Philosophy – critical thinking research paper requirement
● double¬-spaced, 1 in. margins, 11 or 12 pt. font
MUST INCLUDE:
● Introduction to the Topic (1 paragraph)¬ why is the issue relevant today? How does it connect to other concerns? What is at stake in the debate? Also, clearly state your thesis here, which is your own moral conclusion or “call to action.”
● Your Objection to One or More Premises in the Article (about 3 paragraphs) ¬
Referring to at least 5 concepts covered in this course, explain why you think one or more premises in the article you found are false or at least weakly supported. For example, you might write a paragraph for each of 3 different premises you think are wrong, or 3 paragraphs explaining 3 different reasons why one premise is wrong. The concepts from the textbook may include:
○ Types of fallacies or persuaders (Ch. 5)
○ Types of biases, misleading comparisons, etc. (Ch. 4)
○ Psychological or philosophical obstacles, such as group pressure, social or subjective relativism, etc. (Ch. 2)
○ Forms of weak inductive reasoning, such as hasty generalizations, biased samples, faulty analogies, or causal confusions (Ch. 8)
● Your Alternative Argument (about 3 paragraphs) ¬ Propose your own solution in reply to the article. Make sure to clearly re¬state your own specific moral conclusion or “call to action,” which should be strongly supported by at least 5 claims (at least one of these should be a sub¬conclusion). In the text, cite at least 2 other reputable sources to back your claims (include the last name of the author(s) and the year in parentheses: “…(Chalmers 2015).” ¬you’ll provide a Works Cited at the end).
● Reconstruction of Your Alternative Argument (at least 6 lines total) ¬ Similarly to the reconstruction you did for the article, you will reconstruct your own argument, noting any sub-¬conclusions (there should be at least 1) and the numbers of premises that support them and the conclusion.
● Analysis of One Possibly Weak Claim (1 paragraph) ¬ Choose one of the claims from your own alternative argument that you think is possibly weak. Referring to at least 2 concepts from the textbook (as you did in your objection), explain why you think the claim is possibly weak and how it could be improved. What further arguments or evidence would need to be provided?
● Works Cited (at least 3 sources, including the article you chose to evaluate)
GRADING CRITERIA: ● Does the paper meet all the requirements above? ● Does the student successfully apply concepts from the course? ● Does the student apply the principle of charity when summarizing and evaluating another argument? ● Does the student demonstrate sound or cogent logic? ● Does the reconstruction accurately represent the student’s argument? ● Is there nearly perfect spelling and grammar?
