This guidebook from Harvard University will enable you to finally write a philosophy paper.
If you’re struggling to write one, you must read this.
I’m reading an email from my supervisor about my paper.
He says it is hard to understand and I have to rewrite, again. For the third time, I’ve been told to rewrite it. I say to myself, “How many more times will I have to redo this? Does he even make an effort to understand my paper?”
If this sounds like a familiar struggle, you’re in the right place.
In philosophy, if someone reads your article and says they don’t get it, it’s your fault. Maybe you haven’t made your conclusion clear, or your argument isn’t logical. Anyways, you’re not ready to write a philosophy paper yet.
In this article, I want to introduce you to a guidebook from Harvard University that helped me out of this situation. Ever since I read it, it has completely changed my approach. My supervisor told me I’ve made great progress. He even told me my argument was compelling (for the first time in 9 years!).
I’ll walk you through most helpful parts so you can decide if it’s worth reading.
The guidebook
The guidebook is . It is written by . It is only 57 pages long. And it teaches you the right mindset as well as how to write a philosophy paper.
Here are three things I find most helpful.
1. Common types of philosophy paper (pp.7–14)
Chudnoff points out common philosophical projects. So if you want to write a philosophy paper, check out this section and find out which project is suitable for you.
If you don’t, then you might end up writing a paper that other philosophers find weird. They might be like, “What is the author trying to do? Is it even a philosophy paper?”
I actually did this before preparing a presentation last week. From the common projects that Chudnoff mentioned, I realized what I was aiming for was to “adjudicate between two arguments for opposing claims.” Chudnoff explains what you should do if you write this type of paper. So, I followed his advice and made a good presentation.
Thus, Chudnoff’s list of types of paper helps you figure out what you want or can do. It takes you from “I might be able to write about this topic, but I’m not sure how.” to “I can definitely write this type of paper on this topic!”
2. Who you are writing for (pp. 20–23)
My first reaction to my supervisor’s reply was “Did he even make an effort to understand my paper?”
If you read the sections “Who to Write For” and “Who Not to Write For” in the guidebook, you will know this attitude isn’t philosophical at all. According to them, you should write so the reader won’t need to make any efforts to figure out what you’re trying to say.
Some of you might be thinking, “Other philosophers don’t write that way. Look how many hours I’ve spent trying to understand a single page!”
I know what you mean. I’ve gone through that hardship. I’m now reading a book by Michel Henry, who is famous for writing in most complex French.
But think about it this way. Two philosophers wrote about the same thing. One wrote a clear and concise paper, while the other wrote in an unclear way. Who would you call more skillful philosopher?
Great philosophers can write about complicated things most clearly, and you should be great.
3. Your argument should be deduction, not induction (pp. 26–42).
Every philosophy students takes a lecture where they are told the differences between deductive and inductive arguments.
So did I. But I was like, “So what?” I wasn’t sure how this lecture was related to philosophy.
Yet this guide book has told me that my argument should be deductive, not inductive. As you might know from the number of pages dedicated to this topic in the guidebook, the author convincingly and repeatedly tells you to form your arguments deductively.
So ever since I read it, I’ve been in the habit of writing up my arguments like I did in high school, that is, like mathematical demonstrations. That way I make sure my arguments are deductive.
This practice lets me know what premises I use and where they come from. As a result, I know how to structure my paper and in what order to present my paragraphs.
Conclusion
It was in 2016 that I enrolled in graduate school of philosophy and history of science. Since then, I’ve been a complete failure. Nothing I did worked. I just read and wrote blindly, watching other talented students praised by professors. I was convinced philosophy is a matter of talent you were born with, and I wasn’t born with it.
But this guidebook has changed everything. With the right attitude and necessary steps, you can become a philosopher. Philosophy is not talent. It’s a skill.
