name (City: Publisher, date), pages.

Example:

Jean-François Lyotard, The Postmodern Condition: A Report on Knowledge, trans. Geoff Bennington and Brian Massumi (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 2002), 35.

(Journals or Magazines):

Author’s Name, “Article Title,” Journal Name Number (date): pages.

Example:

Toby Avard Foshay, “Denegation, Nonduality, and Language in Derrida and Dogen,” Philosophy East and West 44, 3 (1994): 543-58, 544.

Note: Page range of the article is given first, then a comma, then the cited or quoted page or pages.

Bibliography:

Note: Indent all lines after the first by one tab.  List works alphabetically by last names.

(Original Language Books):

Author’s Last, First Name.  Book Title.  City: Publisher, date.

Example:

Caputo, John D.  The Mystical Element in Heidegger’s Thought.  New York: Fordham University Press, 1986.

(Translated Books):

Author’s Last, First Name.  Book Title.  Translated by First Last Name.  City: Publisher, date.

Example:

Lyotard, Jean-François. The Differend: Phrases in Dispute.  Translated by Georges Van Den Abbeele.  Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1988.

Note: List the work’s subtitle, if it has one, after the title and separated by a colon.

(Journals or Magazines):

Author’s Last, First Name.  “Article Title.”  Journal Name Number (date): pages.

Example:

Landgrebe, Ludwig.  “The Phenomenological Concept of Experience.”  Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 34, 1 (1973): 1-13.

Note: Journals are listed “Number, Issue” if it has both; no punctuation is used between the journal name and its volume number.

Basic Check List for the Written Paper:

____ Name, class, and date in upper right hand corner, single spaced.

____ Title: centered, bold text, separated by one or two lines from the body text.

____ Clear indication of topic selected if chosen from multiple options.

____ Standard font style, size, and color and standard margins used.

____ All quotes are cited by parenthetical reference and bibliography or footnote reference.

____ Quotes over three lines are in block quotes: indented, no quotation marks, single spaced, cited.

____ All abbreviations and numbers under ten are spelled out, except in references.

____ Avoid or greatly limit use of clichés and colloquial expressions. 

____ Pages are numbered (can be bottom right, left, centered, or top right corner, often not on first page). 

____ Pages stapled or paper-clipped in upper left corner.

____ Spell check performed.

____ Proofreading for typographical, grammatical, and content errors performed.