First Sentence: NEVER start a paper by saying something like, “Since the beginning of time, man has grappled with the philosophical question of the basis of reality.” This maneuver is vacuous, clichéd, and silly. Your first sentence should jump right into the subject matter.
Example:
In the Second Meditation, Descartes argues that an evil genius could not fool him into falsely believing that he exists. I will show that Descartes is incorrect. That is, I will show that a sufficiently powerful evil genius could lead someone who does not exist to believe that she does.
Sweeping Generalizations About Philosophers or Philosophy: Many writers are tempted to include in their papers generalizations that appear to increase the erudition of their work. For example, there is the temptation to include in a paper on Descartes a sentence that describes him as “The father of contemporary philosophy” or to say that “Kant’s Copernican Revolution in philosophy inaugurated the modern era of theorizing about the mind.” While this sort of writing may have a place in journalism or for the script of a PBS series, and while your professors may offer stage-setting generalizations like this in lecture, they are inappropriate for your scholarly papers.
Dates, Political Events, and Biographical Details: It is also unnecessary to include the kinds of detail that might be found in an encyclopedia entry for the philosopher or philosophical topic you are writing on. You need not mention the philosopher’s date of birth or death, or the date of the publication of the work you are dealing with, or the cultural or political events that surround its publication. Of course, if your paper is about the connection between philosophical themes and cultural or political events, then you will want to introduce that material. Please keep in mind, however, that you are very very unlikely to say anything interesting or convincing about the broad topics that this approach invites. There likely will never be a good five page paper written in an introductory class about, e.g., “The Influence of Religion and Economics on the Philosophy of Berkeley and Reid.”
Lots of transition sentences: Always go out of your way to make sure the reader is “on board.” At the end of the sections of your paper, be sure to tell the reader what you have achieved so far and what you intend to do next. Do this between every paragraph if necessary. Someone should be able to read the first and last sentence of each paragraph (and nothing more) and know what your paper is about. Of course, I will actually read the whole thing.
Sympathy: For any philosophical view you are considering, offer the most sympathetic reconstruction of it that you can. This is a crucial component of honest engagement with ideas. If the author is unclear, give the best possible case for the view (even if you disagree with it). You are allowed and encouraged to make note of the author’s lack of clarity in your paper. For instance, you might write
[A quotation from the original text]. Here, Smith seems to be claiming that there is no matter in the universe, but there is matter in the mind. This seems the best interpretation of the passage, so I will endorse it in my discussion.
Quoted material: Never offer a quotation without telling the reader how you interpret the passage and why you included it.
The Dictionary: The dictionary is a useful tool, but it is not a philosophical authority. Do not, therefore, put in your paper sentences like, “Webster’s New American Heritage Dictionary defines dualism as the view that the mind is different from the body.”
Originality: Where I ask you to produce an original view, it will not do to merely repeat what some other philosopher has said. There will likely be someone in history who has given the same argument you have, but I want your version in your own voice.
Anecdotes: Keep personal anecdotes to a minimum.