Argument Recreation Assignment

ORDER NOW

Philosophy 100: Introduction to Philosophy (Spring 2017)

Argument Recreation Assignment

These first essays should be 3-4 pages, double-spaced, with one-inch margins and 12-point font. Everyone has a different writing style in terms of how long it takes to get the point across, and what is most important is that you explain everything that needs to be explained as clearly as possible. If you can do that in a somewhat shorter paper, that is fine. If it takes you a bit longer to do what you need to do, that is also fine. However, if you are on the short or long end of the page range above, that is a sign that you may not have followed the assignment prompt somehow, so be careful.

Paper Outline:
1. Thesis statement
a. Start your paper with a very short introduction; you do not need any more than one good thesis statement to introduce a philosophical paper of this length. Just get right down to the point, no filler!
b. Remember that a good thesis statement is one sentence, in the first person, that makes it clear to the reader exactly whose work you are responding to and what main task YOU are going to accomplish.
c. Here is a template that you can use to make a good thesis statement: “In this paper, I will recreate Simon Keller’s / Sarah Stroud’s argument for the claim that …”
d. This part is worth 3 points.
2. Argument Recreation
a. In this assignment, your main task is explanation; you’ll be recreating an argument from a text - literally creating it again in your own words.
i. You can choose to explain any ONE (but no more than one) of the following arguments:
1. Keller’s argument that epistemic norms sometimes conflict with the norms of friendship.
2. Keller’s argument that sometimes we have good reason not to be an ideal friend.
3. Stroud’s argument that mainstream epistemologists cannot endorse the belief-forming practices characteristic of friendship or the beliefs formed via those practices.
ii. To complete your argument recreation, you need to identify, state, explain, and justify (that is, defend) each premise that the author uses to support their conclusion, and then state the conclusion.
iii. Use your own words throughout as much as possible, even though you are explaining someone else’s reasoning.
iv. Hint: devote a whole paragraph to each premise. Start by stating the premise explicitly, then define any key terms in it, then explain what the whole premise means, then explain why the author or someone who agrees with them might think that it is true.
b. This part is worth 12 points.
3. Bibliography
a. You must have a complete, appropriate bibliographic citation at the end of the paper for each source that you used in writing it.
b. You also need in text citations that include the author’s name and a page number in parentheses after all quotations and paraphrases.
c. If you have questions about citations, please check out the Purdue OWL, but do not hesitate to ask me if your question is not answered there.
d. If you use anyone else’s words or ideas without appropriate citations, that is plagiarism, which will earn you a zero for the assignment.
e. Along with your citations, the writing (which includes correct spelling, grammar, sentence and paragraph structure, word choice, and so on) is worth 5 points.

These assignments are due at noon on Saturday, February 11th, and they are worth 20 points total.

Please submit your assignment as an attachment via Blackboard, leaving your name off so that I can grade anonymously.

It is in your interest to start your paper as soon as possible and leave plenty of time for revision. The best papers are basically always those that have been revised the most.

I don’t read and write comments on drafts that people send to me via email, because I don’t have time to do so for everyone, and doing it for only some people would not be fair However, I am happy to help you by working with you on your drafts if you come to my office hours or make an appointment. You’ll learn a lot more from face to face conversations about your papers anyway. Similarly, I will answer specific questions about your papers via email, because this is something I can do for everyone, and because you’ll learn more when you have to think critically to formulate your questions (as opposed to just asking me what I think about the paper in a general way, or what would make it better).

You do NOT need to read any texts other than what was assigned for class to do a good job on these papers. In fact, I recommend that you focus as narrowly as you can.

The following are the questions I will be asking myself as I grade your papers:
1. Structure and Organization
a. Is the paper well organized?
b. Does it have a clear thesis statement and conclusion?
c. Are there clear transitions between paragraphs and sections?
2. Exposition and Interpretation
a. Do you clearly and charitably interpret the view under consideration?
b. Do you clarify the underlying assumptions of the view and their implications?
c. Do you support your interpretation with relevant citations to the text?
3. Argument and Critical Evaluation
a. Do you make rational arguments for your claims? Is it obvious what they are?
b. When critiquing a view, do you consider possible responses to that critique?
c. Do you show that you have thought independently about the issue(s)?
4. Writing Style
a. Is your prose style clear and easy to understand?
b. Are there any recurring grammatical or spelling errors?
c. Do you avoid awkward and confusing sentence structures?

For more writing tips, check out the resources on Blackboard, visit the writing center, and/or come to my office hours (or make an appointment with me); I am happy to help!