Writing a Philosophy Paper

User Generated

nejn1234

Writing

Description

Your paper topics should focus on Prudence or Book VI of the Nicomachean Ethics: Intellectual Virtue

Here are some examples of thesis statements.

1) In this paper, I will critically examine Aristotle’s conception of prudence and discuss how it leads to eudaimonia.

2) In this paper, I will assess how the moral and intellectual virtues work together to provide complete virtue.

3) In this paper, I examine the importance of prudence for Aristotle’s virtue ethics.

I drop files have the all informations

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Writing a Philosophy Paper I. CHOOSING A TOPIC AND DEVELOPING A THESIS A. How do I know which of the readings to choose from? You must choose your topic from the final assigned reading (see syllabus). B. What do I write about? A philosophy paper should be an argumentative paper. The first thing you need to do is to develop a THESIS. Developing a thesis is probably the most difficult part of the paper. Students normally struggle in coming up with a proper thesis. The thesis should affirm a position on some controversial issue related to one of the readings. A thesis should state the main and central purpose of the paper (i.e., What do you want to accomplish? What is the overall purpose of the paper?). Your thesis should not be too broad or ambitious; it should be very specific to the reading. A thesis should answer a central question related to the reading. Here are some examples of theses. Example 1: Question: Does the existence of evil demonstrate that God does not exist? Answer: Hume’s argument from evil demonstrates that God probably does not exist. Thesis: In this paper I defend Hume’s argument from evil for the non-existence of God. Example 2 Question: Does human existence have meaning? If so, in what does it consist? Answer: The meaning of human existence can be derived from human happiness. Thesis: In this paper I critique Richard Taylor’s theory of the meaning of human existence and argue that happiness can make human life meaningful. Example 3 Question: Is it rational to believe in God? Answer: It is rational to believe in God only if you have evidence for the existence of God. Thesis: In this paper I argue that Pascal’s wager argument is flawed and that it is only rational to believe in God if one has evidence for God’s existence. II. STRUCTURING AND ORGANIZING THE PAPER A. How do I organize my paper? The next step is organizing your paper. Here a simple outline can be very beneficial. The organization of the paper should be guided by the specific thesis; however, most papers will follow a very similar format. First, if you are defending or critiquing a view, you will need to explain the view. This is always the first step. Explain clearly what the arguments are and use examples to illustrate your point. Here you might want to include some citations (use sparingly). Second, after having elucidated the view and arguments, you can begin your defense or critique. Again, you need to be very clear about what your main point is and why someone should believe you. This section is where your originality and creativity gets to shine. This section is your main contribution to the subject area, and it is here where you get to present YOUR arguments, perhaps something completely new and original. Third, all papers ought to consider objections and replies. What kind of objections to YOUR arguments can you foresee other philosophers making? Explain these and respond to them. What are the weak points in your arguments and how could this be improved? Finally, all papers should have a conclusion where you summarize the thesis and your main arguments. In the conclusion you might also want to point out areas in which future research is needed. III. WRITING THE INTRODUCTION A. How long should the introduction be? The introduction should not be very long, especially for a 5 to 7 page paper. 1 or 2 paragraphs are sufficient. B. What do I include in the introduction? The introduction requires only two things: (1) the thesis statement and (2) several statements explaining the organization of the paper. The best way to understand this is through a simple example. Let us consider thesis 3 above. Sample Introduction In The Wager Blaise Pascal argued that despite the lack of evidence in support of the existence of God, it is more rational to believe in God than not to believe in God. In this paper, I argue that Pascal’s wager argument is flawed and that it is only rational to believe in God if one has evidence for God’s existence. First, I explain Pascal’s wager argument and elucidate his reasons for claiming that it is more rational to be a believer than a non-believer. Second, I show that his conception of evidence is different than the conceptions we understand to be essentially connected to rationality. I argue that evidence must be connected to truth (through evidential support) and his conception is not. Third, I consider some possible objections to my argument. Basic Outline Part I: Introduction Part II: Pascal’s Wager Argument Part III: Rationality and Evidence Part IV: Objections Answered Part V: Conclusion IV. GRADING (See Rubric) I use a grading rubric to grade the paper. You will be evaluated on 4 parts. First, you will be assessed on the quality of the introduction. This is worth 20% of the paper’s grade. I am looking for 2 things: (1) a clear and explicit thesis statement and (2) clear and explicit developing statements. Second, you will be assessed on the structure and organization of the paper, which is worth 20%. Is the paper structured as stated in the introduction? Do you meet the objectives stated in the thesis? Is the paper well organized? Is there a logical flow of ideas? Does the paper read fluidly (smooth transitions)? Third, you will be assessed on the quality of arguments and explanations. This is worth 40% of the paper’s grade. Did you understand the philosophical view well? Did you understand the arguments? Are your arguments valid, sound, or cogent? Are your arguments fallacious or very weak? Fourth, you will be assessed on your overall writing skills (i.e., word use, sentence structure, grammar, and punctuation are excellent). This is worth 20% of the paper’s grade. Grading Rubric for Paper Name ________________________ 2.5 3.0 3.25 Total Score: _______________ 3.5 3.75 4.0 4.25 4.5 5.0 Introduction F There is no thesis Statement There are no explicit statements developing the paper. D- D Either There is no thesis statement or there are no explicit statements developing the paper. C- C There is a vague or poorly stated thesis statement and there are poor statements developing the paper. B- B Either there is a vague or poorly stated thesis statement or there are poor statements developing the paper A- A Clear and explicit Thesis statement and clear and explicit developing statements. 20% Body Structure and Organization The paper is not organized. There is no apparent coherence to the organizatio n of the paper. Paper lacks organization and structure. There is no apparent logical flow of ideas. Paper does not follow the development described in the introduction Paper shows some organization and structure. There are some breaks in the logical flow of ideas. Paper does not follow the development described in the introduction. Paper shows some organization and structure. There are some breaks in the logical flow of ideas. Paper follows to some extent the development described in the introduction. Paper is well organized and there is a logical flow of ideas. Paper reads fluidly. Paper follows the development described in the introduction. There is no clear objective and no apparent explanation or arguments. There is not a clear objective. There are poor arguments and poor explanations of philosophica l theories. There is not a clear objective. Either there are poorly constructed and developed arguments or poorly developed critical explanations of philosophical theories. There is a clear objective. There is argumentation and/or critical explanations of philosophical theories. There is a clear objective. There are well constructed and developed arguments and/or well developed critical explanations of philosophical theories. Writing is poor. Paper cannot be understood. Writing is poor. Significant deficiencies in word use, grammar, punctuation, and/or presentation. Writing is for the most part clear. Adequate use of wording, grammar, and punctuation. Errors are not excessive. Writing is for the most part clear. Good use of wording, grammar, and punctuation. Errors are not excessive. Writing is excellent. Word use, sentence structure, grammar, and punctuation are excellent. 20% Quality of Argument and/ Explanation 40% Writing Grammar and spelling 20% Paper Topics Your paper topics should focus on Prudence or Book VI of the Nicomachean Ethics: Intellectual Virtue Here are some examples of thesis statements. 1) In this paper, I will critically examine Aristotle’s conception of prudence and discuss how it leads to eudaimonia. 2) In this paper, I will assess how the moral and intellectual virtues work together to provide complete virtue. 3) In this paper, I examine the importance of prudence for Aristotle’s virtue ethics. Review Questions These questions can guide you to important issues that should be addressed when discussing Aristotle’s conception of prudence. 1) What is the difference between intellectual and moral virtues? 2) What are the two parts of the soul/mind? 3) Explain each of the different kinds of reason: (1) scientific, (2) craft, (3) prudence, (4) wisdom and (5) understanding. How are they different? 4) What type of reason concerns ethical thinking (deliberation)? How is it different from the other types of reasoning? 5) What is the difference between cleverness and prudence? 6) How is truth related (if at all) to prudence? 7) How are desires related (if at all) to prudence? 8) How are particulars related to prudence? 9) Provide a definition of prudence. 10) Aristotle says that produce is normative and prescriptive whare as cipomprehension is descriptive. What does he mean? 11) Aristotle says that prudence is not just action in accordance with reason but rather action involving reason. Explain what he means. Grading Rubric for Paper Name ________________________ 2.5 F Introduction 3.0 3.25 DD Total Score: _______________ 3.5 C- 3.75 C 4.0 B- 4.25 B 4.5 A- 5.0 A There is no thesis Statement There are no explicit statements developing the paper. Either There is no thesis statement or there are no explicit statements developing the paper. There is a vague or poorly stated thesis statement and there are poor statements developing the paper. Either there is a vague or poorly stated thesis statement or there are poor statements developing the paper Clear and explicit Thesis statement and clear and explicit developing statements. The paper is not organized. There is no apparent coherence to the organization of the paper. Paper lacks organization and structure. There is no apparent logical flow of ideas. Paper does not follow the development described in the introduction Paper shows some organization and structure. There are some breaks in the logical flow of ideas. Paper does not follow the development described in the introduction. Paper shows some organization and structure. There are some breaks in the logical flow of ideas. Paper follows to some extent the development described in the introduction. Paper is well organized and there is a logical flow of ideas. Paper reads fluidly. Paper follows the development described in the introduction. There is no clear objective and no apparent explanation or arguments. There is not a clear objective. There are poor arguments and poor explanations of philosophical theories. There is not a clear objective. Either there are poorly constructed and developed arguments or poorly developed critical explanations of philosophical theories. There is a clear objective. There is argumentation and/or critical explanations of philosophical theories. There is a clear objective. There are well constructed and developed arguments and/or well developed critical explanations of philosophical theories. Writing is poor. Paper cannot be Writing is poor. Significant deficiencies in word use, grammar, punctuation, and/or Writing is for the most part clear. Adequate use of wording, grammar, and punctuation. Errors are not excessive. Writing is for the most part clear. Good use of wording, grammar, and punctuation. Errors are not excessive. Writing is excellent. Word use, sentence structure, grammar, and punctuation are excellent. 20% Body Structure and Organization 20% Quality of Argument and/ Explanation 40% Writing understood. Grammar and spelling presentation. 20%
Purchase answer to see full attachment
Tags: PHIL292
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Running Head: Prudence

1

Philosophy Paper

Prudence

2
INTRODUCTION

According to Aristotle, human beings need prudence to know what is right for oneself.
The ability of human beings to exercise prudence leads to them performing actions which are
right and may lead to the well-being of the people. By acting prudently, it shall bring out a
fulfilling life full of happiness. In this paper, I shall critically examine Aristotle's conception of
prudence and discuss how it may lead to eudaimonia.
I shall begin by examining Aristotle's conception of prudence and then form a discussion
on how it may lead to eudaimonia. Secondly, I shall draw objections that people may bring
forward on prudence and if it brings about eudaimonia. Finally, I shall conclude on explaining
what impact eudaimonia has on our lives.
DISCUSSION
In the Nicomachean Ethics, Aristotle defines prudence as "a state grasping the truth,
involving reason, concerned with action about things that are good or bad for a human being."
Prudence will, therefore, involve a person making the right and wise decision in every situation
he or she encounters and act upon that knowledge. Aristotle believed that prudence like other
virtues would be learned through both experience and example.
Aristotle informs us that it is possible for people to perform wrong deeds. Virtue will,
therefore, require action and knowledge. People, therefore, have to train themselves to determine
what is wrong and right in which case morality will have to follow intellect. Aristotle tells us that
if we could focus on being people who are good then effortlessly, the right actions shall...


Anonymous
Excellent resource! Really helped me get the gist of things.

Studypool
4.7
Trustpilot
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Similar Content

Related Tags