Spring 2021
Papers
 		Phil 101: Introduction to Philosophy
Prof. Jeremy Anderson
. .

You will be writing two or three short papers for this course.

Paper assignments will require you to express challenging ideas clearly and accurately, organize them, and critically appraise them fairly. Further details will be posted here as the course progresses.

Here are:
Requirements for all drafts & papers, including
academic integrity requirements for all writing in this course, and
advice for writing a good paper


Paper 1 on God: see assignment below.
Paper 2 on matter: see assignment below.
Paper 3: assignment TBA.


Requirements for all drafts & papers

Papers should:
  • Meet the general requirements here for format, style, and integrity
  • Respond to the prompt
  • Go through the peer review process: please turn in a draft on time, and comment on others' drafts.
Drafts should:
  • Meet the general requirements here for format, style, and integrity
  • Include an introduction with thesis and road map (see the advice)
  • Present some argument from the course and critically evaluate it
    • Your draft will not be graded. But the grade for your finished paper may be lowered if your draft is missing, incomplete, not well proofread, or doesn't meet the integrity requirements.
    • Integrity lapses on drafts may be charged as violations of DePauw's academic integrity policy, so follow the integrity instructions
    • FYI, here is a copy of the peer review form

Format:
  • Word (.docx or .doc), Rich Text Format (.rtf), or shared Google doc only. No PDF's or Pages files, please.

  • Double spaced, 1" margins, numbered pages, 12-point Times New Roman or similar font.

  • Your name and the word count (for the text of the paper, not counting bibliography, etc.) at the top. 

  • Free of errors in grammar, spelling, punctuation, etc. Do not trust your college GPA to auto-correct or to grammar- or spell-checkers! Proofread your paper yourself. Read it aloud!

  • About length: I grade content, not length. I will not lower your grade merely because your paper is not within the stated word count. Instead, think of it this way: if you write your paper and end up at only 800 words, you probably need to say more. If you end up at 1500+ words, you maybe should cut some material out or be more concise.
Style:
Academic integrity for all writing in this course (drafts, papers, reading responses, and exams):
  • Citing and quoting properly is vital. Failing to cite and quote as required will automatically lower your grade, potentially down to failing. I may also prosecute you for plagiarism per DePauw’s academic integrity policy. If the prosecution is successful, the minimum penalty is worse than turning in no work at all. So you must keep track of, and properly document, whose words and ideas you are using. DePauw provides lots of info on understanding academic integrity and how to avoid plagiarism on this helpful page.

  • Use these guidelines:

    • If the idea isn’t yours, cite it even if you don't quote it. 
      If the wording isn't yours, put it in quotes       and cite it.
      • Whatever the source was--assigned texts, class discussion, a conversation with a friend, a web page, your mother, space aliens, or whatever--cite it.

    • Citing properly is easy. As you work on the paper, make a note of what you read and who you talk to about it, keeping track of what words and ideas come from each source. Then, if you decide to use any ideas from these notes, cite the sources. If you use others' words, put them (or your close paraphrase) in quotation marks.

    • Examples of citing:
When not quoting:
 We should not completely trust our senses because they can deceive us; for example, at any moment we might be dreaming (Descartes, 145).

(The period is after the citation.)
When quoting:
 The Third Meditation argument for God is essentially that "the idea of God which is in us must have God himself as its cause" (Descartes, 143).

(The citation is outside the quotation marks, and the period is after the citation. That's because the quotation marks contain only what the author said,and your citation is part of your sentence.)
Also:
When you mention the author's name in the sentence, you don't need to include it in the citation (though including it is never wrong). For example:
Descartes says we should not completely trust our senses because they can deceive us; for example, at any moment we might be dreaming (145).

    • Bibliography/Works Cited/References: if you only use class materials, you need not add a Works Cited or References or Bibliography section to your work. If you use any sources outside of class materials, you must include a Works Cited for them.

    • How to cite various sources:

      • Readings with page numbers: Give the author's name and the page number in parentheses, like this: (Descartes, 145) or (Locke, 187). Only cite Bailey for things Bailey wrote, like introductory material, the logic reading, etc.

      • Readings with paragraph numbers: give the author's name and the paragraph number, like this: (Behe, 21).

      • Readings without page or paragraph numbers: If the assigned text is, for example, a web page with no page numbers, just cite the author.

      • Videos: Give the video's title and the time at which the cited material begins, like this: (Evidence for Intelligent Design, 4:13). After you give the full title the first time you cite it, you may abbreviate the title:

                First time cited: (Evidence for Intelligent Design, 4:13)
                Second and later citations: (Evidence, 2:03) etc.

      • Citing class discussion: 
        • Class notes: cite the class and date, either like (Phil 101, 2021-02-05) or (2021-02-05 Phil 101 notes)
        • Class discussion: cite the same as for class notes.
        • Recorded class meeting: include the time like with any video: (Phil 101, 2020-02-05, 15:35).
        • But: I recommend you do not rely only on class discussion for material that is in assigned texts or videos, for two reasons. First, the original source--the text or video--is usually a richer source. Second, citing notes for something in the book is misleading. You should cite the origin of an idea whenever you can, not just where you last heard it. For any material that is in an assigned text or video or whatever, use that assignment as your source and cite it.

      • Citing outside sources. No research outside of assigned texts is needed in this course, and if you don't cite anything besides class and assigned texts or videos, I don't require a "works cited" page. But if you use any outside sources:
        • Choose them carefully. Here's a handy rule: if you cannot tell who the author is, and that the author is qualified to write about your topic, you probably should not use that source. When in doubt, either ask me or do not use the source.
        • Cite outside sources in Chicago or Turabian format, using the parenthetical citations/reference list style. In other words, cite an outside source in parentheses--like (Miyazaki, 247)--wherever you use it in your paper, and provide a bibliography. You must include the URL for all sources you access via the internet. A quick guide to Turabian format is here on the Library web page; click the tab labeled "Turabian (P/RL)" for instructions on how to cite various kinds of sources.


Advice for writing a good paper
  • First, give readers a clear preview of what you will do in the paper in a brief introduction:
    • Your intro should be no more than half a page, and include:
      • A thesis: why you think the argument is good or bad; and
      • A road map: a brief summary of how you will support your thesis.
    • Resist the temptation to do much more than this in your introduction.
    • Make your thesis and road map specific, not generic:
Generic, less informative maps:
 Better, more specific map:
"First I will present the argument. Then I will object to it and conclude the argument is unsound."


"I will first present the argument. Then I will present an objection to it and show why the objection fails."

"After explaining Descartes' argument that God exists, I will defend it against an objection. The objection tries to show Descartes' argument is unsound because people do not all share the same idea of God. I will argue, however, that this objection does not show that any of Descartes' premises are false or that his argument is invalid, so this objection fails."
  • Second, explain your chosen argument, in 1-2 pages. Rely on the text; don't just write up your notes. 
    • Explain the whole argument, as if to someone who has never heard of it.
    • Here are some good ways to do that:
      • Explain it all in your own words (but citing all along); or
      • Quote --> explain --> quote --> explain. That is, quote a premise from the text, then explain for yourself what it means, then quote some more and explain that, and so on until you've shown how the whole argument works. For any conclusions, explain how they're supposed to follow from the premises.
      • Or, some of each.
      • Using notes from class to help you understand the argument in the text is fine, but a paper that just writes up notes won't be very good.
    • Be charitable. Even if you don't agree with the argument, make it look as persuasive as possible (without misrepresenting what the author says). 
    • For the first paper, explaining the argument well is the most important part. After that, evaluating is just as important.
       

  • Third, evaluate that argument, in 1-2 pages. Argue for why some objection(s) shows, or fails to show, the argument is unsound or weak, giving the best reasons you can for why any reasonable person should agree with your assessment.
    • For the first paper, this part is less important than presenting the argument. After that, evaluating is just as important.
    • State just one or two objections. More than that will not work in a short paper.
    • Make them good objections, not easily dismissed.
    • Using an objection from the text or class? Cite it! From something you found on the internet? Cite it! From a chat with a friend, a relative, space aliens, or any other source? Cite!
    • Evaluating the argument doesn't have to mean showing the argument is bad. Maybe it turns out the argument is good--or at least that some objection(s) fail to show it's bad. There are many ways a paper can go. Here are some ways your paper might go:
      1. Here's the argument. Here's an objection. Here's why the objection shows the argument is bad. The end. 
      2. Here's the argument. Here's an objection. The objection, though, fails to show the argument is bad. So, the argument is immune to that objection. 
      3. Here's the argument. Here's an objection. Here's why this objection fails. But wait, here's another objection, and it succeeds. So the argument is bad.
      4. Here's an argument. Here's an objection. Oh, and here's another. But here's why they both fail to show the argument is bad. So the argument is immune to both those objections.
    • Of these (1-4), #1 and #2 are OK, but #3 and #4 show more sophistication, which is even better.
  • Before you turn in your draft:
  • Before submitting the final version, consider the feedback you received and use it to improve the paper.


Paper Assignment #2

 Deadlines for your draft & finished paper are on the class schedule Google doc and here on Moodle.

Prompt: explain and evaluate one of the arguments from our unit on matter -- one you did NOT write about in the second exam's last question.

Pick one of these -- again, one you did NOT write about in the second exam's last question:
  • Descartes's argument for defective nature doubt (145, first one and a half paragraphs)
  • Descartes's argument that God exists (M3; see the reading for assignment 16 on our Google drive; the reading for assignment 17 may be helpful)
  • Descartes's argument that God is no deceiver (second paragraph of M4, p. 157; also see the reading for assignment 16 on our Google drive)
  • Descartes's argument that mind and body are "completely distinct" (i.e., separable; 166-7)
  • Descartes's argument that material things exist (167)
  • Locke's argument that material things exist (184-6, esp. §§3-8)
  • Berkeley's better argument that we cannot know matter exists (§§18-19)
  • Berkeley's argument that God exists (§§29-32; he restates it in §§145-149)
If you would like to write about something else in the course from after James, see me!

Explain your chosen argument carefully and completely. Then critically evaluate it. For this paper, the critical evaluation is just as important as getting the exposition right.

As before, your paper should be about 1000-1300 words (about 3-4 pages).

 Please follow the advice for writing a good paper.




Paper Assignment #1

 Deadlines for your draft & finished paper are on the class schedule Google doc and here on Moodle.

Prompt: explain, and evaluate, one of the arguments about God in our assigned texts -- one you did NOT write about in the first exam's last question.

Pick one of these -- again, one you did NOT write about in the first exam's last question:
  • Anselm's argument that God exists (Anselm, 7)
  • Aquinas's "First Way" (Aquinas, 26) or his Second or Third (Aquinas, 26-7) -- your choice
  • Kenyon & Dembski's argument (see the video)
  • Carl Sagan's argument for a naturalistic account of DNA (see both the Sagan videos)
  • Michael Behe's argument
  • Pascal's Wager (in James, 112), or James's defense of it
Explain your chosen argument carefully and completely. This is the most important part of this paper. Then critically evaluate the argument--that is, explain why some objection(s) shows, or fails to show, it is unsound or weak; for this paper, this is less important than explaining the argument well.

Your paper should be about 1000-1300 words (about 3-4 pages).

Please follow the advice for writing a good paper.








TOP


.