Your assignment is to write a 2 – 4 page critique of one of the assigned readings. If you disagree with the author, what is wrong with his or her argument? If you generally agree with the author, yet you think the argument could be better, in what way could it be better? NOTE: I strongly suggest that you choose a paper that you disagree with. It is much easier to be critical of a position you think is wrong.
The purpose of this assignment is to provide an opportunity for you to do critical philosophical writing.
The Assignment:
The paper should contain the following elements:
(1) A thesis statement. Tell the reader what position you will be defending in the paper.
Example: In this paper, I will argue that Warren does not adequately support her conception of personhood.
(2) A summary of the argument you are responding to. Please make sure that your summary is accurate. Be charitable in your interpretation. In other words, make sure that your reconstruction of the argument is the strongest possible, given the evidence you have. Also be brief. You do not need to include background information in this section of the paper, nor do you need to give an exposition of the entire paper. You just need to summarize the particular argument that is the subject of your critique.
(3) Your critique of the argument. You want to respond critically. This is the most important part of your paper. Here are some examples of critical responses:
(a) Argue that the author does not adequately defend a premise in the argument.
(b) Argue that one of the author’s premises is false.
(c) Argue that the author could have made a stronger argument in defense of her/his thesis.
(d) Anticipate and respond to an objection to the author’s argument. (Note, the objection must be one the author does not consider.)
(e) Discuss the implications of the author’s view. These implications may be favorable or unfavorable.
There are other possible ways to respond critically to an assigned reading — these are just examples.
Make sure you develop your critique. A paper containing one or two thoughtfully explained criticisms is better than one containing several under-explained or under-defended criticisms.
Note that saying that you agree with the author and that her/his argument is good does not constitute a critical analysis or evaluation. You need to do more than that.
General writing guidelines:
• Your paper should be free of typographical, spelling, and grammatical errors.
• Organization: The paper should be easy to follow and should reflect your understanding of the ideas and arguments of the philosopher whose work you are critiquing. The order of presentation should be systematic and logical.
• Clarity: Your writing should be easy to understand. It should not be difficult to figure out what you are talking about. Further, simplicity is a virtue. Don’t use more words than you need to say what you mean.
- Your paper should be written with a tone of respect for the author whose work you are critically analyzing. Stating or implying that the author to whom you are responding is foolish, stupid, or absurd is unprofessional.
Format:
• Please double space your paper.
• Use 11 – 12 point font
• You may use any standard citation format (MLA, APA, Chicago, etc.).
Plagiarism:
From dictionary.com:
“ 1: a piece of writing that has been copied from someone else and is presented as being your own work 2: the act of plagiarizing; taking someone’s words or ideas as if they were your own .”
Do not plagiarize. Any time you present someone else’s ideas as if they were your own, you plagiarize. If you buy a paper off the internet or turn in a paper your friend wrote, you are plagiarizing. If you cut and paste from an internet page without indicating that you are directly quoting someone, that’s plagiarism, too. Plagiarism is unethical, illegal, and a violation of the EMU student conduct code.
If you are using someone else’s ideas in your paper, failing to cite your source constitutes plagiarism.
If you use the exact words of someone else, you must indicate that it is a quotation. Here’s a good guideline: If you are using more than three words in a row that are someone else’s, you’ll need to treat it as a direct quotation. Use quotation marks for short quotes (fewer than three lines). Longer quotes should be indented ½ inch on both the right and left. Whenever you quote someone, you must note where the quote came from. (Author, title, publisher, date, page number. See https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/section/2/for instructions on how to do this. Note that you may use any standard citation style, as long as you are consistent.)
If you use ChatGPT or any other AI tool as a source, you must cite it in your bibliography/works cited page and explain how you used it. Make sure you cite any sources the AI tool used (and don’t trust its own list of sources). You may NOT turn in work fully or mostly written by an AI tool. Doing so is a often a double case of plagiarism, since (1) AI tools themselves plagiarize and (2) turning it in as if it were your own work is plagiarism.
Anyone guilty of plagiarism will automatically fail the course. Charges may be brought with the Student Conduct Office.
Criteria of Evaluation
In evaluating your paper, I look for the following:
(1) the thesis is clearly stated
(2) the remainder of the paper is a defense of the thesis
(3) the position you are critiquing is clearly and accurately stated
(4) the response/critique is apt and on point.
Please use the readings listed below would be appropriate candidates for this assignment:
