|
||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||
PHI332 : The Class : Background Info : Hints
There are hints scattered through Modules 2, 3 and 4 for your research paper. For your convenience, I've collected them all here.
Module 2.6: You will be using language to express your own reasons and conclusions
in your research paper. In that paper you will be solving some ethical puzzle.
So the logic puzzle in 2.6, even if it makes your head ache, is great preparation
for all of your graded assignments in this course. . . .
Many of you wonder, what criteria will I use in grading your research paper
in this course? One important criterion I use will be how well your paper is
argued-and I will be looking at your solution to an ethical puzzle as if it
were like a logic puzzle you are solving.
2.13.1 Don't you wish the author had labeled his first and second reasons in this passage?-I had to add the labels "first" and "second" in square brackets. When you write your research paper, be sure to be careful about labeling your reasons!
Module 3 There is a standard form most essays follow. Knowing this form will also help you identify the main lines of argument. (It will also help you write your research paper!) . . . There are often many alternative interpretations when diagramming arguments. The fact that you are able to see this ambiguity means you have developed a higher level of skill at seeing arguments than many of the authors you read! This should give you confidence when it is time to construct your own argument in your research paper.
3.1 Some essays have titles that clearly signal the thesis that will be defended. For example, Goldman's title, "The Refutation of Medical Paternalism," (p. 59) tells us to expect his main thesis to be something like "Medical paternalism is refuted." When you write your research paper, you will pick this sort of title, a title that tells what your main thesis is.
3.3 The outline of the standard form of a thesis-defending paper in module 3.3 will help you write your research paper for this (and any other) course, and will help you identify arguments in the essays of others.
3.4.15 Be sure you advance your intended arguments directly in your research paper-Have the courage of your convictions!
3.4.14 The section level structure of Sherwin's essay "Abortion: A Feminist Perspective," is admirably clear. Notice how the very first sentence of the essay announces the thesis of the essay, while the very first sentence of each section announces the thesis of that section. I recommend you do the same in your research paper.
4.1.3 When you are writing your research paper, you may have trouble thinking of objections to an argument (or "seeing both sides of an issue," as we sometimes say), or you may wonder if you are leaving out a good objection. If that happens, there are three things to do to look for objections: see Module 4.1.3.
4.1.3 There's an important lesson here, which surprises many people and will
help you write your research paper: your best friend, if you want to defend
a thesis as well as possible, is someone who is best at raising objections to
your thesis, and often this will be someone who disagrees with you, perhaps
passionately, about your thesis. . . .
Ideally, your research paper will cover objections already in the literature
and somewhere contain at least one original idea. Be sure to cover the objections
already published; otherwise your research paper will be ill-informed.
4.1.4 It is unlikely that your research paper will successfully defend (for example) the thesis that abortion is (or is not) immoral. The issue is too big; there are too many objections and replies to cover. It is much more likely that your research paper will be able to successfully contribute to the thesis that abortion is (or is not) immoral by defending a more restricted thesis, such as "One argument for (against) abortion is poor" or "One objection to an argument for (against) abortion fails (or succeeds)." I'll help you individually to find the right statement of your thesis. Often you won't know until the final draft!
4.1.5 You want to monitor and seek to improve your personal character in all your human actions, including the action of arguing and inquiring in a research paper or discussion.
4.2 Your research paper might benefit from the use of an argument from analogy, either when you identify and evaluate another person's use of such an argument, or when you construct your own analogy. Indeed, your entire evaluation of an argument can rest on one carefully drawn argument from analogy, or on the evaluation of the analogy of another.
4.2.1 When you are raising an objection to an argument with an argument from analogy (perhaps this will be useful to you in writing your research paper), use the steps given in 4.2.1 in making your objection.
4.2.2 A statement of an argument will always be a numbered list of sentences, with a conclusion indicator before each conclusion. Although such numbered lists of sentences do not display the structure of an argument as well as the diagrams you will come to know and love, the convention in ethics papers is to state arguments using the numbered list. (Notice, for example, that there are no diagrams in the text for this course.) You will use numbered lists in your midterm and in the final draft of your research paper.
4.2.7 If you use arguments from analogy in your research paper, go ahead and do all three steps as shown in 4.2.7. Make life easy for your reader!
Once you have completed this excercise you should:
Go on to Module 2: Argument Identification
or
Go back to Background Information
E-mail George Rudebusch at George.Rudebusch@nau.edu
or call (520) 523-7091
 |
|
Copyright © 2001 Northern
Arizona University
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED |