Philosophy Essay Writing Advice for Beginners

  • Thread starter Thread starter Treadstone 71
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Paper Philosophy
AI Thread Summary
In writing a philosophy essay, clarity and logical structure are paramount, as emphasized by the professor's advice that "the more boring the essay is, the better." The essay should follow a logical progression, detailing premises, assumptions, and conclusions without creative embellishments. It is crucial to begin with a clear description of the philosophical concept, followed by a thesis statement that outlines agreement or disagreement with the philosopher's argument. Each argument should be developed in its own paragraph, and the essay should conclude with a summary of the points made. Adhering to these guidelines and maintaining a formal tone will lead to successful essay writing in philosophy.
Treadstone 71
Messages
275
Reaction score
0
I'm not sure where to post this. I'm taking a university level philosophy class for the first time (ethics), and I'm about to write an essay. Now, as an advice, the prof. told me that "the more boring the essay is, the better." I'm not sure what he means, and I'm not sure what a philosophy paper should look like. Any general advices? Should I write it in the style of a math paper?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
He means explain each step in logic used to make your point, from your initial premise, explanation of any assumptions, through to your conclusions. Don't try to be fancy, or use creative writing styles you learned in English classes, just stick with A leads to B, B leads to C, thus A leads to C, type arguments. Have you been given any reading assignments? It seems to be jumping the gun a bit to require you to write a philosophical essay without having assigned some to read first so you can see examples of the style required.
 
Further advice about writing a philosophy paper. Don't ask rhetorical questions. Do not use abbreviations like "don't". Write the whole thing out "do not".

You begin by giving a brief description of whichever philosophical concept you are going to discuss. If you've been assigned to read one philosopher in particular, outline that philosopher's argument.

Next part, give your thesis statement. You agree/disagree with the philosopher and give short points of the arguments you intend to present to illustrate your point.

Make your points. Each argument to at least one paragraph.

Summarise.

Done.

Do not go past the allotted word count, follow these guidelines, you should be fine. I got 90s with it.

Edit: Yay! I finally wrote a post that counted as having written a post.
 
Way to go, Georgina! :)
 
I'm not sure what the congrats are for, Tide, but thank you! :)

I'm wondering, Moonbear, if we arrived here too late to give Treadstone advice.
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...

Similar threads

Replies
144
Views
13K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
20
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
3K
Back
Top