University of Melbourne Department of Philosophy A Guide to Researching and Writing Philosophy Essays By Stephen Tudor Modified with the

authors permission by Daniel Vine for use by students at Melbourne High School 1. Introduction
For many new students of philosophy, 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. This guide is intended to give you a few preliminary pieces of advice about writing essays in philosophy, as well as a few requirements.[1] 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", orby 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. This dialectic of question and response is part of a tradition of thinking a great conversation -- that dates back to the Ancient Greeks and has been a fundamental influence in the development of the science, art, literature and politics of Western civilisation. In philosophy, a good essay is one that, amongst other things, displays a good sense of this dialectic of question and response by asking insightful, probing questions, and provides 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(b) 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. The guidelines in this booklet are suggestions 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 suggested guidelines. Nonetheless, it is important that you passthrough that which you seek to pass beyond.[2] 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.

2. Philosophy Essay Topics

What do philosophy essays topics look like? There are, very roughly, two basic kinds of philosophy essay topics: "text-focused" topics and "issue- or problemfocused" topics. Text-focused topics ask you to consider some particular philosopher's writing on some issue. (E.g: "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 issue, without reference to any particular philosopher's text. (E.g: "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. (E.g: "'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. (E.g: "'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 problemor 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.[3]) How will you know which texts to adopt as reference points or prompts, if none is mentioned in the essay topic itself? The easiest (but not, thereby, necessarily the less respectable) way is to consider what texts have already been mentioned with regard to the topic in your course reading guide and in classes. Another way is to do some of your own research. On this see Section 4 below.

3. 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 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(a) below.

(a) Exposition
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 below.)

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", 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.(E.g: "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. (E.g: "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 "coathanger" for putting forth your own favoured views on the matter in question, which should be left to your . . .

(b) 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 Classical 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. (E.g: "Norman Malcolm argues that Descartes is mistaken in assuming that dreams and waking episodes have the same content.[4]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.(E.g: "Simone de Beauvoir's analysis of women's oppression in The Second Sex suffers from serious weaknesses, as I have shown 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. (E.g: "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.)

4. Researching Your Essay

(a) Research
To research for your philosophy essay you need to do only two things: read and think. (Actually, for problem-focussed essays, thinking is the only truly necessary bit, but it's highly likely that you will find your thinking much helped if you do some reading as well.) What 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 via catalogues and intelligent browsing of the relevant shelves can also uncover very useful sources, and evidence of this in your essay is a pleasing sign of intellectual independence. (Make sure, though, that what you come up with is relevant to the topic. See Section 5 (b) 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 primary text. Texts on or about the primary text are called secondary texts, and can be helpful. 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.) Most philosophical writings come in two forms: books or articles -- the latter being either in books that are edited anthologies or in philosophical journals, such as Philosophical Quarterly or Australasian Journal of Philosophy. Most articles in the journals are written by professional philosophers for professional philosophers, but by no means let this put you off. (Everyone begins philosophy at the deep end -it's really the only kind there is!) Similarly with many books. There are, however, many books written for student audiences. Some useful general reference works

include (and some of these would be prudent investments for beginners in philosophy):

Paul Edwards, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (8 vols) (New York: Macmillan, 1967) Robert Audi, ed., The Cambridge Dictionary Of Philosophy (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995) Ted Honderich, The Oxford Companion to Philosophy, (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995) Simon Blackburn, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994) J.O. Urmson and Jonathan Ree, eds., The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers, (London: Unwin Hyman, 1989) A. R. Lacey, A Dictionary of Philosophy, 3rd ed (London: Routledge,1996) Antony Flew, ed., A Dictionary of Philosophy (London: Pan,1984)

(b) 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 vast numbers 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.

(c) Libraries
In the MHS Library, the philosophical books are located (mostly) between 100-199 in the Dewey decimal system. MHS also subscribes to two fine popular philosophical journals: Philosophy Now and The Philosophers magazine. These are located in the magazine racks near the front desk. Some useful works can also be found in the reference section of the library.

5. Writing Your Essay

(a) 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 in mind. Planning your essay includes laying out a structure. It is very important that your essay has some discernible structure, i.e., 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, though it is skills such as structuring your thoughts for presentation to others which should be amongst the more enduring things you learn in studying Arts. So, avoid the "domino" method of essay writing, whereby one writes one sentence, then another one that seems to follow that one, then another one that seems to fit after that one, and so on until the requisite1500 words are up.

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, this is a common problem-area.) 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 covers, of course, 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 meat of your essay is to be found. Of course, what that meat is and how you will serve 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. (E.g: "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 too bland or the 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 have a grand summation and 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, by the way, that you must come up with earthshattering conclusions. Of course, utter banality or triviality are not good goals, either. A good conclusion to a philosophy essay will usually combine a realistic assessment of the ambit and cogency of its claims with some plausible claim that those claims have some philosophical substance.

(b) Relevance
What you write in your essay should always be relevant to the question posed. This is a 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. (E.g: "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 consistent nor unified.") Be wary, however, of twisting a topic too far out of shape in order to fit your favoured theme. (You would be illadvised, 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, amongst others), then we certainly encourage you to 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.)

(c) Citing philosophical "authorities"

There might be occasions when you want to quote other philosophers and writers apart from when you are quoting a philosopher 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. (E.g: "As Nietzsche put it, 'There are no moral phenomena at all, only a moral interpretation of phenomena'.[5]") 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, e.g., 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. (E.g: "For the purposes of this essay, I shall adopt Russell's thesis[6] that . . .".)

(d) Examples
Philosophy is by its nature a relatively abstract and generalising business.(Note that abstraction 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. 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; a problem for a theory or viewpoint to be applied to.(Note that there can be different levels of concreteness and specificity in examples.) 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.

(e) 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(c) below for advice for nonnative English speakers.) 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. This "intra-sentential logic" should work very closely with the "inter-sentential logic" of your essay, i.e., with the logical relations between your sentences. (It's no good cementing your bricks together well if the bricks themselves crumble; and it's no good having solidly made bricks if your cement can't hold them together.) 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. Good punctuation of a sentence should help to display its grammar. When reading philosophers, attend closely to their sentence construction so as to be alive to all the subtleties of the text. (E.g: think of the difference between "Plato stands as a great philosopher, however he is criticised by modern thinkers." and "Plato stands as a great philosopher. However, he is criticised by modern thinkers.") 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 we hope some of the content of what you study will also stick!) So use your time at university to develop these skills further. (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 thesaurus should always be within reach as you write your essay. If you are concerned to write not only clearly and precisely, but also with some degree of grace and style (and we 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 off 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, nonetheless, 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. 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. (E.g: "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.) Things to avoid: waffle; vagueness; ambiguity; abbreviations (this guide I'm writing isn't an e.g. 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 speech; unnecessary abstractness or indirectness; unexplained jargon; overly-rhetorical questions and other flourishes. Also, try to shorten and simplify sentences where you can do so without sacrificing the subtlety and inherent complexity of your thinking. Don't be fooled into thinking that obscurity is a sign of profundity. Nonetheless, don't be afraid of sometime essaying things which happen to sound a little odd, if you think you have expressed your ideas just as they should be expressed. 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.

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 quasilegal 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 feel", "I wish", "I hate", 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, reasonable, open to discussion, well-read, perhaps knows something about what you're writing about, but either is not quite clear or decided on the matter, or needs convincing of the view you want to put forward, or is curious about what you think about the issues. We encourage you also to write using non-discriminatory language, that is, language which does not involve or imply inequality of worth between people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, and so on. (Is it discriminatory to lump the categories together here by using the words "and soon"?) As you write, you will be considering carefully your choice of words to express your thoughts. You will almost always find that there are alternative ways to put the same point by rephrasing your sentences. Some further writing and style guides you might like to consult include:

J.M. Williams, Style: Ten Lessons in Clarity and Grace, 4th ed. (New York: Harper Collins, 1994) W. Strunk and E.B. White, The Elements of Style, 3rd ed. (New York: Macmillan, 1979) J. Clanchy and B. Ballard, Essay Writing for Students: A Guide for Arts and Social Science Students (Melbourne: Longman, 1981) Australian Government Publishing Service, Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers, 5th ed. (Canberra: AGPS, 1995) Robert Burchfield, ed., The New Fowler's Dictionary of Modern English Usage (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996) Pam Peters, The Cambridge Australian English Style Guide (Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1995) S. H. Barton, Mastering English Grammar (London: Macmillan, 1984)

And especially for philosophy students:

A. P. Martinich, Philosophical Writing, 2nd ed (Oxford: Blackwell,1996) Robert Solomon, "Writing Philosophy", Appendix to his The Big Questions: A Short Introduction to Philosophy, 3rd ed. (San Diego: Harcourt, Brace and Jovanovich, 1990)

(f) Vocabulary of logical argument

Closely related to the above points about English expression is the importance of having a good grasp of what we can rather generally call "the vocabulary of logical argument". These sorts of terms are crucial to articulating clearly and persuasively a logical line of argument. Such argumentation will, of course, be of central importance in whatever discipline you are studying (indeed, in whatever 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, implies, infer, consequence

moreover, furthermore 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 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 the booklet Basic Philosophical Vocabulary, available from the Philosophy Department Office for $2.50, as well as such introductory texts on logic as Wesley C. Salmon, Logic, 2nd ed(Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1973), or Antony Flew, Thinking About Thinking (London: Fontana, 1985).

(g) 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 re-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 change, alter, 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. Most philosophers will agree that 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 work. 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 sleepless night and a weak, perhaps non-existent, essay.

(h) Word limit

Stick to the word limit given for your essay (within, say, 10% of the limit, either above or below). 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. (See Section 5(b) above.) 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 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.")

6. Plagiarism & Originality

(a) Plagiarism
Plagiarism is not tolerated, and is dealt with severely, always by awarding zero marks for a plagiarised piece and usually with some other disciplinary action. Plagiarism is the knowing but unacknowledged use of work by someone other than oneself (including work by another student) and which is being presented as one's own work. Plagiarism can take a number of forms, such as:

copying: exactly reproducing another's words paraphrasing: expressing the meaning of another's words indifferent 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.

None of these practices is wrong in itself, but when one or more is done without acknowledgment it constitutes plagiarism, and as such it will not be tolerated. Therefore, all sources must be adequately and accurately acknowledged in footnotes or endnotes. (See Section 7 below.)

(b) 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 from several centuries ago, if not 2500 years ago. 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 you 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.

7. Quotations, Footnotes, Endnotes, & Bibliography

(a) Quotations
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 do make quotations, you must make them clearly distinct from your own text, using quotation marks, or, where the quoted passage is greater than 3 lines, in a

separate indented paragraph. In all cases, quotations must be given proper referencing in a footnote or endnote. Indirect quotations (e.g., "Descartes says that it is wise not to trust something that has deceived us once before"[7]), paraphrases, summaries, and cobblings must be similarly acknowledged as such, using footnotes or endnotes.

(b) Footnotes and endnotes

Footnotes appear at the foot of the page, 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 a number of different conventions for writing up footnotes and endnotes. The Philosophy Department does not require that any particular convention be followed, only that, again, 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. ENDNOTES 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 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: Universityof Notre Dame Press, 1982), p.155. Ibid. 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", TheMonist 49 (1965), p.212.

Notes explained: 1. This is your first reference to a book called The Elements of MoralPhilosophy . The title is given in full and in italics. If you areunable to use italics, then you should underline the title. The book'sauthor is James Rachels. It's the 2nd edition of that book, which was publishedin New York, by the publishers McGraw-Hill, in 1993. The page you have referredto in your main text is page 25. This is your first reference to Philippa Foot's article, "MoralRelativism", the title of which is put in "quotation marks". This articleappeared in a book (title in italics) which is an anthology of differentarticles, and which was edited by Krausz and Meiland (names in full). The restis in the same style as note (1).

2.

3.

4. 5. 6. 7.

8.

"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 andpage number as in the previous note. So here the reference wasagain to Foot's article at p.155. Ditto, except this time you referred to a different page in Foot'sarticle, viz. p.160. This is reference to a book by Kant. Same book details as per note (1),except that, because this is a translation, we include the translator's name, This is a book reference again, so it's the same as note (1), except that,because it's an old book, we include the date of the original edition. Here we are referring to Rachel's book again, but, because we are not inthe very next note after a reference to it, we can't use "ibid.". Simply givethe author's surname and a short title of the book, plus page reference. Thereis 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 workalready cited") and page reference. (i.e: Rachels, op. cit., p.51.) Yourreader then has to scan back over the notes to see what that "op." was exactly.The first (author plus short title) option is usually easier on the reader. This is a reference to an article by Peter Winch in a journal called TheMonist. The article's title is in "quotes", the journal title is initalics. The volume of the journal is 49, the year of publication is1965, the page referred to is p.212.

(c) 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:

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 Monist49 (1965)

8. Presentation of Essays
(a) Format
The MHS Philosophy Faculty has few specific requirements about the format in which you present your essay, only that it be legibly written, typed or wordprocessed, in English, on one side of pieces of paper that are somewhere in the vicinity of A4 size and are fixed together. You should use the Cover Sheet provided to record your name, the subject, the essay topic and your tutor's name. (Plastic folders and suchlike presentational paraphernalia are not needed.)

It is prudent for you to make a copy of your essay for yourself before handing your essay in, just in case your essay is lost.)

(b) Late essays

Late essays may be penalised at your teachers discretion.

(c) Essays not handed in

Essays not handed in get N/UG.

9. Seeking Advice
Teachers
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 teacher to discuss questions or problems you have concerning your work.

10. A Bit on Philosophy Exams

Essays of the sort discussed so far in this booklet are not the only form of assessment in the Philosophy Department -- exams 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! The only basic difference 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, not about how many words to write on an exam essay topic, but rather about how long to spend writing on it. Simple arithmetic will tell you how much time to spend on each exam question. (E.g: if you have a2-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 set question. Planning and structuring remain centrally 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 aspecific passage from a text, do indicate this clearly as such. If you have the reference handy, just put it briefly in the text of your exam essay. (E.g: "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 true for your non-exam essays, also.) Bringing a text into the exam and reading it there for the first, or even second, time, is not a good idea. Your research for the exam should have been done before entering the exam hall. If you are properly prepared, you should not need to spend much time at all consulting texts or notes during the exam itself. Note that various

subjects have restrictions on what texts and other items can be brought into the exam hall. 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. "pointform" sav. time. Diff. kn. mean. use incomp. sent. Finally, read the instructions at the beginning of the exam paper. They are important. (E.g: It's not a good look 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 policy 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 useful. Use it to decide which questions you'll answer and to start planning your answers.

This third edition of "A Guide to Researching and Writing Philosophy Essays" was, like the previous two editions dating back to 1991, written by Steven Tudor in consultation with interested members of the Philosophy Department, University of Melbourne (including 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 and the Australian National University. 1997 Steven Tudor.

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 stage is 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?