THE BIG QUESTONS, A Short Introduction to Philosophy

from ROBERT C. SOLOMON

WRITING PHILOSOPHY
THE RULES OF GOOD WRITING IN PHILOSOPHY We can distinguish two basic categories of philosophical presentation, which we call simply standard and indirect. In the standard presentation, you simply present your main ideas at the very beginning, and then proceed to argue for them, give examples that support them, and show how they tie together. Indirect writing can take a number of forms, from the still rather straightforward but more subtle technique of saving your more controversial ideas until later, building up to them from viewpoints that are less controversial or even apparently trivial, to the much more difficult and complex styles of dialogue and aphoristic presentation. ORGANIZE Organize your toughts before you begin to write. Be clear about your main points, answer the primary questions and arrange these, not necessarily in order of importance to you but rather in the order in which you feel most prepared to argue for them. In a straightforward presentation, your essay should show this organization. You can use mathematical structure (examples: Wittgensteins book Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus, Spinozas Ethics), but you may also find the geometrical rigor a bit too cold for your own taste. In any case, even if you are not so explicit in your writing, it is a good idea to write down an outline of the main ideas you want to establish, the order in which you want to establish them, and skecth of the kinds of arguments, examples, and considerations you want to use. WRITE SIMPLY Good philosophy is like good journalism or good short story writing; it consists of simple, straightforward sentences. Say clearly what you want to say, so that your readers dont have to spend their time trying to figure out what you mean.

BE CLEAR There is no need for so much technical jargon, without examples or clarificaton. There is no need for a foreign word when a good English word is available. BE HUMAN Remember you are trying to court the attention of your readers and make your views attractive and appealing. That means that they first have to feel that you really believe what you say and that they are sharing your thoughts rather than being attacked by them. Personal anecdotes and examples can help a great deal. USE EXAMPLES It is no good starting a string of abstractions that never touch earth ... it is the example that makes distinctions and arguments work; otherwise discourse would just be a string of abstractions. ARGUE YOUR POINT Arguing doesnt have to be belligerent or nasty; in philosophy, to argue is to establish your viewpoint, give reasons why you accept it and why others ought to accept it, too. There are many kinds of arguments, but in every case what makes a good argument is that it is convincing. Many students seem to think that, once they have accepted a position themselves, any argument will do. But remember that a bad argument, even surrounded by several good ones, is more likely to turn your readers against your view than convince your readers. A good argument should be succint short and to the point. CONSIDER THE OBJECTIONS AND ALTERNATIVES Philosophy is not just the presentation of a viewpoint; it is also a dialogue and part of a discussion, whether or not it takes the form of a dialogue or a discussion. This means that you will always be anticipating some critic (it helps to have someone specific in mind as you write) who will respond to your views and your arguments with objections and examples designed to show that you are wrong. One argument is almost never enough.

DEFINE YOUR SPECIALIZED TERMS If you introduce a technical term that is not part of ordinary speech, or if you use an ordinary word in some special way, tell the reader what you mean, and stick to that meaning. USE THE HISTORY OF PHILOSOPHY After all, you are now part of it. Dont be afraid to bring in the opinions of other philosophers you have read to support you. You can repeat their arguments (whith an acknowledgment that you are doing so); you can quote them. You can use a particularly appealing phrase or description they use to amplify your own views. You can begin by quoting or representing other philosophers views, to wich you are directly opposed. And as you argue your position, it is always a good idea to think of those philosophers who would certainly disagree with you and what they might say (or have already said) in reply. The more clearly you see yourself as part of long tradition and other peoples terms and ideas as influencing your own, the more confident youll feel about you say. The idea that each of us is supposed to have an original philosophy is utter nonsense. It is doubtful that there are any new ideas. Even Einsteins views can be traced back to those of the early Greek scientists. What makes philosophy worthwhile is not total newness but its sense of being a part of a long tradition and the individual style and personality you yourself contribute to it.

INDIRECT STYLES
Indirect styles are much more difficult to bring off than straightforward presentations, and you are well advised to check with your instructor before trying the indirect approach for your own project. They are not, in general, recommended for introductory philosophy students, except, perhaps, as a persoanl experiment. One form of idirect style, however, is safe enough and we have already treated it as standard in which you save your most important conclusions for last and begin with a far less controversial set of statements, designed to lead readers from what they will certainly agree with to what they most likely will not. The problem with this method is that readers get bored long before they get to the best part. DIALOGUE STYLE

The strategy of the dialogue is to get someone else to make a philosophical statement, in order to refute it. IRONIC STYLE The second strategy is even more difficult than first; it is the style of irony, in which one attacks a view by stating it in such a way that it becomes ridiculous (Voltaires Candide...) APHORISTIC STYLE A good aphorism is very short rarely more than a sentence; it is usually extremely clever and must go right to the heart of the matter.