Philosophy Final

Response paper

Submit your response paper via the drop box in Blackboard

NOTE: There are two due dates for the response paper (see schedule of activities for exact dates)

1) Papers turned in by the first deadline will be given comments and a grade.

2) Papers turned in on the second deadline will not be given comments.

Follow the instructions given below carefully

Locate an article that offers an argument in support or against a controversial ethical topic, and then write a

2 to 3 page paper in response to the argument offered by the author.

This is not a research paper! The goal of the essay is to critically analyze the argument presented by the

author of your article. You should analyze the argument in an effort to determine if it passes the criteria of a

good argument, commits fallacies, and is valid, invalid, sound, unsound, strong, weak, uncogent, or cogent.

Your essay should follow this format:

Section 1- Introduction: Begin with an introductory paragraph that a) presents your thesis, b)

identifies the name of the article and author you will discuss, and c) prepares the reader for the

organization of your paper. Your THESIS is a clear and exact statement of the claim you will

support in your essay (what you will argue). Be very specific about what you will argue—tell the

reader what specific fallacies you will argue the author commits and/or what criteria the author

does not satisfy. Stay focused on the author’s specific argument, not on the topic in-general.

Section 2- Exposition: The body of the paper should begin with a focused discussion on your

chosen reading. Your paper should provide a clear exposition of the argument in the article on

which you focus. Take the time to walk the reader through the author’s argument step by step. Do

not offer criticism of the author’s argument in this section. This section should be dedicated to

explaining the author’s argument in detail—again, walk the reader through the author’s argument

step by step.

Section 3 – Objections: Following the exposition, point out the fallacies committed by the author

and/or which criteria of a good argument the author fails to satisfy. Be sure to offer an argument

defending your claim that the author commits these fallacies or fails a specific criteria—just

saying the author commits fallacies or fails a specific criteria is not enough. Be sure that your

objection(s) are specifically linked to the arguments given by the author whose work you have

exposited.

The following are things to address:

a. What sorts of fallacies does the author make? b. Is the author’s argument invalid? Weak? Unsound? Uncogent? c. What criteria does the author fail to satisfy? d. Be sure to explain in detail why!

Section 4 – Responses and Rebuttal: Anticipate possible responses to your argument and offer

an effective rebuttal. Think carefully about what one might say in response to your objections in

an effort to show that your objections fail. Present these responses, then offer a rebuttal showing

that the responses do not hold, and your original objections stand. Remember, a rebuttal needs to

offer an effective response to a potential issue with your specific argument.

Section 5 – Conclusion: The concluding remarks should reiterate briefly the structure of your

foregoing argument and the conclusion(s) you have reached. But, crucially, concluding remarks

should say something more than this. What kind of modifications could be made to the author’s

argument to solve the issues?

Be sure to include a citation page and the relevant information (the link) needed to locate the article

(or a copy of the article).

Note: Make sure you offer arguments! Do not simply give mere opinions. You need to offer rational

justification for the claims you make. Do not simply say, I think James is wrong because I don’t agree or I

don’t like what he says etc. Offer a rational argument in defense of your claims. Review the notes on

Arguments and Good Arguments if you have forgotten.

 You need not do additional research. Focus on the specific article you have chosen.

 Your work must be your own, original writing. There are severe penalties for plagiarism and cheating. See the syllabus for details.

 Your paper should be double-spaced in 10 or 12-point font. Use standard margins. Do not use a cover page.

 Spell-check your paper. Proofread and edit your work to check for mistakes that computer programs cannot catch.

 At the top of the first page provide the following information single spaced:

Student Name

PHI 1103: Critical/Creative Thinking

Date

 Give your paper a title. DO NOT USE A COVER PAGE!

 Quote and cite the text to support your discussion. (footnotes or parenthetical citations) All verbatim quotation must use quotation marks. Citations are also required for

paraphrases of the text. The goal is to point the reader to the appropriate passages of text

where the claims are made. Use quotations selectively; most of the paper should be

written in your own words.

 The exposition should provide a clear, accurate, precise, and selective account of the author’s position.

CLEAR: Write in complete, grammatical sentences. Organize your thoughts.

ACCURATE: Give a fair and reasonable representation of the author’s position.

PRECISE: Avoid offering vague claims and mere generalities. Make your discussion

detailed, specific, and focused on the exact claims the author gives in support of the

particular arguments you will examine.

SELECTIVE: In a short paper you cannot cover all of the arguments or claims the

author gives. Select only those ideas, reasons, arguments that are directly relevant to your

discussion.

 As a guideline, your first, introductory paragraph should not be more than ½ a page. The exposition should take about 1 page and the presentation of your objection(s)

and response(s) should take about 1 page.

NOTE: This paper assignment focuses on exposition AND on critical thinking. The first

goal is to demonstrate that you have a solid understanding of the text, that you can explain

specific arguments from the text, and that you can appropriately cite and quote the text in

support of your discussion. The second goal is to critically evaluate the text. In formulating

your objection(s) to the text, you are attempting to provide reasons why we might reject the

author’s argument or claims. These reasons should identify specific problems with the

author’s claims, not merely a general difference of opinion or view. The reasons you offer in

formulating your objection should be reasonable, clear, intelligent, and as convincing as

possible.1

1 Portions of this document were excerpted from Dr. Brook Sadler’s “Guidelines for Writing a Philosophy

Paper.”