what is philosophy in your own understanding essay

What Is the Philosophy? Essay

Philosophy is a subject that focuses on the important nature of existence, of human beings, and human’s relationship to their surroundings. For instance, when it comes to cognition one can say that trees are the important components that make a forest while in philosophy one will say that the soil is the vital component that makes up the forest because if it wasn’t for the soil the trees won’t be there. Philosophy is a broad system of ideas concerning human nature and the kind of real human beings live in. It can be compared with a guide for living because the issues it tackles are essential and pervasive in determining how we associate and treat other people and the path human beings take in life, (p, 6).

There are several topics that philosophy addresses and they fall under different fields. Some of the vital concerns are Epistemology which is the theory of knowledge, Ethics; (the theory of moral values), Aesthetics (the theory of the nature of art), Metaphysics (the theory of reality), and finally Politics (the theory of legal rights and government). Religions such as Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, and Judaism contribute so much in offering guidance in the philosophical field.

The difference between religions and philosophy is mainly not in the subject they both address but the different methods they use to address the subject. Religions have their foundation in mythic tales that pass the discovery of explicitly coherent methods of analysis. Numerous religions or faith organizations these days call to a spiritual faith and revelation modes of belief which claim validity independence to logic and the scientific ways, at least for the prime questions. But many religions are in their basis not anti-rational but pre-rational, for example, a storyteller’s relay of philosophic matters rather than a scientist’s, (p, 25).

Philosophy means “The Love of wisdom” in Greek. Philosophy is found in rational debates and appeals mostly to actuality. It should be noted that the account of our scientific discoveries started either with philosophical studies or inquiries, and the systematic ways of testing and proof up to now remains a case of the common approach that truth-seekers try to bring to question; one which is exact and rational. Though, as so far the researchers in sciences center on expert inquiries in particular fields, while on the other hand, the subjects addressed by philosophy persist to be the most general, these are issues that inspire the field of sciences and are situated at the base of a world-view, (p, 56).

Covering the issues in each sector of philosophy needs to integrate everything an individual knows about reality, humanity, politics, epistemology, and aesthetics. Therefore, supporting meaningful positions in philosophy can turn out to be a complicated task. Straightforward philosophers have many times disagreed about important issues, and deceitful ones have always managed to find their own places into the mix too. This is the reason why no one philosophy is used universally, as there is in physics, (p, 89).

Throughout history, philosophers have presented the entire systems that brought together positions in every branch of philosophy. The renowned father of logic Mr. Aristotle wrote such a system in early times, elaborating that “if people could know the truth then they will achieve contentment and happiness”. Authors and philosophers like Immanuel Kant and John Locke have written logical accounts of their ideas on governments and other issues in the late 1800s and early 1900s.

The current philosophic issues have often come to the public life through social or political groups, some through inspiration in religion, like conservatism in Christianity, and otherworldly areas, such as Marxism and left-wing conservationism. The notions behind such movements are known as ideologies. The word “ideology,” is a substitute name for the different classes of ideas that have been covered in this paper. While the center of ideological groups is on a political perspective, their political convictions tend to be entrenched in shared outsets of reality, values, and human nature, (p, 116).

Geoge Kuria. Philosophy compared to different fields. Milan; Mogan Press, 1996.

• Chicago (A-D)
• Chicago (N-B)

IvyPanda. (2021, November 16). What Is the Philosophy? https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-the-philosophy/

"What Is the Philosophy?" IvyPanda , 16 Nov. 2021, ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-the-philosophy/.

IvyPanda . (2021) 'What Is the Philosophy'. 16 November.

IvyPanda . 2021. "What Is the Philosophy?" November 16, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-the-philosophy/.

1. IvyPanda . "What Is the Philosophy?" November 16, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-the-philosophy/.

Bibliography

IvyPanda . "What Is the Philosophy?" November 16, 2021. https://ivypanda.com/essays/what-is-the-philosophy/.

• Philosophic and Cultural Timeline of Ancient Times
• Ontology and Epistemology in the Contemporary Society
• Philosophic and Religious Ideas Throughout History
• What Critical Thinking Is and How to Become an Accomplished Critical Thinker?
• What Is the Difference Between Soul and Body According to Descartes?
• Plato’s Theory of Natural Depravity
• Philosophical Role of the Moral Character
• A Defense of Skepticism: Discussion

About The Philosophy Foundation

• National Thinking Classroom Awards

Testimonials

• Talks & Papers

World Philosophy Day

• Online courses
• Other educational settings
• Resources for children
• Resources for teachers
• Young Plato Documentary
• Holiday Clubs
• Other settings
• Think and Drink
• Philosophical enquiry (P4C)
• Thinking Classroom Programme
• Universities
• Games for Thinking
• Films / Podcasts
• Thought Adventures
• Anything within reason
• Hodja Stories
• What's on

What is Philosophy?

The aim of philosophy, abstractly formulated, is to understand how things in the broadest possible sense of the term hang together in the broadest possible sense of the term.

Wilfrid Sellars

A definition of philosophy is notoriously difficult. However, it is important, for anyone writing or training about doing philosophy, first of all to spell out what they mean by it so that the reader has some idea about what kind of philosophy they will encounter and, when training people to facilitate philosophy, to provide criteria.  

The Philosophy Foundation’s account attempts to capture something of its spirit, structure, content, method, aims and hopes, but our account is inextricably personal to us and culturally specific. So, consistent with the philosophical spirit we’ve tried to illustrate here, one might wonder whether philosophy is – at least in addition to what we have said it is – something other than what we have said it is; to accept our account uncritically would not be very philosophical, after all. 

The short answer

Philosophy is a way of thinking about certain subjects such as ethics, thought, existence, time, meaning and value. That 'way of thinking' involves 4 Rs: r esponsiveness, r eflection, r eason and r e-evaluation. The aim is to deepen understanding. The hope is that by doing philosophy we learn to think better, to act more wisely, and thereby help to improve the quality of all our lives.

The longer one

You can read our longer definition on the document below.

In Philosophy it’s not that there are no answers it’s just that the answers are very difficult to find.

Adam, aged 11

The film version

Peter Worley speaking at the Battle of Ideas 2015 ' Can Children Do Philosophy? '

Types of questions we explore

• Who should be in charge? How should we decide?
• What is fairness?
• What is responsibility?
• What is beauty? Who decides?
• Are some things absolutely wrong or right, or is it all relative?
• Is zero a number?
• What is freedom?
• Would you like to live forever if you could?
• Are people of equal value? 

Philosophy’s not asking questions, it’s understanding questions

Child, aged 10

Talks & Papers

• Philosophy for Children
• Philosophy for Adults

Member Login

• Terms of use
• Privacy policy

© 2024 The Philosophy Foundation | RO 21-27 Lamb’s Conduit Street, London WC1N 3GS | Company number: 7416912 | Registered charity number 1140338

Website by on-IDLE

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

• Faculty of Arts
• School of Historical and Philosophical Studies
• Current students
• Undergraduate

Philosophy essay writing guide

Introduction.

This guide is intended to give new students of philosophy some preliminary advice about writing philosophy essays at university. For many of you, writing a philosophy essay will be something of a new experience, and no doubt many of you will be a little unsure of what to expect, or of what is expected of you. Most of you will have written essays in school for English, History, etc. A philosophy essay is something a little different again. However, it is not an unfathomable, mysterious affair, nor one where anything goes.

Just what a philosophy essay is will depend a lot, as you'd expect, on just what philosophy is. Defining philosophy is always a more or less controversial business, but one way to think of what is done in university philosophy departments is to think of the difference between having a philosophy and doing philosophy. Virtually everyone "has a philosophy" in the sense that we have many basic beliefs about the world and ourselves and use certain key concepts to articulate those beliefs. Many of us initially come to thus "have a philosophy" (or elements of several philosophies) often only unconsciously, or by following "what's obvious" or "what everybody knows", or by adopting a view because it sounds exciting or is intellectually fashionable.

"Doing philosophy", on the other hand, is a self-conscious unearthing and rigorous examination of these basic beliefs and key concepts. In doing so, we try to clarify the meanings of those beliefs and concepts and to evaluate critically their rational grounds or justification. Thus, rather than having their heads in the clouds, philosophers are really more under the surface of our thinking, examining the structures that support - or fail to support - those who trust that they have their feet on the ground. Such examination may even help to develop new and firmer ground.

Doing philosophy, then, begins with asking questions about the fundamental ideas and concepts that inform our ways of looking at the world and ourselves, and proceeds by developing responses to those questions which seek to gain insight into those ideas and concepts - and part of that development consists in asking further questions, giving further responses, and so on. Human beings across the world have been engaged in this sort of dialogue of question and response for many centuries - even millennia - and a number of great traditions of reflection and inquiry have evolved that have fundamentally influenced the development of religion, art, science and politics in many cultures. The influence of philosophical thinking on Western civilization, in particular, can be traced back more than 2,500 years to the Ancient Greeks.

In philosophy, a good essay is one that, among other things, displays a good sense of this dialectic of question and response by asking insightful, probing questions, and providing reasoned, well-argued responses. This means that you should not rest content with merely an unintegrated collection of assertions, but should instead work at establishing logical relations between your thoughts. You are assessed not on the basis of what you believe, but on how well you argue for the position you adopt in your essay, and on how interesting and insightful your discussion of the issues is. That is to say, you are assessed on how well you do philosophy, not on what philosophy you end up having. Nonetheless, you ought to make sure that your essay's discussion is relevant to the topic. (See Section 5.2 below on relevance.)

It is hoped that you enjoy the activity of essay writing. If you have chosen to study Arts, it is likely that you will have a particular interest in - even a passion for - ideas and the variety of forms and genres in which ideas are expressed and explored. The argumentative or discursive formal academic essay is one such form, and one which can be a pleasure to read and to write. Thus, the assessment that is set in philosophy courses is primarily an invitation to you to pursue what is already (or, hopefully, soon to be) your own interest in writing to explore ideas. However, your immediate goal in writing an academic philosophy essay ought not to be to write a personal testament, confession or polemic. Rather, you should primarily aim at articulating, clearly and relatively dispassionately, your philosophical thinking on the topic at hand. Nevertheless, the kind and degree of personal development one can gain from taking up the challenge to think and to write carefully, clearly and thoroughly is certainly something to be greatly valued.

This guide is intended to help you get started in the business of writing philosophy essays. As you practise your philosophical writing skills, you will develop your own technique, and learn what is appropriate in each particular case. So you may well come to "work around" many of these guidelines. Nonetheless, it is important that you pass through that which you seek to pass beyond.* In addition to your own writing, your reading of other philosophers will help you to develop your sense of what constitutes good philosophical writing. As you read, note the various styles and techniques that philosophical authors employ in their treatment of philosophical issues. Practice and studying good examples, then, are the most valuable ways to develop your essay writing skills.

This guide is, moreover, only one of many publications that introduce philosophy students to essay writing. Some others you may like to consult include:

• A. P. Martinich, Philosophical Writing, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1997)
• J. Feinberg and R. Shafer-Landau, Doing Philosophy: A Guide to the Writing of Philosophy Papers, 2nd ed. (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2001)
• Z. Seech, Writing Philosophy Papers, 4th ed. (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2003)
• R. Solomon, "Writing Philosophy", Appendix to his The Big Questions: A Short Introduction to Philosophy, 6th ed. (Belmont, Calif.: Wadsworth, 2001)
• S. Gorovitz et al., Philosophical Analysis: An Introduction to its Language and Techniques, 3rd ed. (New York: Random House, 1979)

Also, the websites of many philosophy departments in universities around Australia and the world contain downloadable essay writing guides or links to them.

*This phrase is adapted from Jacques Bouveresse, "Why I am so very unFrench", in Alan Montefiore, ed., Philosophy in France Today (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983), p. 12.

What do I do in a Philosophy essay?

Philosophy essay topics are not designed to provide an intellectual obstacle course that trips you up so as to delight a malicious marker. They are designed to invite you to "grapple with" with some particular philosophical problem or issue. That is to say, they are designed to offer you an opportunity to demonstrate your understanding of a particular philosophical problem or issue, and to exhibit your own philosophical skills of analysis, argumentation, etc. These twin goals are usually best achieved by ensuring that your essay performs two basic functions (your understanding and your skills apply to both):

an exposition of the problem or issue in question (often as it is posed in some particular text); and a critical discussion of the problem or text

These two functions can, but need not always, correspond to physically or structurally distinct sections of your essay. See Section 5.1.

The expository ("setting forth") aspect of your essay is where you should make clear what the issue is and why it is an issue. Where you are dealing with an issue as it is presented in some particular text, your aim should be to make clear what it is that the author in question meant in their text, what they see as the issue and why they see it as an issue. This does not involve merely quoting or paraphrasing a text. Of course, occasional quotation and paraphrase may be appropriate - sometimes necessary - but these ought not to constitute the sole or major content of your exposition. Where you do quote or paraphrase, make sure you attribute your sources in footnotes or endnotes. (See Section 7.)

Exposition is, then, primarily a matter of developing in your own words what you think the issue is or what you think the text means. In all expository work you should always try to give a fair and accurate account of a text or problem, even when the exposition becomes more interpretive rather than simply descriptive. You ought to be patient and sympathetic in your exposition, even if you intend later to criticise heavily the philosopher in question. Indeed, the better the exposition in this regard, usually the more effective the critique.

An important part of exposition is your analysis of the text or issue. Here you should try to "break down" the text, issue or problem into its constitutive elements by distinguishing its different parts. (E.g. "There are two basic kinds of freedom in question when we speak of freedom of the will. First, … . Second, …", or "There are three elements in Plato's conception of the soul, namely... He establishes these three elements by means of the following two arguments... ") This also involves showing the relationships between those elements, relationships which make them "parts of the whole".

As well as laying out these elements within a text or issue, you can also (when appropriate or relevant) show how a text or issue "connects up with" other texts, issues, or philosophical and/or historical developments, which can help to shed further light on the matter by giving it a broader context. (eg "Freedom of the will is importantly connected to the justification of punishment", or "Plato's tripartite theory of the soul bears interesting resemblances to Freud's analysis of the psyche", or "Kant's transcendental idealism can be seen as reconciling the preceding rationalist and empiricist accounts of knowledge".)

An exposition of a text need not always simply follow the author's own view of what it means. You should, of course, demonstrate that you understand how the author themself understands their work, but an exposition can sometimes go beyond this, giving another reading of the text. (eg "Heidegger might deny it, but his Being and Time can be read as developing a pragmatist account of human understanding.") A given text or issue may well be susceptible to a number of plausible or reasonable interpretations. An exposition should aim to be sensitive to such variety. When appropriate, you should defend your interpretations against rivals and objections. Your interpretation ought, though, to be aimed at elucidating the meaning or meanings of the text or issue and not serve merely as a "coat-hanger" for presenting your own favoured views on the matter in question, which should be left to your ...

Critical discussion

This is where your thought gets more of the centre stage. Here you should attempt to develop a response to the issues which your exposition has made clear, and/or, in the case of a discussion of some particular text, attempt to give a critical appraisal of the author's treatment of the issue. In developing a response to a philosophical problem, argumentation is, again, of central importance. Avoid making unsupported assertions; back up your claims with reasons, and connect up your ideas so that they progress logically toward your conclusions. Consider some of the various objections to and questions about your views that others might or have put forward, and try to respond to them in defence of your own line of thinking. Your goal here should be to discuss what you have expounded so as to come to some conclusion or judgement about it. ("Critical" is derived from the Ancient Greek for "to decide, to judge".) Critical discussion is thus not necessarily "destructive" or "negative"; it can be quite constructive and positive.

In the case of a critical appraisal of a particular author's text, you can negatively criticise the author's arguments by pointing out questionable assumptions, invalid reasoning, etc. If, on the other hand, you think that the text is good, then your critical discussion can be positive. This can be done by revealing its "hidden virtues" (that is, by showing that there is more to the author's arguments and views than what lies on the surface) and/or by defending an author against possible and/or actual criticisms. (eg "Norman Malcolm argues that Descartes is mistaken in assuming that dreams and waking episodes have the same content.* However, Malcolm fails to appreciate the subtlety of Descartes' argument in the First Meditation, which allows Descartes to claim . . .") Just to expound an author's arguments and then say "I disagree" or "That seems right" is not really enough - you need to "have something to say" about it. Of course, by all means go on, after finding fault with some philosopher, to answer in your own way the questions tackled or raised by the author. (eg "Simone de Beauvoir's analysis of women's oppression in The Second Sex suffers from serious weaknesses, as I have shown in Section 2 above. A better way to approach the issue, I shall now argue, is to . . .".)

Where you are not primarily concerned with evaluating or responding to a particular text, your critical discussion can be more focused on your own constructive response to the issue. (eg "Having used Dworkin's account to clarify the meanings of the concepts of 'the sanctity of life' and 'voluntariness', I shall now argue that voluntary euthanasia is morally permissible because its voluntariness respects what is of value in the notion of the sanctity of life" - where you now leave Dworkin behind as a source and move on to give your own account.)

* See Norman Malcolm, "Dreaming and Skepticism", in Willis Doney, ed., Descartes: A Collection of Critical Essays (London: Macmillan, 1967), p. 56.

Guide to researching and writing Philosophy essays

5th edition by Steven Tudor , for the Philosophy program, University of Melbourne, 2003.

This fifth edition of How to Write a Philosophy Essay: A Guide for Students (previous editions titled A Guide to Researching and Writing Philosophy Essays ) was prepared in consultation with members of the Philosophy program, the University of Melbourne. For advice and assistance on this and earlier editions, thanks are due to Graham Priest, Barry Taylor, Christopher Cordner, Doug Adeney, Josie Winther, Linda Burns, Marion Tapper, Kimon Lycos, Brendan Long, Jeremy Moss, Tony Coady, Will Barrett, Brian Scarlett, and Megan Laverty. Some use was also made of materials prepared by the Philosophy Departments of La Trobe University, the University of Queensland, and The Australian National University.

Disclaimer: University, Faculty and program rules

Please note: this booklet does not provide authoritative statements of the official policies or rules of the University of Melbourne, the Faculty of Arts, or the Philosophy program with regard to student essays and examinations or any other matters. Students should, therefore, not rely on this booklet for such information, for which they should consult the various appropriate notice boards, handbooks, websites, and/or members of staff.

Essay topics

What do philosophy essay topics look like? There are, very roughly, two basic kinds of philosophy essay topics: "text-focused" topics and "problem-focused" topics. Text-focused topics ask you to consider some particular philosopher's writing on some issue. (eg "Discuss critically David Hume's account of causation in Part III of Book I of his A Treatise of Human Nature " or "Was Wittgenstein right to say that 'the meaning of a word is its use in the language', in his Philosophical Investigations, Sec. 43?"). Problem-focused topics are more directly about a particular philosophical problem or issue, without reference to any particular philosopher's text. (eg "Is voluntary euthanasia morally permissible?" or "What is scientific method?")

There is another sort of topic, one which presents a statement and asks you to discuss it, where that statement is a "made up" or, at least, unattributed quote. (eg. "'Without belief in God, people cannot be moral'. Discuss.") I shall regard these as variations of the problem-focused type of topic. Where you are asked to discuss some such statement "with reference to" some specified text or philosopher, then that topic becomes more text-focused. (eg "'Without belief in God, people cannot be moral'. Discuss with reference to J.L. Mackie's Ethics: Inventing Right and Wrong. ") Occasionally, a topic presents an unattributed statement, but the statement is, in fact, a quote from a particular philosopher you've been studying, or, at least, a good paraphrase of their thinking. (An example of the latter: "'All the ideas in our minds originate from either sense perception or our reflection upon sensory information.' Discuss.", in a course devoted to John Locke, whose views are summed up in the quoted statement, though those words are not actually his.) Should you take such topics as problem- or text-focused? Rather unhelpfully, I'll say only that it depends on the case. You might ask your lecturer or tutor about it. Whichever way you do take it, be clear in your essay which way you are taking it.

The difference between text-focused and problem-focused essay topics is, however, not very radical. This is because, on the one hand, any particular philosopher's text is about some philosophical problem or question, while, on the other hand, most philosophical problems (certainly virtually all those you will be given as essay topics at university) will have been written about by previous philosophers.

The basic way to approach text-focused topics, then, is to treat the nominated text as an attempt by one philosopher to deal with a particular philosophical problem or issue. The essay topic will, generally speaking, be inviting you to do philosophy with that philosopher, to engage with them in thinking about the issue, whether that engagement proves to be as an ally or an adversary. The chosen text will usually be one which has been (or deserves to be) influential or significant in the history of philosophy, but the task is not to pay homage to past masters. But, even if homage is your thing, the best way to do that here is to engage with the master philosophically.

With regard to problem-focused topics, you will often find your exploration of the problem aided by taking some text or texts which have dealt with it as reference points or prompts. This is not always strictly necessary, but many of you starting out in philosophy will find it helpful to do so - it can help you give focus to your response to the question. (Thus, you might, in an essay on the topic "Is voluntary euthanasia morally permissible?" take it upon yourself to use, for example, Ronald Dworkin's Life's Dominion and Peter Singer's Practical Ethics as reference points. Or, in an essay on the topic "What is scientific method?", you might set up your answer via a comparison of the two different accounts in Karl Popper's The Logic of Scientific Discovery and Paul Feyerabend's Against Method.*) How will you know which texts to adopt as reference points or prompts, if none is mentioned in the essay topic itself? One way is to consider what texts have already been mentioned with regard to the topic in your course reading guide and in lectures and tutorials. Another way is to do some of your own research. On this see Section 4 below.

* In this guide, in giving examples of how to go about answering an essay question, I am not necessarily giving any concrete or reliable advice for any particular topic. The examples are primarily to do with the form or style or strategy you might find helpful.

Researching your essay

To do research for your philosophy essay you need to do only two things: read and think. Actually, for problem-focused essays, thinking is the only truly necessary bit, but it's highly likely that you will find your thinking much assisted if you do some reading as well. Philosophical research at university is a little different to research in most other disciplines (especially the natural sciences), in that it is not really about "collecting data" to support or refute explanatory theories. Rather, the thinking that's involved in philosophical research (as part of one's preparation for philosophical writing) is more a matter of reflecting critically upon the problems in front of one. Researching the writings of other philosophers should, therefore, be primarily directed towards helping you with that reflection rather than aiming at gathering together and reporting on "the relevant findings" on a particular topic. In many other disciplines, a "literature review" is an important research skill, and sometimes philosophy academics do such reviews - but it is rare that philosophy students are asked to do one.

What, then, to read? It should be clear from your lectures and tutorials what some starting points for your reading might be. (All courses provide reading guides; many also have booklets of reading material.) Your tutor and lecturer are also available for consultation on what readings you might begin with for any particular topic in that subject. Independent research can also uncover useful sources, and evidence of this in your essay can be a pleasing sign of intellectual independence. Make sure, though, that what you come up with is relevant to the topic. (See Section 5.2 below on relevance.) Whichever way you proceed, your reading should be purposive and selective.

In the case of essay questions that refer to a particular text, you should familiarise yourself thoroughly with this text. Usually, such a text will be a primary text, i.e. one in which a philosopher writes directly about a philosophical issue. Texts on or about a primary text are called secondary texts. (Many philosophical works will combine these two tasks, and discuss other philosophical texts while also dealing directly with a philosophical issue.) Some secondary texts can be helpful to students. However, don't think you will only ever understand a primary text if you have a nice friendly secondary text to take you by the hand through the primary text. More often than not, you need to have a good grasp of the primary text in order to make sense of the secondary text.

How much to read? The amount of reading you do should be that which maximises the quality of your thinking - that is, you should not swamp yourself with vast slabs of text that you can't digest, but nor should you starve your mind of ideas to chew over. There is, of course, no simple rule for determining this optimal amount. Be wary, though, of falling into the vice of looking for excuses not to read some philosopher or text, as in "Oh, that's boring old religious stuff" or "She's one of those obscure literary feminist types", or "In X Department they laugh at you if you mention those authors in tutes". If someone wants a reason not to think, they'll soon come up with one.

Philosophical writings

Most philosophical writings come in either of two forms: books or articles. Articles appear either in books that are edited anthologies or in academic journals, such as Philosophical Quarterly or Australasian Journal of Philosophy. Some academic journals are also on the internet. Most articles in the journals are written by professional philosophers for professional philosophers; similarly with many books. But by no means let this put you off. Everyone begins philosophy at the deep end - it's really the only kind there is!

There are, however, many books written for student audiences. Some of these are general introductions to philosophy as a whole; others are introductions to particular areas or issues (eg biomedical ethics or philosophy of science). Among the general introductions are various philosophical dictionaries, encyclopedias and "companions". These reference works collect short articles on a wide range of topics and can be very useful starting points for newcomers to a topic. Among the most useful of the general reference works are:

• Edward Craig, ed., The Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy (10 vols.) (London: Routledge, 1998)
• Paul Edwards, ed., The Encyclopedia of Philosophy (8 vols.) (New York: Macmillan, 1967)
• Robert Audi, ed., The Cambridge Dictionary of Philosophy, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999)
• Ted Honderich, ed., The Oxford Companion to Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1995)
• Simon Blackburn, The Oxford Dictionary of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)
• Thomas Mautner, ed., The Penguin Dictionary of Philosophy (London: Penguin, 1998)
• J.O. Urmson and Jonathan Ree, eds., The Concise Encyclopedia of Western Philosophy and Philosophers (London: Routledge, 1993)
• Edward N. Zalta, ed., The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (an internet-based reference work: plato.stanford.edu/ )

Note taking

Note taking, like your reading, should not be random, but ought to be guided by the topic in question and by your particular lines of response to the issues involved. Note taking for philosophy is very much an individual art, which you develop as you progress. By and large it is not of much use to copy out reams of text as part of your researches. Nor is it generally helpful to read a great number of pages without making any note of what they contain for future reference. But between these two extremes it is up to you to find the mean that best helps you in getting your thoughts together.

Libraries and electronic resources

The University's Baillieu Library (including the Institute of Education Resource Centre), which is open to all members of the University, contains more than 2,500 years' worth of philosophical writings. The best way to become acquainted with them is by using them, including using the catalogues (including the Baillieu's on-line catalogues and subject resources web-pages), following up a work's references (and references in the references), intelligent browsing of the shelves, etc.

In the main Baillieu Library, the philosophical books are located (mostly) between 100–199 in the Dewey decimal system, and philosophical journals are located in the basement. The Reference section on the ground floor also has some relevant works. The Education Resource Centre also has a good philosophy collection.

In addition to hard-copy philosophical writings, there is also a variety of electronic resources in philosophy, mostly internet-based. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy was already mentioned above. Links to other useful internet sites (such as the Australasian Association of Philosophy website) can be found through the Baillieu Library's web-page and the Philosophy Department's web-page.

A strong word of warning, however, for the would-be philosophical web-surfer: because anyone can put material on a website, all kinds of stuff, of varying levels of quality, is out there - and new-comers to philosophy are usually not well placed to sort their way through it. Unless you have a very good understanding of what you're looking for - and what you're not looking for - most of you will be much better off simply carefully reading and thinking about a central text for your course, eg Descartes' First Meditation, rather than wandering about the internet clicking on all the hits for "Descartes". Exercise your mind, not your index finger.

Writing your essay

Planning and structuring your essay.

It is very important that you plan your essay, so that you have an idea of what you are going to write before you start to write it. Of course, you will most likely alter things in later drafts, but you should still start off by having a plan. Planning your essay includes laying out a structure. It is very important that your essay has a clearly discernible structure, ie that it is composed of parts and that these parts are logically connected. This helps both you and your reader to be clear about how your discussion develops, stage by stage, as you work through the issues at hand.

Poor essay structure is one of the most common weaknesses in student philosophy essays. Taking the time to work on the structure of your essay is time well spent, especially since skill in structuring your thoughts for presentation to others should be among the more enduring things you learn at university. A common trap that students fall into is to start their essay by writing the first sentence, then writing another one that seems to follow that one, then another one that sort of fits after that one, then another that might or might not have some connection with the previous one, and so on until the requisite 1,500 words are used up. The result is usually a weak, rambling essay.

There are, of course, no hard and fast rules about how to structure a philosophy essay. Again, it is a skill you develop through practice, and much will depend on the particular topic at hand. Nonetheless, it might be helpful to begin by developing an essay structure around the basic distinction between your exposition and your critical discussion (as discussed above). In this it will be important that you make clear who is putting forward which point, that is, make it clear whether you are presenting your own thoughts or are expounding someone else's. (Again, confusion in this regard is a common problem in student essays.) It can often help your structuring if you provide headings for different sections (possibly numbered or lettered). Again, this helps both your reader to follow your discussion and you to develop your thoughts. At each stage, show clearly the logical relations between and the reasons for your points, so that your reader can see clearly why you say what you say and can see clearly the development in your discussion.

Another key to structuring your essay can be found in the old adage "Tell 'em what you're gonna tell 'em. Tell 'em. Then tell 'em what you've told 'em", which provides you with a ready-made structure: Introduction, Main Body, and Conclusion.

In your Introduction, first introduce the issues the essay is concerned with. In doing so, try to state briefly just what the problem is and (if there is space) why it is a problem. This also applies, of course, to issues covered in text-focused essay topics. Next, tell the reader what it is that you are going to do about those problems in the Main Body. This is usually done by giving a brief sketch or overview of the main points you will present, a "pre-capitulation", so to speak, of your essay's structure. This is one way of showing your reader that you have a grasp (indeed, it helps you get a grasp) of your essay as a structured and integrated whole, and gives them some idea of what to expect by giving them an idea of how you have decided to answer the question. Of course, for reasons of space, your Introduction might not be very long, but something along these lines is likely to be useful.

In your Main Body, do what you've said you'll do. Here is where you should present your exposition(s) and your critical discussion(s). Thus, it is here that the main philosophical substance of your essay is to be found. Of course, what that substance is and how you will present it will depend on the particular topic before you. But, whatever the topic, make clear at each stage just what it is you are doing. You can be quite explicit about this. (eg "I shall now present Descartes' ontological argument for the existence of God, as it is presented in his Fifth Meditation. There will be three stages to this presentation.") Don't think that such explicitness must be a sign of an unsophisticated thinker.

A distinct Conclusion is perhaps not always necessary, if your Main Body has clearly "played out" your argument. So you don't always have to present a grand summation or definitive judgement at the end. Still, often for your own sake, try to state to yourself what it is your essay has achieved and see if it would be appropriate to say so explicitly. Don't feel that you must come up with earth-shattering conclusions. Of course, utter banality or triviality are not good goals, either. Also, your essay doesn't always have to conclude with a "solution" to a problem. Sometimes, simply clarifying an issue or problem is a worthy achievement and can merit first-class honours. A good conclusion to a philosophy essay, then, will usually combine a realistic assessment of the ambit and cogency of its claims with a plausible proposal that those claims have some philosophical substance.

What you write in your essay should always be relevant to the question posed. This is another common problem in student essays, so continually ask yourself "Am I addressing the question here?" First-class answers to a question can vary greatly, but you must make sure that your essay responds to the question asked, even if you go on to argue that the question as posed is itself problematic. (eg "To ask ‘What is scientific method?' presupposes that science follows one basic method. However, I shall argue that there are, in fact, several different scientific methods and that these are neither unified nor consistent.") Be wary, however, of twisting a topic too far out of shape in order to fit your favoured theme. (You would be ill-advised, for example, to proceed thus: "What is scientific method? This is a question asked by many great minds. But what is a mind? In this essay, I shall discuss the views of Thomas Aquinas on the nature of mind.")

This requirement of relevance is not intended as an authoritarian constraint on your intellectual freedom. It is part of the skill of paying sustained and focused attention to something put before you - which is one of the most important skills you can develop at university. If you do have other philosophical interests that you want to pursue (such as Aquinas on mind), then please do pursue them, in addition to writing your essay on the set topic. At no stage does the requirement of relevance prevent you from pursuing your other interests.

Citing Philosophical "Authorities"

There might be occasions when you want to quote other philosophers and writers apart from when you are quoting them because they are the subject of your essay. There are two basic reasons why you might want to do this. First, you might quote someone because their words constitute a good or exemplary expression or articulation of an idea you are dealing with, whether as its proponent, critic, or simply its chronicler. (eg "As Nietzsche succinctly put the point, 'There are no moral phenomena at all, only a moral interpretation of phenomena'.*") You may or may not want to endorse the idea whose good expression you have quoted, but simply want to use the philosopher as a spokesperson for or example of that view. But be clear about what you think the quote means and be careful about what you are doing with the quote. It won't do all the work for you.

The second reason you might want to quote a philosopher is because you think their words constitute an "authoritative statement" of a view. Here you want to use the fact that, eg Bertrand Russell maintained that there are two kinds of knowledge of things (namely, knowledge by acquaintance and knowledge by description) in support of your claim that there are two such kinds of knowledge of things. However, be very careful in doing this, for the nature of philosophical authority is not so simple here. That is to say, what really matters is not that Bertrand Russell the man held that view; what matters are his reasons for holding that view. So, when quoting philosophers for this second reason, be careful that you appreciate in what exactly the authority lies - which means that you should show that you appreciate why Russell maintained that thesis. Of course, you can't provide long arguments for every claim you make or want to make use of; every essay will have its enabling but unargued assumptions. But at least be clear about these. (eg "For the purposes of this essay, I shall adopt Russell's thesis* that ...").

* Friedrich Nietzsche, Beyond Good and Evil, trans. R.J. Hollingdale (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1973 [first German ed.1886]), Sec. 108.

* See Bertrand Russell, The Problems of Philosophy (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967 [first pub. 1912]), Ch. 5.

Philosophy is by its nature a relatively abstract and generalising business. (Note that abstractness and generality are not the same thing. Nor do vagueness and obscurity automatically attend them.) Sometimes a longish series of general ideas and abstract reasonings can become difficult for the reader (and often the writer) to follow. It can often help, therefore, to use some concrete or specific examples in your discussion. (Note that there can be different levels of concreteness and specificity in examples.)

Examples can be taken from history, current events, literature, and so on, or can be entirely your own invention. Exactly what examples you employ and just how and why you use them will, of course, depend on the case. Some uses might be: illustration of a position, problem or idea to help make it clearer; evidence for, perhaps even proof of, a proposition; a counter-example; a case-study to be returned to at various points during the essay; or a problem for a theory or viewpoint to be applied to. Again, be clear about what the example is and how and why you use it. Be careful not to get distracted by, or bogged down in, your examples. Brevity is usually best.

English expression

There's another old saying: "If you can't say what you mean, then you can't mean what you say" - and this very much applies to philosophical writing. Thus, in writing philosophically, you must write clearly and precisely. This means that good philosophical writing requires a good grasp of the language in which it is written, including its grammar and vocabulary. (See Section 9.3 for advice for people from non-English speaking backgrounds.) A high standard of writing skills is to be expected of Arts graduates. Indeed, this sort of skill will last longer than your memory of, for example, the three parts of the Platonic soul (though it is also hoped that some of the content of what you study will also stick). So use your time at university (in all your subjects) to develop these skills further.

Having a mastery of a good range of terms, being sensitive to the subtleties of their meaning, and being able to construct grammatically correct and properly punctuated sentences are essential to the clear articulation and development of your thoughts. Think of grammar, not as some old-fashioned set of rules of linguistic etiquette, but rather as the "internal logic" of a sentence, that is, as the relationships between the words within a sentence which enable them to combine to make sense.

Virtually all sentences in philosophical writing are declarative (ie. make statements), as opposed to interrogative, imperative or exclamatory types of sentences. There is some place, though, for interrogative sentences, ie. questions. (Note that, in contrast, this guide, which is not in the essay genre, contains many imperative sentences, ie. commands.) As you craft each (declarative) sentence in your essay, remember the basics of sentence construction. Make clear what the sentence is about (its subject) and what you are saying about it (the predicate). Make clear what the principal verb is in the predicate, since it is what usually does the main work in saying something about the subject. Where a sentence consists of more than one clause (as many do in philosophical writing), make clear what work each clause is doing. Attend closely, then, to each and every sentence you write so that its sense is clear and is the sense you intend it to have. Think carefully about what it is you want each particular sentence to do (in relation to both those sentences immediately surrounding it and the essay as a whole) and structure your sentence so that it does what you want it to do. To help you with your own sentence construction skills, when reading others' philosophical works (or indeed any writing) attend closely to the construction of each sentence so as to be alive to all the subtleties of the text.

Good punctuation is an essential part of sentence construction. Its role is to help to display the grammar of a sentence so that its meaning is clear. As an example of how punctuation can fundamentally change the grammar and, hence, meaning of a sentence, compare (i) "Philosophers, who argue for the identity of mind and brain, often fail to appreciate the radical consequences of that thesis." and (ii) "Philosophers who argue for the identity of mind and brain often fail to appreciate the radical consequences of that thesis." In the first sentence it is asserted (falsely, as it happens) that all philosophers argue for the identity of mind and brain; in the second, only some philosophers are said to argue for the identity of mind and brain. Only the punctuation differs in the two strings of identical words, and yet the meanings of the sentences are very different. Confusions over this sort of thing are common weaknesses in student essays, and leave readers asking themselves "What exactly is this student trying to say?"

It will be assumed that you can spell - which is not a matter of pressing the "spell-check" key on a word-processor. A good dictionary and a good thesaurus should always be within reach as you write your essay.

Also, try to shorten and simplify sentences where you can do so without sacrificing the subtlety and inherent complexity of the discussion. Where a sentence is becoming too long or complex, it is likely that too many ideas are being bundled up together too closely. Stop and separate your ideas out. If an idea is a good or important one, it will usually deserve its own sentence.

Your "intra-sentential logic" should work very closely with the "inter-sentential logic" of your essay, ie. with the logical relations between your sentences. (This "inter-sentential logic" is what "logic" is usually taken to refer to.) For example, to enable sentences P and Q to work together to yield sentence R as a conclusion, you need to make clear that there are elements within P and Q which connect up to yield R. Consider the following example: "Infanticide is the intentional killing of a human being. However, murder is regarded by all cultures as morally abhorrent. Therefore, people who commit infanticide should be punished." This doesn't work as an argument, because the writer has not constructed sentences which provide the connecting concepts in the various subjects and predicates, even though each sentence is grammatically correct (and possibly even true).

If you are concerned to write not only clearly and precisely, but also with some degree of grace and style (and I hope you are), it's still best to get the clarity and precision right first, in a plain, straightforward way, and then to polish things up afterwards to get the style and grace you want. But don't sacrifice clarity and precision for the sake of style and grace - be prepared to sacrifice that beautiful turn of phrase if its presence is going to send your discussion down an awkward path of reasoning. Aim to hit the nail on the head rather than make a loud bang. What you are likely to find, however, is that a philosophy essay which really is clear and precise will have a large measure of grace and style in its very clarity and precision.

Remember that obscurity is not a sign of profundity. (Some profound thought may well be difficult to follow, but that doesn't mean that one can achieve profundity merely through producing obscure, difficult-to-read writing.) Your marker is interested in what's actually in your essay, not what's possibly inside your head (or indeed what's possibly in some book you happen to have referred to in your essay). So avoid hinting at or alluding suggestively to ideas, especially where they are meant to do some important work in your essay. Instead, lay them out explicitly and directly. Of course, you won't have space to spell out every single idea, so work out which ideas do the most important work and make sure that you at least get those ideas clearly articulated. In expounding a text or problem that ultimately just is vague, muddled, or obscure, try to convey such vagueness, muddle or obscurity clearly, rather than simply reproducing it in your own writing. That is, be clear that and how a text or problem has such features, and then perhaps do your best to make matters clearer.

Despite these stern pronouncements, don't be afraid of sometimes saying things which happen to sound a little odd, if you have tried various formulations and think you have now expressed your ideas just as they should be expressed. Philosophy is often an exploratory business, and new ways of seeing and saying things can sometimes be a part of that exploration.

The need for clarity and precision in philosophical writing sometimes means that you need to stipulate your own meaning for a term. When you want to use a particular word in a particular way for the purposes of your essay - as a "technical term" - be clear about it. (eg "In this essay, I shall intend ‘egoism' to mean ...") Also, be consistent in your technical meanings, or else note when you are not. Be wary, though, of inventing too many neologisms or being too idiosyncratic in your stipulations.

With regard to what "authorial pronoun" to adopt in a philosophy essay, it's standard to write plainly in the first person singular ("I", "me", "my", etc.) rather than use the royal "we" (as in "we shall argue that ..."), or the convoluted quasi-legal indirect form ("It is submitted that ..."), or the scientific objectivity of a physics experimental report. Nonetheless, stick closer to "I argue", "I suggest", "my definition", etc., than to "I wish", "I hate", "my feeling", etc. A philosophy essay is still something more intellectual and formal than a personal reminiscence, polemic, or proclamation. In terms of audience, it's probably best to think of your reader as someone who is intelligent, open to discussion and knows a little about the topic you're writing on, but perhaps is not quite clear or decided about the issues, or needs convincing of the view you want to put forward, or is curious about what you think about the issues.

Try also to use non-discriminatory language, ie. language which does not express or imply inequality of worth between people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, sexuality, and so on. As you write, you will be considering carefully your choice of words to express your thoughts. You will almost always find that it is possible to avoid discriminatory language by rephrasing your sentences.

Other things to avoid:

• waffle and padding
• vagueness and ambiguity
• abbreviations (this guide I'm writing isn't an eg. of what's req'd. in a phil. essay)
• colloquialisms (which can really get up your reader's nose)
• writing whose syntax merely reflects the patterns of informal speech
• unnecessary abstractness or indirectness
• unexplained jargon
• flattery and invective
• overly-rhetorical questions (do you really need me to tell you what they are?) and other flourishes

There are many guides to good writing available. Anyone who writes (whether in the humanities or the sciences, whether beginners or experienced professionals) will do well to have some on hand. Most good bookshops and libraries will have some. Among the most consulted works are (check for the latest editions):

• J. M. Williams and G. C. Colomb, Style: Toward Clarity and Grace (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1995)
• W. Strunk and E. B. White, The Elements of Style, 4th ed. (New York: Longman, 2000)
• E. Gowers, The Complete Plain Words, 3rd ed. (Harmondsworth: Penguin, 1987)
• R. W. Burchfield, ed., The New Fowler's Modern English Usage (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1996)
• Pam Peters, The Cambridge Australian English Style Guide (Melbourne: Cambridge University Press, 1995)
• Australian Government Publishing Service, Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers, 5th ed. (Canberra: AGPS, 1995)

Vocabulary of logical argument

Closely related to the above points about English expression is the importance of having a good grasp of what can rather generally be called "the vocabulary of logical argument". These sorts of terms are crucial in articulating clearly and cogently a logical line of argument. Such argumentation will, of course, be of central importance in whatever discipline you are studying, indeed in any sphere of life that requires effective thinking and communication. I have in mind terms such as these (grouped a little loosely):

all, any, every, most, some, none, a, an, the that, this, it, he, she, they if . . . , then. . . ; if and only if . . . , then . . . ; unless either . . . or . . .; neither . . . nor . . . not, is, are therefore, thus, hence, so, because, since, follows, entails, implies, infer, consequence, conditional upon moreover, furthermore which, that, whose and, but, however, despite, notwithstanding, nevertheless, even, though, still possibly, necessarily, can, must, may, might, ought, should true, false, probable, certain sound, unsound, valid, invalid, fallacious, supported, proved, contradicted, rebutted, refuted, negated logical, illogical, reasonable, unreasonable, rational, irrational assumption, premise, belief, claim, proposition argument, reason, reasoning, evidence, proof

Most of these are quite simple terms, but they are crucial in argumentative or discursive writing of all kinds. (Many are themselves the subject of study in logic, a branch of philosophy). The sloppy use of these sorts of terms is another common weakness in students' philosophy essays. Pay close and careful attention to how you employ them. Moreover, pay close and careful attention to how the authors you read use them. For further discussion of some of these terms and others, see:

• Basic Philosophical Vocabulary, prepared by the staff of the Philosophy Department and available from the programs Office
• Wesley C. Salmon, Logic, 2nd ed. (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall, 1973)
• Antony Flew, Thinking About Thinking (London: Fontana, 1985)
• Graham Priest, Logic: A Very Short Introduction (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2000)
• Joel Rudinow and Vincent E. Barry, Invitation to Critical Thinking, 4th ed. (Fort Worth, Texas: Harcourt Brace, 1999)

Revising your essay

It is virtually essential that you write a first draft of your essay and then work on that draft to work towards your finished essay. Indeed, several drafts may well be necessary in order to produce your best possible work. It is a rare philosopher indeed who can get things perfectly right on the first attempt, so be prepared to revise and re-develop what you write. Don't be too precious about what you have written, if it appears that it should be sacrificed in the revision process. There is usually a very marked difference between essays which are basically first draft rush-jobs done the night before they are due and those which have been revised and polished. Give yourself time to revise by starting writing early on. For most philosophy students, the greater part of the work in essay writing is in the writing, not in the preliminary researches and planning stages. So be wary of thinking "I've done all the research. I only need to write up my notes, which I can do the night before the essay's due". This is likely to lead to a weak, perhaps non-existent, essay (and very likely a sleepless night).

Stick to the word limit given for your essay. Why are word limits imposed? First, to give the markers a fair basis for comparing student essays. Second, to give you the opportunity to practise the discipline of working creatively under constraints. Skill in this discipline will stand you in very good stead in any sphere where circumstances impose limitations. Again, word limits are not constraints on your intellectual freedom. Outside your essay you are free to write without limit. But even there you'll probably find that your creativity is improved by working under a self-imposed discipline.

As a general rule, most student essays that fall well short of the word limit are weak or lazy attempts at the task, and most essays that go well over the limit are not much stronger or the result of much harder work - the extra length is often due to unstructured waffle or padding which the writer hasn't thought enough about so as to edit judiciously. If you structure your essay clearly, you'll find it easier to revise and edit, whether in order to contract or expand it. ("Hmm, let's see: section 2 is much longer than section 4, but is not as important, so I'll cut it down. And I should expand section 3, because that's a crucial step. And I can shift that third paragraph in the Introduction to the Conclusion.")

Plagiarism and originality

Plagiarism is essentially a form of academic dishonesty or cheating. At university level, such dishonesty is not tolerated and is dealt with severely, usually by awarding zero marks for a plagiarised essay or, in some cases, dismissing a student from the university.

When you submit your essay, you are implicitly stating that the essay is your own original and independent work, that you have not submitted the same work for assessment in another subject, and that where you have made use of other people's work, this is properly acknowledged. If you know that this is not in fact the case, you are being dishonest. (In a number of university departments, students are in fact required to sign declarations of academic honesty.)

Plagiarism is the knowing but unacknowledged use of work by someone else (including work by another student, and indeed oneself - see below) and which is being presented as one's own work. It can take a number of forms, including:

• copying : exactly reproducing another's words
• paraphrasing : expressing the meaning of another's words in different words
• summarising : reproducing the main points of another's argument
• cobbling : copying, paraphrasing or summarising the work of a number of different people and piecing them together to produce one body of text
• submitting one's own work when it has already been submitted for assessment in another subject
• collusion : presenting an essay as your own independent work when in fact it has been produced, in whole or part, in collusion with one or more other people

None of the practices of copying, paraphrasing, summarizing or cobbling is wrong in itself, but when one or more is done without proper acknowledgment it constitutes plagiarism. Therefore, all sources must be adequately and accurately acknowledged in footnotes or endnotes. (See Section 7.) Plagiarism from the internet in particular can be a temptation for a certain kind of student. However, be warned: there is a number of very good internet and software tools for identifying plagiarism.

With regard to collusion, it's undoubtedly often very helpful to discuss one's work with others, be it other students, family members, friends or teachers. Indeed, philosophy thrives on dialogue. However, don't kid yourself that you would simply be extending that process if you were to ask your interlocutor to join with you in the writing of your essay, whether by asking them to tell you what you should write or to write down some of their thoughts for you to reproduce in your essay. At the end of the day, you must be the one to decide what goes into your essay.

Originality

Students sometimes worry about whether they will be able to develop "original ideas", especially in light of the fact that nearly every philosophical idea one comes up with seems to have been thought of before by someone else. There is no denying that truly original work in philosophy is well rewarded, but your first aim should be to develop ideas that you think are good and not merely different. If, after arguing for what you believe is right, and arguing in way that you think is good, you then discover that someone else has had the same idea, don't throw your work away - you should feel vindicated to some extent that your thinking has been congruent with that of another (possibly great) philosopher. (If you have not yet handed your essay in when you make this discovery, make an appropriately placed note to that effect.) Don't be fooled, however, into thinking that plagiarism can be easily passed off as congruent thinking. Of course, if that other philosopher's ideas have helped you to develop your ideas, then this is not a matter of congruent ideas but rather of derivative ideas, and this must be adequately acknowledged. If, after developing your ideas, you discover that they are original, then that is an added bonus. But remember that it is more important to be a good philosopher than an original one.

Quotations, footnotes, endnotes and bibliography

Quotations in your essay should be kept to a minimum. The markers know the central texts pretty well already and so don't need to have pages thereof repeated in front of them. Of course, some quotation will usually be important and useful - sometimes essential - in both exposition and critical discussion.

When you quote the words of someone else directly, you must make the quotation clearly distinct from your own text, using quotation marks . (eg "Descartes said that 'it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once.'* He makes this claim …" - where the words quoted from Descartes are in 'single quotation marks'. Note that it is relatively arbitrary whether one uses 'single' or "double" quotation marks for "first order" quotations, but whichever style you adopt, use it consistently in the one essay.) Alternatively, where the quoted passage is greater than three lines, put the quoted words in a separate indented paragraph , so that your essay would look like this:

In his First Meditation , Descartes argues as follows:

Whatever I have up till now accepted as most true I have acquired either from the senses or through the senses. But from time to time I have found that the senses deceive, and it is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once.* In this essay I shall argue that prudence does not in fact require us to distrust our senses and that Descartes's sceptical method is therefore seriously flawed.

In both cases, the quotations must be given proper referencingin a footnote or endnote.

When you are not quoting another person directly, but are still making use of their work - as in indirect quotations (eg "Descartes says that it is wise not to trust something that has deceived us before"*), paraphrases, summaries, and cobblings - you must still acknowledge your debts, using footnotes or endnotes.

* Rene Descartes, Meditations on First Philosophy , trans. John Cottingham (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1986 [first French ed., 1641]), p. 12.

Footnotes and endnotes

Footnotes appear at the foot of the same page on which the cited material appears, clearly separated from the main body of the text, each one clearly numbered. Endnotes appear at the end of the essay, again clearly separated from the main body of text, numbered and headed "Endnotes" or "Notes". Either method is acceptable, but you should choose one and stick with it throughout the one essay.

Below are some examples of how to put the relevant referencing information in footnotes and endnotes. This is not intended as an exercise in pedantry, but as a guide to how to provide the information needed for adequate referencing. The reason we provide this information is to enable our readers to find the sources we use in order to verify them and to allow them to pursue the material further if it interests them. In your own researches you will come to value good referencing in the texts you read as a helpful source of further references on a topic. Again, it is this sort of research skill that an Arts graduate will be expected to have mastered.

There are various conventions for writing up footnotes and endnotes. The Philosophy Department does not require that any particular convention be followed, only that you be consistent in your use of the convention that you do choose. For other conventions see the style guides mentioned above, or simply go to some texts published by reputable publishers and see what formats they employ.

Imagine, then, that the following are endnotes at the end of your essay. I will explain them below.

• James Rachels, The Elements of Moral Philosophy , 2nd ed. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993), p. 25.
• Philippa Foot, "Moral Relativism", in Michael Krausz and Jack W. Meiland, eds., Relativism: Cognitive and Moral (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982), p. 155.
• Ibid., p. 160.
• Immanuel Kant, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals, trans. H. J. Paton (New York: Harper and Row, 1964 [first German ed., 1785]), p. 63.
• Thomas Hobbes, Leviathan, (London: Dent, 1973 [first pub. 1651]),p. 65.
• Rachels, The Elements, p. 51.
• Peter Winch, "The Universalizability of Moral Judgements", The Monist 49 (1965), p. 212.
• Antony Duff, "Legal Punishment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2001 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2001/entries/legal-punishment/ at 15 June 2003, sec. 6.

Notes explained

• This is your first reference to a book called The Elements of Moral Philosophy. The title is given in full and in italics. If you are unable to use italics, then you should underline the title. The book's author is James Rachels. It's the 2nd edition of that book, which was published in New York, by the publishers McGraw-Hill, in 1993. The page you have referred to in your main text is page 25
• This is your first reference to Philippa Foot's article, "Moral Relativism", the title of which is put in "quotation marks". This article appeared in a book (title in italics) which is an anthology of different articles, and which was edited by Krausz and Meiland (names in full). The rest is in the same style as note (1)
• "Ibid." is short for "ibidem", which means "in the same place" in Latin. Use it on its own when you want to refer to exactly the same work and page number as in the immediately preceding note. So here the reference is again to Foot's article at page 155
• Ditto, except this time you refer to a different page in Foot's article, namely page 160
• This is reference to a book by Kant. Same book details as per note (1), except that, because this is a translation, you include the translator's name, and the date of the first edition in the original language
• This is a book reference again, so it's the same as note (1), except that, because it's an old book, you include the date of the original edition. (How old does a book have to be before it merits this treatment? There is no settled view. Note, though, that this convention is not usually followed for ancient authors)
• Here you are referring to Rachels' book again, but, because you are not in the very next note after a reference to it, you can't use "ibid.". Simply give the author's surname and a short title of the book, plus page reference. There is also a common alternative to this, whereby you give the surname, and write "op. cit." (which is short for "opere citato", which is Latin for "in the work already cited") and page reference (eg "Rachels, op. cit., p. 51.") Your reader then has to scan back over the notes to see what that "op." was exactly. The first option (author plus short title) is usually easier on the reader
• This is a reference to an article by Peter Winch in a journal called The Monist. The article's title is in "quotes", the journal title is in italics. The volume of the journal is 49, the year of publication is 1965, the page referred to is p. 212
• This is a reference to an article in the internet-based Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy. The article is titled "Legal Punishment" and was written by Antony Duff. The Encyclopedia was edited by Edward N. Zalta. Note that I have basically followed the mode of citation that the Encyclopedia itself recommends. (This is one sign of the site being a reputable one. Where a site makes such a recommendation, it's best to follow it.) I have, however, also added the date on which the article was retrieved from the site, and put the author's given name first, to be consistent with the other footnotes. I have also added the reference to section 6, in an effort to be more precise as to where in the article the material I used came from. Since web pages aren't numbered in the manner of hard copy works, it will help if you are able to refer to some other feature, such as paragraphs or sections, so as to pin-point your reference. In the absence of a site recommending a mode of citation to its own material, the basic information needed for adequate citation of internet-based material is (where identifiable) the author, the document title, the year the document was created, the website name, the uniform resource locator (URL) in <arrow-brackets>, date of retrieval, and a pin-point reference*

* I am here following the mode of citation of internet materials recommended in Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc, Australian Guide to Legal Citation , 2nd ed. (Melbourne: Melbourne University Law Review Association Inc, 2002), pp. 70-73. I have, though, added the desirability of a pin-point reference.

Bibliography

At the end of your essay (after your endnotes, if used) you should list in a bibliography all of the works referred to in your notes, as well as any other works you consulted in researching and writing your essay. The list should be in alphabetical order, going by authors' surnames. The format should be the same as for your notes, except that you drop the page references and should put surnames first. So the bibliography of our mock-essay above would look like this:

• Duff, Antony, "Legal Punishment", The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Spring 2001 Edition), Edward N. Zalta (ed.), plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2001/entries/legal-punishment/ at 15 June 2003
• Foot, Philippa, "Moral Relativism", in Michael Krausz and Jack Meiland, eds., Relativism: Cognitive and Moral (Notre Dame, Indiana: University of Notre Dame Press, 1982)
• Hobbes, Thomas, Leviathan (London: Dent, 1973 [first pub.1651])
• Kant, Immanuel, Groundwork of the Metaphysic of Morals , trans. H.J. Paton (New York: Harper and Row, 1964 [first German ed. 1785])
• Rachels, James, The Elements of Moral Philosophy , 2nd ed., (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1993)
• Winch, Peter, "The Universalizability of Moral Judgements", The Monist 49 (1965)

Presentation of essays and seeking advice

Generally, you should present an essay that is legible (hand-writing is OK, but typed or word-processed essays are preferable), in English, on one side of pieces of paper that are somewhere in the vicinity of A4 size and are fixed together . You should attach a completed Cover Sheet provided by the Philosophy program. Plastic document covers, spiral binding and other forms of presentational paraphernalia are not necessary (nor are they usually even desirable, as they mostly just get in the marker's way).

Late essays

Late essays are penalised . (For details of penalties consult the Philosophy program's notice board.)

Essays not handed in

Essays not handed in at all get zero marks. An essay that is handed in but gets a mark below 50 (and so is technically a "failed" essay) still gets some marks. (At least, it will so long as it's not so extremely late that the deducted marks wipe out all the marks it would have received if handed in on time.) All marks received for your essay (whether pass or fail) go toward your final score in the subject. Therefore, even if you think your essay is bound to fail (but please let your marker be the judge of that), or the due date has already passed, or both, it is still in your interests to hand your essay in .

Tutors and lecturers

Philosophy staff are not there just to be listened to by you; they are also there to listen to you. So don't hesitate to contact your tutor or lecturer to discuss questions or problems you have concerning your work.

If you have a legitimate excuse, you may be granted an extension on the due date for your essay by the lecturer in charge. Similarly, special consideration may also be granted when illness or other circumstances adversely affect your work. Applications for special consideration are made online via the Special Consideration web page.

Student counselling

Some personal or non-philosophical academic difficulties you might have you might want to discuss with someone other than your tutor or lecturer. Student Counselling and Psychological Services are there for you to discuss all sorts of problems you might encounter. Please consult your student diary for details on the counselling service.

English language assistance

As noted above, good philosophical writing requires a good grasp of the language in which it is written. If you are from a non-English speaking background and are having difficulties with your English expression in an academic context, you might like to make use of the services provided by Student Services Academic Skills . Many native English speakers, too, can benefit from short "refresher" courses and workshops run by the Centre. Please consult your student diary for details about this service.

A bit on Philosophy exams

Essays of the sort discussed so far in this guide are not the only form of assessment in the Philosophy program - examinations are also set. What is to be said about them?

First, not much that is different from what's been said above about philosophy essays. This is because what you write in a philosophy exam is none other than a philosophy essay . Have a look at past philosophy exam papers, in the Gibson and Baillieu libraries, to get a feel for them. The only basic difference between essays and exams is the matter of what constraints you're working under. Essays have word limits; exams have time limits . Again, stick to them. (Actually, you'll be made to stick to them by the exam invigilators.)

It's best, then, to think about how long to spend writing on an exam essay topic, rather than about how many words to write on it. Simple arithmetic will tell you how much time to spend on each exam question. (eg if you have a 2-hour exam and have to answer 3 questions, each worth one-third of the exam mark, then spend 40 minutes on each question.) Avoid the trap of "borrowing time" from a later question in order to perfect your answer to an earlier question, and then working faster on the later questions to catch up on lost time - this is likely to get you in a tangle. There are no word limits in philosophy exam essays, but don't think that the more you scrawl across the page, the more marks you'll get. Nonetheless, use the time you've got so as to maximise your display of your philosophical understanding and skills in answering the question.

Planning and structuring remain very important in exam essays. With regard to the niceties of footnotes, endnotes and bibliographies, etc., these are not necessary, so don't waste time on these. However, if you quote or refer to a specific passage from a text, do indicate clearly that it is a quotation or reference. (The principle of being clear as to who is saying what remains central.) If you have the reference handy, just put it briefly in the text of your exam essay. (eg "As Descartes says in Meditation I (p. 12), . . ." or "'[I]t is prudent never to trust completely those who have deceived us even once' (Descartes, Meditation I, p. 12)".) Generally speaking, you will show your familiarity with any relevant texts by how you handle them in your discussion. This is also true for your non-exam essays.

Your preparation for the exam should have been done well before entering the exam hall. Note that various subjects have restrictions on what texts and other items can be brought into the exam hall. (Consult the Philosophy program's notice board for details.) Many subjects will have "closed book" exams. Even if an exam is "open book", if you are properly prepared, you should not need to spend much time at all consulting texts or notes during the exam itself.

You won't have time for redrafting and revising your exam essay (which makes planning and structuring your answers before you start writing all the more important). If you do want to delete something, just cross it out clearly. Don't waste time with liquid paper or erasers. Write legibly . Don't wr. "point form" sav. time. Diff. kn. mean. use incomp. sent.

Finally, read the instructions at the beginning of the exam paper. They are important. (eg it's not a good strategy to answer two questions from Part A, when the Instructions tell you to answer two questions, one from Part A and one from Part B.) Note the (somewhat quaint) University practice of starting Reading Time some time before the stated time for the exam. Philosophy exams usually have 15 minutes of reading time. (Check for each of your exams.) So, if your exam timetable says the exam is at 2.15 pm, with reading time of 15 minutes, then the reading time starts at 2.00 pm and the writing time starts at 2.15pm - so get to the exam hall well before 2.00 pm. Reading time is very important. Use it to decide which questions you'll answer and to start planning your answers.

Checklist of questions

• Do I understand the essay question ? Do I know when the essay is due ?
• Do I know which texts to consult? Do I know where to find them?
• Have I made useful notes from my reading of the relevant texts?
• Have I made a plan of how I'll approach the question in my essay?
• Have I given myself enough time to draft and redraft my essay?
• Have I written a clearly structured essay? Is it clear what each stageis doing? Do I do what I say I'll do in my Introduction?
• Have I clearly distinguished exposition and critical discussion ? Have I given a fair and accurate account of the author(s) in question?
• Is my response to the topic relevant ? Do I answer the question? Have I kept my essay within the general bounds of the topic?
• Have I displayed a good grasp of the vocabulary of logical argument ? Are my arguments logically valid and sound? Are my claims supported by reasons ? Am I consistent within my essay?
• Is my English expression clear and precise ? Are my grammar, punctuation and spelling correct? Have I said what I meant to say? Is my writing legible?
• Have I fully acknowledged all my sources in footnotes or endnotes? Are my quotations accurate? Have I included a bibliography ?
• Do I need to revise any part of my essay again?
• Have I made a copy or photocopy of my essay for myself?
• Have I kept the receipt for my handed-in essay?

Philosophy: What and Why?

Find a job in philosophy, what is philosophy.

Philosophy is the systematic and critical study of fundamental questions that arise both in everyday life and through the practice of other disciplines. Some of these questions concern the nature of  reality : Is there an external world? What is the relationship between the physical and the mental? Does God exist? Others concern our nature as rational, purposive, and social beings: Do we act freely? Where do our moral obligations come from? How do we construct just political states? Others concern the nature and extent of our knowledge: What is it to know something rather than merely believe it? Does all of our knowledge come from sensory experience? Are there limits to our knowledge? And still others concern the foundations and implications of other disciplines: What is a scientific explanation? What sort of knowledge of the world does science provide? Do scientific theories, such as evolutionary theory, or quantum mechanics, compel us to modify our basic philosophical understanding of, and approach to, reality? What makes an object a work of art? Are aesthetic value judgments objective? And so on.

The aim in Philosophy is not to master a body of facts, so much as think clearly and sharply through any set of facts. Towards that end, philosophy students are trained to read critically, analyze and assess arguments, discern hidden assumptions, construct logically tight arguments, and express themselves clearly and precisely in both speech and writing.

Here are descriptions of some of the main areas of philosophy:

Epistemology studies questions about knowledge and rational belief.  Traditional questions include the following: How can we know that the ordinary physical objects around us are real (as opposed to dreamed, or hallucinated, as in the Matrix)?  What are the factors that determine whether a belief is rational or irrational?  What is the difference between knowing something and just believing it?  (Part of the answer is that you can have false beliefs, but you can only know things that are true.  But that’s not the whole answer—after all, you might believe something true on the basis of a lucky guess, and that wouldn’t be knowledge!)   Some other questions that have recently been the subject of lively debate in epistemology include: Can two people with exactly the same evidence be completely rational in holding opposite beliefs?  Does whether I know something depend on how much practical risk I would face if I believed falsely?  Can I rationally maintain confident beliefs about matters on which I know that others, who are seemingly every bit as intelligent, well-informed, unbiased and diligent as I am, have come to opposite conclusions?

Metaphysics is the study of what the world is like—or (some would say) what reality consists in. Metaphysical questions can take several forms. They can be questions about what exists (questions of ontology); they can be questions what is fundamental (as opposed to derivative); and they can be questions about what is an objective feature of the world (as opposed to a mere consequence the way in which creatures like us happen to interact with that world). Questions that are central to the study of metaphysics include questions about the nature of objects, persons, time, space, causation, laws of nature, and modality. The rigorous study of these questions has often led metaphysicians to make surprising claims. Plato thought that alongside the observable, concrete world there was a realm of eternal, unchanging abstract entities like Goodness, Beauty, and Justice. Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz claimed that the world was composed of tiny indivisible souls, called monads. Even today contemporary metaphysicians have been known to doubt the existence of ordinary objects, to deny the possibility of free will, and to argue that our world is just one of a plurality of worlds.

Logic is the study of the validity of patterns of inference. Logic is not a branch of psychology: It does not concern how people actually reason or which kinds of reasoning they find intuitively compelling. Rather, logic concerns the question of when a claim is conclusively supported by other claims. For instance, the inference from the claims “it is raining” and “if it is raining then the streets are wet” to the claim “the streets are wet” is logically valid – the premises conclusively support the conclusion. The validity of this specific inference, and of other inferences of the same form, is tied to the nature of the concept “if … then”. More generally, the notion of logical validity is closely connected to the nature of concepts such as “and”, “or”, “not”, “if … then”, “all”, and “some”. In studying the notion of logical validity, logicians have developed symbolic languages. These enable us to state claims clearly and precisely, and to investigate the exact structure of an argument. These languages have turned out to be useful within philosophy and other disciplines, including mathematics and computer science. Some of the questions about logic studied by members of the philosophy department include: Given that logic is not an empirical science, how can we have knowledge of basic logical truths? What is the connection between logic and rationality? Can mathematics be reduced to logic? Should we revise logic to accommodate vague or imprecise language? Should we revise logic to answer the liar paradox and other paradoxes concerning truth? 

Political philosophy is the philosophical study of concepts and values associated with political matters. For one example, is there any moral obligation to do what the law says just because the law says so, and if so on what grounds? Many have said we consent to obey. Did you consent to obey the laws? Can one consent without realizing it? Are there other grounds for an obligation to obey the law? Another central question is what would count as a just distribution of all the wealth and opportunity that is made possible by living in a political community? Is inequality in wealth or income unjust? Much existing economic inequality is a result of different talents, different childhood opportunities, different gender, or just different geographical location. What might justify inequalities that are owed simply to bad luck? Some say that inequality can provide incentives to produce or innovate more, which might benefit everyone. Others say that many goods belong to individuals before the law enters in, and that people may exchange them as they please even if this results in some having more than others. So (a third question), what does it mean for something to be yours, and what makes it yours?

The Philosophy of Language is devoted to the study of questions concerned with meaning and communication. Such questions range from ones that interact closely with linguistic theory to questions that are more akin to those raised in the study of literature. Very large questions include: What is linguistic meaning? How is the meaning of linguistic performances similar to and different from the meanings of, say, gestures or signals? What is the relationship between language and thought? Is thought more fundamental than language? Or is there some sense in which only creatures that can speak can think? To what extent does the social environment affect the meaning and use of language? Other questions focus on the communicative aspect of language, such as: What is it to understand what someone else has said? What is it to assert something? How is assertion related to knowledge and belief? And how is it that we can gain knowledge from others through language? Yet other questions focus on specific features of the languages we speak, for example: What is it a name to be a name of a particular thing? What's the relationship between the meanings of words and the meanings of sentences? Is there an important difference between literal and figurative uses of language? What is metaphor? And how does it work?

Ethics is the study of what we ought to do and what sorts of people we ought to be. Ethicists theorize about what makes acts right and wrong and what makes outcomes good and bad, and also about which motivations and traits of character we should admire and cultivate. Some other questions that ethicists try to answer are closely related to the central ones. They include: What does it mean to act freely? Under what conditions are we responsible for our good and bad acts? Are moral claims true and false, like ordinary descriptive claims about our world, and if they are what makes them so?

The History of Philosophy plays a special role in the study of philosophy. Like every other intellectual discipline, philosophy has of course a history.  However, in the case of philosophy an understanding of its history - from its ancient and medieval beginnings through the early modern period (the 17th and 18th centuries) and into more recent times - forms a vital part of the very enterprise of philosophy, whether in metaphysics and epistemology or in ethics, aesthetics, and political philosophy.  To study the great philosophical works of the past is to learn about the origins and presuppositions of many of the problems that occupy philosophy today.  It is also to discover and to come to appreciate different ways of dealing with these problems, different conceptions of what the fundamental problems of philosophy are, and indeed different ways of doing philosophy altogether.  And it is also the study of works—from Plato and Aristotle, through Kant and Mill and more recent writers—that have shaped much of Western culture far beyond academic philosophy. Many of the most creative philosophers working today have also written on various topics in the history of philosophy and have found their inspiration in great figures of the past. 

Why Study Philosophy?

This question may be understood in two ways: Why would one engage in the particular intellectual activities that constitute philosophical inquiry? And how might the study of philosophy affect my future career prospects?

Philosophy as intellectual activity may have a number of motivations:

• Intellectual curiosity: philosophy is essentially a  reflective-critical inquiry  motivated by a sense of intellectual “wonder.” What is the world like? Why is it this way, rather than another? Who am I? Why am I here?
• Interest in cultural and intellectual history: as a discipline, philosophy pays a great deal of attention to its history, and to the broader cultural and intellectual context in which this history unfolds.
• Sharpening thinking skills: the study of philosophy is especially well suited to the development of a variety of intellectual skills involved in the analysis of concepts, the critique of ideas, the conduct of sound reasoning and argumentation; it is important to emphasize that philosophical inquiry also fosters intellectual creativity (developing new concepts, or new approaches to problems, identifying new problems, and so on).
• Sharpening writing skills: the writing of philosophy is especially rigorous

Philosophy might affect future career prospects in a number of ways:

• Some philosophy concentrators go on to graduate school to earn a Ph.D. in philosophy. Most of those become professors of philosophy, which means that their professional lives are devoted to research and teaching in philosophy.
• A philosophy concentration is not limiting: in fact, the skills it develops and sharpens are transferable to a wide variety of professional activities. Obvious examples include the application of reasoning and argumentation skills to the practice of law; less obvious examples include the application of analytical and critical skills to journalism, investment banking, writing, publishing, and so on; even less obvious examples include putting one’s philosophical education to work in business entrepreneurship, political and social activism, and even creative arts.

2.6 Writing Philosophy Papers

Learning objectives.

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Identify and characterize the format of a philosophy paper.
• Create thesis statements that are manageable and sufficiently specific.
• Collect evidence and formulate arguments.
• Organize ideas into a coherent written presentation.

This section will provide some practical advice on how to write philosophy papers. The format presented here focuses on the use of an argumentative structure in writing. Different philosophy professors may have different approaches to writing. The sections below are only intended to give some general guidelines that apply to most philosophy classes.

Identify Claims

The key element in any argumentative paper is the claim you wish to make or the position you want to defend. Therefore, take your time identifying claims , which is also called the thesis statement. What do you want to say about the topic? What do you want the reader to understand or know after reading your piece? Remember that narrow, modest claims work best. Grand claims are difficult to defend, even for philosophy professors. A good thesis statement should go beyond the mere description of another person’s argument. It should say something about the topic, connect the topic to other issues, or develop an application of some theory or position advocated by someone else. Here are some ideas for creating claims that are perfectly acceptable and easy to develop:

• Compare two philosophical positions. What makes them similar? How are they different? What general lessons can you draw from these positions?
• Identify a piece of evidence or argument that you think is weak or may be subject to criticism. Why is it weak? How is your criticism a problem for the philosopher’s perspective?
• Apply a philosophical perspective to a contemporary case or issue. What makes this philosophical position applicable? How would it help us understand the case?
• Identify another argument or piece of evidence that might strengthen a philosophical position put forward by a philosopher. Why is this a good argument or piece of evidence? How does it fit with the philosopher’s other claims and arguments?
• Consider an implication (either positive or negative) that follows from a philosopher’s argument. How does this implication follow? Is it necessary or contingent? What lessons can you draw from this implication (if positive, it may provide additional reasons for the argument; if negative, it may provide reasons against the argument)?

Think Like a Philosopher

The following multiple-choice exercises will help you identify and write modest, clear philosophical thesis statements. A thesis statement is a declarative statement that puts forward a position or makes a claim about some topic.

• How does Aristotle think virtue is necessary for happiness?
• Is happiness the ultimate goal of human action?
• Whether or not virtue is necessary for happiness.
• Aristotle argues that happiness is the ultimate good of human action and virtue is necessary for happiness.
• René Descartes argues that the soul or mind is the essence of the human person.
• Descartes shows that all beliefs and memories about the external world could be false.
• Some people think that Descartes is a skeptic, but I will show that he goes beyond skepticism.
• In the meditations, Descartes claims that the mind and body are two different substances.
• Descartes says that the mind is a substance that is distinct from the body, but I disagree.
• Contemporary psychology has shown that Descartes is incorrect to think that human beings have free will and that the mind is something different from the brain.
• Thomas Hobbes’s view of the soul is materialistic, whereas Descartes’s view of the soul is nonphysical. In this paper, I will examine the differences between these two views.
• John Stuart Mill reasons that utilitarian judgments can be based on qualitative differences as well as the quantity of pleasure, but ultimately any qualitative difference must result in a difference in the quantity of pleasure.
• Mill’s approach to utilitarianism differs from Bentham’s by introducing qualitative distinctions among pleasures, where Bentham only considers the quantitative aspects of pleasure.
• J. S. Mill’s approach to utilitarianism aligns moral theory with the history of ethics because he allows qualitative differences in moral judgments.
• Rawls’s liberty principle ensures that all people have a basic set of freedoms that are important for living a full life.
• The US Bill of Rights is an example of Rawls’s liberty principle because it lists a set of basic freedoms that are guaranteed for all people.
• While many people may agree that Rawls’s liberty principle applies to all citizens of a particular country, it is much more controversial to extend those same basic freedoms to immigrants, including those classified by the government as permanent residents, legal immigrants, illegal immigrants, and refugees.

[ANS: 1.d 2.c 3.c 4.a 5.c]

Write Like a Philosopher

Use the following templates to write your own thesis statement by inserting a philosopher, claim, or contemporary issue:

• [Name of philosopher] holds that [claim], but [name of another philosopher] holds that [another claim]. In this paper, I will identify reasons for thinking [name of philosopher]’s position is more likely to be true.
• [Name of philosopher] argues that [claim]. In this paper, I will show how this claim provides a helpful addition to [contemporary issue].
• When [name of philosopher] argues in favor of [claim], they rely on [another claim] that is undercut by contemporary science. I will show that if we modify this claim in light of contemporary science, we will strengthen or weaken [name of philosopher]’s argument.

Collect Evidence and Build Your Case

Once you have identified your thesis statement or primary claim, collect evidence (by returning to your readings) to compose the best possible argument. As you assemble the evidence, you can think like a detective or prosecutor building a case. However, you want a case that is true, not just one that supports your position. So you should stay open to modifying your claim if it does not fit the evidence . If you need to do additional research, follow the guidelines presented earlier to locate authoritative information.

If you cannot find evidence to support your claim but still feel strongly about it, you can try to do your own philosophical thinking using any of the methods discussed in this chapter or in Chapter 1. Imagine counterexamples and thought experiments that support your claim. Use your intuitions and common sense, but remember that these can sometimes lead you astray. In general, common sense, intuitions, thought experiments, and counterexamples should support one another and support the sources you have identified from other philosophers. Think of your case as a structure: you do not want too much of the weight to rest on a single intuition or thought experiment.

Consider Counterarguments

Philosophy papers differ from typical argumentative papers in that philosophy students must spend more time and effort anticipating and responding to counterarguments when constructing their own arguments. This has two important effects: first, by developing counterarguments, you demonstrate that you have sufficiently thought through your position to identify possible weaknesses; second, you make your case stronger by taking away a potential line of attack that an opponent might use. By including counterarguments in your paper, you engage in the kind of dialectical process that philosophers use to arrive at the truth.

Accurately Represent Source Material

It is important to represent primary and secondary source material as accurately as possible. This means that you should consider the context and read the arguments using the principle of charity. Make sure that you are not strawmanning an argument you disagree with or misrepresenting a quote or paraphrase just because you need some evidence to support your argument. As always, your goal should be to find the most rationally compelling argument, which is the one most likely to be true.

Organize Your Paper

Academic philosophy papers use the same simple structure as any other paper and one you likely learned in high school or your first-year composition class.

Introduce Your Thesis

The purpose of your introduction is to provide context for your thesis. Simply tell the reader what to expect in the paper. Describe your topic, why it is important, and how it arises within the works you have been reading. You may have to provide some historical context, but avoid both broad generalizations and long-winded historical retellings. Your context or background information should not be overly long and simply needs to provide the reader with the context and motivation for your thesis. Your thesis should appear at the end of the introduction, and the reader should clearly see how the thesis follows from the introductory material you have provided. If you are writing a long paper, you may need several sentences to express your thesis, in which you delineate in broad terms the parts of your argument.

Make a Logical and Compelling Case Using the Evidence

The paragraphs that follow the introduction lay out your argument. One strategy you can use to successfully build paragraphs is to think in terms of good argument structure. You should provide adequate evidence to support the claims you want to make. Your paragraphs will consist of quotations and paraphrases from primary and secondary sources, context and interpretation, novel thoughts and ideas, examples and analogies, counterarguments, and replies to the counterarguments. The evidence should both support the thesis and build toward the conclusion. It may help to think architecturally: lay down the foundation, insert the beams of your strongest support, and then put up the walls to complete the structure. Or you might think in terms of a narrative: tell a story in which the evidence leads to an inevitable conclusion.

Connections

See the chapter on logic and reasoning for a developed account of different types of philosophical arguments.

Summarize Your Argument in the Conclusion

Conclude your paper with a short summary that recapitulates the argument. Remind the reader of your thesis and revisit the evidence that supports your argument. You may feel that the argument as written should stand on its own. But it is helpful to the reader to reinforce the argument in your conclusion with a short summary. Do not introduce any new information in the conclusion; simply summarize what you have already said.

The purpose of this chapter has been to provide you with basic tools to become a successful philosophy student. We started by developing a sophisticated picture of how the brain works, using contemporary neuroscience. The brain represents and projects a picture of the world, full of emotional significance, but this image may contain distortions that amount to a kind of illusion. Cognitive illusions produce errors in reasoning, called cognitive biases. To guard against error, we need to engage in effortful, reflective thinking, where we become aware of our biases and use logical strategies to overcome them. You will do well in your philosophy class if you apply the good habits of mind discussed in this chapter and apply the practical advice that has been provided about how to read and write about philosophy.

As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.

This book may not be used in the training of large language models or otherwise be ingested into large language models or generative AI offerings without OpenStax's permission.

Want to cite, share, or modify this book? This book uses the Creative Commons Attribution License and you must attribute OpenStax.

Access for free at https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction

• Authors: Nathan Smith
• Publisher/website: OpenStax
• Book title: Introduction to Philosophy
• Publication date: Jun 15, 2022
• Location: Houston, Texas
• Book URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/1-introduction
• Section URL: https://openstax.org/books/introduction-philosophy/pages/2-6-writing-philosophy-papers

© Dec 19, 2023 OpenStax. Textbook content produced by OpenStax is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License . The OpenStax name, OpenStax logo, OpenStax book covers, OpenStax CNX name, and OpenStax CNX logo are not subject to the Creative Commons license and may not be reproduced without the prior and express written consent of Rice University.

What this handout is about

This handout discusses common types of philosophy assignments and strategies and resources that will help you write your philosophy papers.

What is philosophy, and why do we study it?

Philosophy is the practice of making and assessing arguments. An argument is a set of statements (called premises) that work together to support another statement (the conclusion).

Making and assessing arguments can help us get closer to understanding the truth. At the very least, the process helps make us aware of our reasons for believing what we believe, and it enables us to use reason when we discuss our beliefs with other people. Your philosophy teacher wants to help you learn to make strong arguments and to assess the arguments other people make.

Elements of philosophy papers

A philosophy paper may require several kinds of tasks, including:

• Argument reconstruction

Objections and replies

Application.

• Original argument

Thought experiments

Let’s examine these elements one at a time.

Argument Reconstruction

To reconstruct an argument, you’ll need to present it in a way that someone unfamiliar with the material will understand. Often, this requires you to say a lot more than the philosopher whose work you are writing about did!

There are two main ways to reconstruct an argument: in regular prose or as a formal series of numbered steps. Unless your professor or TA has told you otherwise, you should probably use regular prose. In either case, keep these points in mind:

• Keep your ideas separate from the author’s. Your purpose is to make the author’s argument clear, not to tell what you think of it.
• Be charitable. Give the best version of the argument you can, even if you don’t agree with the conclusion.
• Define important terms.
• Organize your ideas so that the reader can proceed logically from premises to conclusion, step by step.
• Explain each premise.

Let’s walk through an argument reconstruction. Here is a passage by 18th-century British philosopher David Hume:

Take any action allowed to be vicious: Willful murder, for instance. Examine it in all lights, and see if you can find that matter of fact, or real existence, which you call vice. In whichever way you take it, you find only certain passions, motives, volitions and thoughts. There is no other matter of fact in the case. The vice entirely escapes you, as long as you consider the object. You never can find it, till you turn your reflection into your own breast, and find a sentiment of disapprobation, which arises in you, towards this action. Here is a matter of fact, but it is the object of feeling, not of reason. It lies in yourself, not in the object. So that when you pronounce any action or character to be vicious, you mean nothing, but that from the constitution of your nature you have a feeling or sentiment of blame from the contemplation of it. (David Hume, A Treatise of Human Nature).

Step 1: Reread the passage a few times, stopping to look up any unfamiliar words—”disapprobation,” maybe. Be sure you understand the important terms, like “vicious.” (By “vicious,” Hume seems to mean “wicked, depraved, or immoral,” which probably isn’t the way you use the word in everyday speech.)

Step 2: Identify the conclusion. Sometimes your teacher will identify it for you, but even if they didn’t, you can find it. (Caution: It won’t always be the first or the last sentence in the passage; it may not even be explicitly stated.) In this case, Hume’s conclusion is something like this: The viciousness of an action is a feeling of disapprobation in the person who considers it, not a property of the action itself.

Step 3: Identify the premises. Consider the conclusion and ask yourself what the author needs to do to prove it. Hume’s conclusion here seems to have two parts: When we call an action vicious, we mean that our “nature” causes us to feel blame when we contemplate that action. There is nothing else that we could mean when we call an action “vicious.”

Step 4: Identify the evidence. Hume considers an example, murder, and points out that when we consider why we say that murder is vicious, two things happen:

• We realize that when we contemplate murder, we feel “a sentiment of disapprobation” in ourselves.
• No matter how hard we look, we don’t see any other “matter of fact” that could be called “vice”—all we see “in the object” (the murder) are “certain passions, motives, volitions, and thoughts.”

Step 5: Identify unspoken assumptions. Hume assumes that murder is a representative case of “viciousness.” He also assumes that if there were “viciousness” in the “object” (the murder), we would be able to “see” it—it isn’t somehow hidden from us. Depending on how important you think these assumptions are, you may want to make them explicit in your reconstruction.

Step 6: Sketch out a formal reconstruction of the argument as a series of steps.

• If we examine a vicious action like murder, we see passions, motives, volitions, and thoughts.
• We don’t see anything else.
• So we don’t see any property or “matter of fact” called “viciousness.”
• Assumption: What we don’t see is not there.
• When we examine our feelings about murder, we see a “sentiment of disapprobation.”
• Unstated premise: This feeling of disapprobation is the only thing all the acts we think are vicious have in common, and we feel it whenever we confront a vicious act—that is, all and only vicious acts produce the feeling of disapprobation.
• Conclusion: So the viciousness of a bad action is a feeling of disapprobation in the person who considers it, not a factual property of the action itself.

Step 7: Summarize the argument, explaining the premises and how they work together. Here’s how such a prose reconstruction might go: To understand what we mean when we call an action “vicious,” by which he means “wrong,” Hume examines the case of murder. He finds that whenever we consider a murder itself, all we see are the “passions, motives, volitions, and thoughts” of the people involved. For example, we might see that the murderer feels the passion of anger and is motivated by a desire to make his victim suffer, and that the victim feels the passion of fear and is thinking about how to escape. But no matter how hard we look, we don’t see “viciousness” or wrongness—we see an action taking place, and people with motives and feelings are involved in that action, but none of these things seem to be what we mean by “viciousness” or wrongness. Hume next turns his inquiry inward, and considers what is happening inside a person who calls a murder “vicious.” The person who thinks or says that murder is wrong always seems to be feeling a certain “sentiment of disapprobation.” That is, the person disapproves of the action and blames the murderer. When we say “murder is wrong,” we usually think that we are saying something about murder itself, that we are describing a property (wrongness) that the action of murder has. But Hume thinks what we are in fact describing is a feeling in us, not a property of murder—the “viciousness” of a vicious action is just an emotion in the person who is thinking about or observing that action, rather than a property of the action itself.

Often, after you reconstruct an argument, you’ll be asked to tell whether it is a good or a bad argument and whether you agree or disagree with it.

Thinking of objections and examining their consequences is a way that philosophers check to see if an argument is a good one. When you consider an objection, you test the argument to see if it can overcome the objection. To object to an argument, you must give reasons why it is flawed:

• The premises don’t support the conclusion.
• One or more of the premises is false.
• The argument articulates a principle that makes sense in this case but would have undesirable consequences in other cases.
• The argument slides from one meaning of a term to another.
• The argument makes a comparison that doesn’t really hold.

Here are some questions you can ask to make sure your objections are strong:

• Have I made clear what part of the argument I object to?
• Have I explained why I object to that part of the argument?
• Have I assessed the severity of my objection? (Do I simply point out where the philosopher needs to do more work, or is it something more devastating, something that the philosopher cannot answer?)
• Have I thought about and discussed how the philosopher might respond to my objection?
• Have I focused on the argument itself, rather than just talking about the general issues the conclusion raises?
• Have I discussed at least one objection thoroughly rather than many objections superficially?

Let’s look at our example again. What objections might you make to Hume’s argument about murder? Here are some possible arguments:

• You might object to premises 2 and 3, and argue that wrong actions do have a property that makes us call them wrong. For example, maybe we call actions wrong because of their motives—because the actions are motivated by cruelty, for example. So perhaps Hume is right that we don’t see a property called “viciousness,” but wrong that “viciousness” is thus only a feeling in us. Maybe the viciousness is one of the motives or passions.
• You might also object to premise 5, and say that we sometimes judge actions to be wrong even though we don’t feel any “sentiment” of disapproval for them. For example, if vigilantes killed a serial murderer, we might say that what they did was wrong, even if we shared their anger at the murderer and were pleased that they had killed them.

Often you’ll be asked to consider how a philosopher might reply to objections. After all, not every objection is a good objection; the author might be able to come up with a very convincing reply! Use what you know about the author’s general position to construct a reply that is consistent with other things the author has said, as well as with the author’s original argument.

So how might Hume, or someone defending Hume, reply to the objections above? Here are some possible objections:

• To the first, Hume might reply that there is no one motive that all “vicious” actions have in common. Are all wrong actions motivated by cruelty? No—theft, for example, might be motivated by hunger. So the only thing all “vicious” actions have in common is that we disapprove of them.
• To the second, Hume might reply that when we call the actions of vigilantes wrong, even though we are pleased by them, we must still be feeling at least some disapproval.

Sometimes you will be asked to summarize an author’s argument and apply that position to a new case. Considering how the author would think about a different case helps you understand the author’s reasoning and see how the argument is relevant. Imagine that your instructor has given you this prompt:

“Apply Hume’s views on the nature of vice to the following case: Mr. Smith has an advanced form of cancer. He asks Dr. Jones what she thinks his prognosis is. Dr. Jones is certain Mr. Smith will die within the month, but she tells him he may survive for a year or longer, that his cancer may not be fatal. Dr. Jones wants to give Mr. Smith hope and spare him the painful truth. How should we think about whether what Dr. Jones did is wrong?”

Consider what you know about Hume’s views. Hume has not given a list of actions that are right or wrong, nor has he said how we should judge whether an action is right or wrong. All he has told us is that if an action is wrong, the wrongness is a sentiment in the people considering the action rather than a property of the action itself. So Hume would probably say that what matters is how we feel about Dr. Jones’s action—do we feel disapproval? If we feel disapproval, then we are likely to call the action “wrong.”

This test case probably raises all kinds of questions for you about Hume’s views. You might be thinking, “Who cares whether we call the action wrong—I want to know whether it actually is wrong!” Or you might say to yourself, “Some people will feel disapproval of the doctor’s action, but others will approve, so how should we decide whether the action is wrong or not?” These are exactly the kinds of questions your instructor wants to get you thinking about.

When you go back to read and discuss Hume, you will begin to see how he might answer such questions, and you will have a deeper understanding of his position. In your paper, though, you should probably focus on one or two main points and reserve the rest of your speculation for your conclusion.

Original argument/taking a position

Sometimes an assignment will ask you to stake out a position (i.e., to take sides in a philosophical debate) or to make an original argument. These assignments are basically persuasive essays, a kind of writing you are probably familiar with. If you need help, see our handouts on argument and thesis statements, among others.

Remember: Think about your audience, and use arguments that are likely to convince people who aren’t like you. For example, you might think the death penalty is wrong because your parents taught you so. But other people have no special reason to care what your parents think. Try to give reasons that will be interesting and compelling to most people.

If scientists want to test a theory or principle, they design an experiment.

In philosophy, we often test our ideas by conducting thought experiments. We construct imaginary cases that allow us to focus on the issue or principle we are most interested in. Often the cases aren’t especially realistic, just as the conditions in a scientific laboratory are different from those in the outside world.

When you are asked to write about a thought experiment, don’t worry about whether it is something that is ever likely to happen; instead, focus on the principle being tested. Suppose that your bioethics teacher has given you this thought experiment to consider:

An elderly, unconscious patient needs a heart transplant. It is very unlikely that a donor heart will become available before the patient dies. The doctor’s other option is to try a new and risky procedure that involves transplanting the heart of a genetically engineered chimpanzee into the patient. This will require killing the chimp. What should the doctor recommend?

This scenario may be unrealistic, but your instructor has created it to get you to think about what considerations matter morally (not just medically) when making a life-or-death decision. Who should make such decisions—doctors, families, or patients? Is it acceptable to kill another intelligent primate in order to provide a heart for a human? Does it matter that the patient is elderly? Unconscious? So instead of focusing on whether or not the scenario is likely to happen, you should make an argument about these issues. Again, see our handouts on argument and thesis statements for help in crafting your position.

Other things to keep in mind

• Be consistent. For example, if I begin my paper by arguing that Marquis is right about abortion, I shouldn’t say later that Thomson’s argument (which contradicts Marquis’s) is also correct.
• Avoid overstatement. Watch out for words like “all,” “every,” “always,” “no,” “none,” and “never”; supporting a claim that uses these words could be difficult. For example, it would be much harder to prove that lying is always wrong than to prove that lying is usually or sometimes wrong.
• Avoid the pitfalls of “seeing both sides.” Suppose you think Kant’s argument is pretty strong, but you still disagree with his conclusion. You might be tempted to say “Kant’s argument is a good one. I disagree with it.” This appears contradictory. If an argument really is good and you can’t find any weaknesses in it, it seems rational to think that you should agree with the argument. If you disagree with it, there must be something wrong with it, and your job is to figure out what that is and point it out.
• Avoid personal attacks and excessive praise. Neither “Mill was obviously a bad person who didn’t care about morality at all” nor “Kant is the greatest philosopher of all time” adds to our understanding of Mill’s or Kant’s arguments.
• Avoid grandiose introductions and conclusions. Your instructor is not likely to appreciate introductions that start with sentences like “Since the dawn of time, human beings have wondered about morality.” Your introduction can place your issue in context, explain why it’s philosophically important, and perhaps preview the structure of your paper or argument. Ask your instructor for further guidance about introductions and conclusions.
• Stay focused. You may be asked to concentrate closely on a small piece of text or a very particular question; if so, stick to it, rather than writing a general report on a “topic.”
• Be careful about appealing to faith, authority, or tradition. While you may believe something because it is a part of your religion, because someone you trust told you about it, or because it is the way things have always been done, be careful about basing your arguments or objections on these sorts of foundations. Remember that your reader may not share your assumptions and beliefs, and try to construct your argument so that it will be persuasive even to someone who is quite different from you.
• Be careful about definitions. Rather than breaking out Webster’s Dictionary, concentrate on the definitions the philosophers you are reading have carefully constructed for the terms they are using. Defining terms is an important part of all philosophical work, and part of your job in writing a philosophy paper will often be thinking about how different people have defined a term.
• Consider reading the Writing Center’s handout on fallacies. Fallacies are common errors in arguments; knowing about them may help you critique philosophers’ arguments and make stronger arguments yourself.

Works consulted

We consulted these works while writing this handout. This is not a comprehensive list of resources on the handout’s topic, and we encourage you to do your own research to find additional publications. Please do not use this list as a model for the format of your own reference list, as it may not match the citation style you are using. For guidance on formatting citations, please see the UNC Libraries citation tutorial . We revise these tips periodically and welcome feedback.

Feinberg, Joel. 2008. Doing Philosophy: A Guide to the Writing of Philosophy Papers , 4th ed. Belmont, CA: Thomson/Wadsworth.

Holowchak, Mark. 2011. Critical Reasoning and Philosophy: A Concise Guide to Reading, Evaluating, and Writing Philosophical Works , 2nd ed. Lanham, Maryland: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.

You may reproduce it for non-commercial use if you use the entire handout and attribute the source: The Writing Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill

Make a Gift

Your complimentary articles

You’ve read one of your four complimentary articles for this month.

You can read four articles free per month. To have complete access to the thousands of philosophy articles on this site, please

Question of the Month

What is philosophy and how do we do it, the following answers to this central philosophical question each win a random book..

The questions ‘What is philosophy and how do we do it?’ are indicative of the answer: philosophy critically examines anything and everything, including itself and its methods. It typically deals with questions not obviously addressed by other areas of enquiry, or those that remain after their activity seems complete. Paraphrasing A.C. Grayling on BBC Radio 4 last year: philosophy, as the critical examination of beliefs, ‘pokes its nose in’, finding problems where it may not always be welcome. For Simone de Beauvoir in the fresh, new translation of The Second Sex , philosophy goes “straight to the essentials” and “right to the heart of truth.” (p.xii). Whilst this, in a nutshell, is the nature of philosophy, it is also its value, for, according to Socrates, the unexamined life is not worth living. Such critical examination helps to mitigate the risk of being duped, misled or deceived by untenable beliefs and spurious claims characteristic of and promoted by authoritarian sources, uncritical acceptance of which claims can result in dire consequences.

As to how ‘we’ do philosophy: in A Philosophy of Boredom , Svendsen reminds us to be wary of what Nietzsche referred to as the “hereditary fault all of philosophers” – a lack of the historical sense, facilitating an unwarranted assumption that existence in our own particular milieu gives privileged access to truth. With this in mind, we seek to identify and address philosophical problems whilst remaining aware of past and current responses, as well as alert to and explicating flaws in extant arguments, their assertions and assumptions. We aim also to be keenly aware of the findings of other pertinent disciplines and their bearing upon those of contemporary philosophical concerns, drawing upon them to help address both perennial matters and those peculiar to the present and so to our possible futures. In so doing, we try to frame our arguments rationally and cogently, such that they can be claimed to be ‘true’ – all of which concepts are themselves grist to philosophy’s mill.

Colin Brookes, Woodhouse Eaves, Leicestershire

Philosophy involves the analysis of arguments and concepts, examining the validity and soundness of the arguments, and revealing the connections and distinctions between the concepts.

This all seems a little dispassionate – a mild sort of occupation; a rarefied and refined pursuit to be indulged away from the hurly-burly of daily life, like butterfly collecting. But what does every philosopher dream of delivering? A knock-down argument! Philosophy is full of belligerent language. Using the power of reason and the weight of evidence, a philosopher exposes unsupported assertions, prejudice, rhetoric, rash generalizations, humptydumptying and wishful thinking, crushes the opposition with brilliant counterexamples, and ultimately triumphs with the truth. A successful philosophical argument forces someone to a belief, whether she wants to believe it or not.

Of course, I’m not talking about a shouting match. A philosophical argument uses only the finest ingredients: well-judged premises, and assumptions containing only the choicest facts, locally sourced rather than flown in from another planet, all kneaded with the yeast of reason.

People die from faulty reasoning as easily as from faulty wiring. In safeguarding the good name of reaso n, philosophers offer a valuable service to our fallible minds. They clear the cognitive undergrowth, clogged by vague concepts, dodgy premises, logical fallacies, invalid arguments. They mentor the inner philosopher we each have within us. They remind us that a wise man proportions his beliefs to the evidence. This matters when peddlars of quack medicines or cultish religions or faulty intelligence sincerely spin their tales. Perhaps most importantly, mindful of our humanity, our common frailty, the best philosophers do philosophy with kindness as well as clarity.

Jon Wainwright, London

Philosophy is the exchange of ideas, and it is done by exchanging ideas. Ideas examined within philosophy include: What are the ideas which philosophy should examine? Who can be identified as a philosopher? What is the relationship between philosophy and philosopher? Can philosophy be ‘done’ in isolation? What should the goal of philosophy be?

The exchange of ideas allows imperfect ideas to be examined without invalidating them, as the purpose centres on the improvement of ideas, rather than their conclusive proving or disproving. This also resists an idea of ranking within philosophy. Generally, the more ideas one is exposed to, the better. However, there is no best. Because exchange is the characteriser, as soon as two philosophies/philosophers are compared, they no longer exist within an individualized, rankable form. Exchange may occur in the form of reading the writings of dead authors, staging an internalised argument, or engaging in conversations with friends and co-philosophers.

R. Young, Holland Park, QLD, Australia

The fun of philosophy is both the global and historical tour one makes in the study of the discipline , for philosophy is not only a body of information, but a skill, like learning a foreign language. I’ve been to ancient Greece to learn the language and customs of the Western patriarchs – learning how both Socrates and Plato plied their philosophy very much through the study of language – and I’ve been to many other places to learn the language of other philosophical approaches.

Once the information is obtained, the skill is not just to learn the words and concepts, but to use them, as you would any language; to communicate using the new ideas you have learned in order to examine and solve the problems relevant to your own life and times. This is how philosophy is intended. No matter which culture or country the language of philosophy is spoken in, the message is the same: the clarification and examination of ideas by use of the correct terms and their meanings, all in the pursuit of truth, but all entrenched in a wonderful scheme of colorful personalities and world views, both ancient and modern.

Corine Sutherland, Lomita, CA

Above Plato’s Academy famously was inscribed, “Let no one enter who cannot think geometrically.” Apparently geometry and mathematics were the only formal teaching on offer; but arguably the Academy was the model from which Western philosophy originated. Much of Plato’s output appears to be philosophical in nature rather then mathematical, but this joint originating institution perhaps suggests a common endeavour. Maths and philosophy are closely related in that they each provide an integrated means of systematic inquiry. Maths provides a technical symbolic language for modelling aspects of the world, and it has a language and techniques used in common with philosophy. These sister disciplines are parallel and dependent: maths modelling and philosophy meta-modelling the world. Like maths, philosophy provides a tool kit for critical thinking which can be applied to other disciplines, and in one’s everyday life. Any claim can be evaluated, clarified, or rejected for various reasons; underlying assumptions explored; fallacies identified; shortcomings in argument pointed out, and differences of meaning discussed.

Pru Hamed, Heaton, Newcastle upon Tyne

I think the first thing we must do is to differentiate between the study of philosophy and just thinking. Thinking is our mind’s way of processing the reality around us. It exists in our minds and stays there. By contrast, philosophy is the sharing of knowledge, of wisdom. Both philosophy and thinking imply action, but it’s the context which makes the difference. Thinking is a process we all go through on a day-by-day basis. However, most people will never do philosophy. Doing philosophy is like doing math. The difference between thinking about numbers and doing math is you take that thinking about numbers and apply it to problems. One of the common ways to do philosophy is to chose a specific philosopher’s view on a question or a problem and present your response. Usually, but not always, the more adverse your opinion is to the author’s, the more intense the argument, and, some would argue, the better the philosophy becomes. It forces both parties to strengthen their view on the subject, or to think about things in a way they may not have previously considered. In closing I would say that ‘doing philosophy’ is the art and science of solving the problems of philosophy.

Kevin Regier, Fayetteville, AR

The way I define philosophy is as an activity founded on scepticism to arrive at truth, or at least, at a position that seems justified by reason. By way of analogy, imagine yourself standing on a path. The path represents a continuum from radical scepticism at one end to gullibility on the other. Where you happen to stand on the path of scepticism depends on how philosophical you are. Most of us share approximately the same point, that is, our day to day activities and thoughts are not philosophical. Making a chicken sandwich, knotting your shoelaces and depositing a cheque, are not activities that typically demand philosophical thought. Philosophy comes into play only when one thinks such thoughts as: “Am I morally justified to make a meat sandwich? An animal must die to do so…” “Do my shoe laces exit?” “Is money a real entity?” Philosophy comes to the forefront when one questions or challenges the underlying assumptions of the world.

Most people I associate with don’t question much. Not that they are fools or gullible: they are as adept at spotting a shady salesman as any philosopher would be. They are intelligent and can reason to attain their goals. What then is the difference? I think it’s that they assume more than a philosopher does.

Why? Three possible reasons:

1) Philosophy is irritating. That is, it asks questions that are too far-reaching, or question things that everybody knows are true, or poses questions that are just plain silly;

2) Philosophy has no real purpose. What can you do with it?

3) People don’t like it when you tell them that their morality or politics or thinking is inconsistent. Not many people are comfortable when what they believe is challenged (myself included). So they fortress themselves in their own dogmatism.

Those of us who are philosophical stand on various points on the sceptical path. Where do you stand? It seems to me that if one is at the extreme sceptical end, one ends up devouring oneself. For example, some there seem comfortable with the statement that there is no truth. But if there is no truth, then how can I believe it? It’s a self-refuting statement. And what about scepticism itself? At what point do I become sceptical about scepticism?

Philosophy can direct to us to positions that appear reasonable to us. However, all the varied and polarized philosophical positions leads me to believe that, paradoxically, there is more to be encompassed than philosophy (sceptical reasoning) can manage. It doesn’t seem to adequately account for my love of my wife and children, the frustration I feel when I realize my limitations, and the many other aspects of life that go beyond reasoning. Though I enjoy philosophical musing, I have come to realize that while scepticism has a use, its use is limited, and to use it to excess can actually lead one away from truth.

Kari Fell, by email

There is really no such subject as philosophy. To claim that there is such a subject is to commit the sin of reification – which is to assume that because the noun ‘philosophy’ exists, there must be some objective ‘thing’ corresponding to it. However, the term has only historical and organizational meaning: it formerly included huge areas of knowledge that are now marked off as distinct from it (for instance, ‘Natural Philosophy’ is now ‘Physics’). What do exist are philosophical studies of essentially autonomous topics, such as our behaviour and our attitudes to others; what is valid when we use our faculties of deduction; the problem of knowing anything for sure; our tastes; and our need for meaning in life – corresponding to what are called the ‘branches of philosophy’: ethics, logic, epistemology, aesthetics and metaphysics. However, there is no thing which is philosophy, as there is no tree on which to hang these so-called branches. Rather, these topics remain the stuff of philosophy because they do not belong anywhere else, inhabiting a limbo between the descriptive world of the sciences and the expressive world of the arts. The disparateness of these subjects can be shown by their widely-varying degrees of vagueness: at one extreme we have the quasi-mathematical world of logic, at the other the hopelessly confused attempts of aestheticians to impose order on the chaotically rich world of modern culture.

On the other hand, one can philosophise about anything: boredom, pain, relations between the sexes or between different species, or the miracle of the snowflake. In doing so, one simply relates these isolated topics to other topics, and so gives all of the topics more ‘meaning’ – by which I mean, more relevance to more people. Most people are in fact philosophers without knowing it, since epigrams and proverbs are simply philosophical statements which are usually not written down or challenged. To go back to my beginning, I may have contradicted myself, by saying that the notion of philosophy is itself unphilosophical, since reification is a philosophical term. Or is this a clever-clever paradox? If there is one thing that philosophy is about more than anything, it is language.

Peter Ellway, by email

The English word ‘philosophy’ is from the ancient Greek meaning ‘love of wisdom’. In ancient Greece, which was the source of modern Western thinking, philosophy and science were one. It was all a search for knowledge. Ancient Greece nurtured two major directions in philosophy. Socrates maintained he knew nothing, and he wanted to prove the same for those with whom he debated. In the opposite direction, Aristotle sought to compile as much as he could of all the knowledge that was later to form the basis of all the sciences.

Socrates fought the prestige of the Sophists, who believed that philosophy was for developing skills in public speaking. These days, tucking away philosophy in lectures for students to reproduce in notes is as much sophistry as it is wisdom: rather, a good philosopher tries to live by his principles and ethics, becoming an example. Moreover, a good philosopher should be able to elucidate on whatever problem is presented. Lecturing and writing need not be underestimated however, as these are the most prominent activities of a philosopher, and a person may get great pleasure from these sources in a celebration of the intellect. Otherwise, philosophy is essentially a matter of analysing language.

After much time and labour, I am capable of a few original ideas; but many of the great philosophers tried to create a system that was superior to all others, as if that was what philosophy is meant to do. However the truth is not that one system is correct and the rest erroneous: philosophy is a matter of ‘and’. Truth is infinite, and is uncovered in little bits. There is a Jewish saying that ‘to be wise means to learn from every person’.

Jai Wax, Toronto

For a creature endowed with consciousness, language, and the ability to engage in abstract thought, the most essential task is to determine the relationship between thought, experience, and the cause of experience. Philosophy is the craft and art of approaching this task in a systematic way, by studying the connections between concepts, and between experience and what we surmise causes experience. This latter causal power is what we call the real world. Philosophy is therefore essentially about how can we use language – words, propositions, and sentences – to craft a procedure that will give us knowledge of the real, and of our connections to it. Thus doing philosophy is working out methods that will help us to discover the relationship of experience and thought, and then to link both to a consistent concept of the real world. Our experiences and our thoughts must in some sense flow from and be dependent upon material reality. Unfortunately we have so far been unable to devise a reliable way of understanding the nature of the connections.

In the modern world, philosophy is slowly being absorbed into science, since science seems to give us the most convincing story of where we come from and what we are. However, science, being dependent upon method, cannot quite break free from philosophy, as we still have to devise what seem to be trustworthy scientific methods. That is, we still must constantly analyze and test the logical relationships between concepts, propositions and experience, in order to satisfy ourselves even that the methods of our science are reliable.

Greg Studen, Novelty, Ohio

Philosophy is the universe, or at least the general survey of it. It’s the ocean in which physics, chemistry, psychology and all of the other disciplines float, the soil from which they grow. All of the sciences are built on it. Philosophy won’t directly provide the equation for the velocity of a projectile, but it yielded the mathematics on which the equation is based. Not the vaccines, but the scientific method with which they were created – including Occam’s Razor, so that the theories wouldn’t be too difficult to work with. But philosophy is not done yet, for once science gives us something, whether a new medicine or a new bomb, we’re then forced to decide if we should use it or not.

Since philosophy is the universe, we do it by existing in the universe. Thinking is the most obvious way of doing philosophy, but we can’t overlook the actual doing of philosophy: as Marx said, in probably his least controversial statement, “The philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways. The point however, is to change it.”

Realization, then actualization. I see a girl. She’s pretty (Bam!! Aesthetics). So pretty, that I wonder if she’s even real (Wham!! Metaphysics). Her boyfriend is standing next to her. I ponder killing him (Pow!! Ethics). But, come to think of it, I’m not quite sure that that they’re dating (Bam Wham Pow!! Epistemology). I conclude that since she’s attractive, and might be free, I should at least try to ask her out (Other Sound Effect!! Logic). Yet, all of this wonderful ogling, questioning, scheming, thinking, and concluding is absolutely useless unless I actually walk over to her and start a conversation – or use the situation as an example of how we do philosophy.

Basically, philosophy is the general study of the intangible foundations of the universe, and we do it by studying this infrastructure and putting our conclusions into practice. In other words, by existing.

Matthew Hewes, Edmond, Oklahoma

To ask ‘What is philosophy and how do we do it?’ is like asking, ‘What is a book and how do we read it?’ Philosophy, as Aristotle would put it, is the study of the essence of being. This must boil down to studying who we are, not how we look or how we behave, or why we behave differently. To be more precise, philosophy is a study of ‘self’ to discover Self. Regrettably, philosophy has expanded into so many facets of life that it seems to have lost its essence. Since the world has become focused on how to do this or that, it has taken for granted what we really are. What is important is that I am a human being: the human comes first always, and I have a right to live a life of freedom. But in a materialistic world, where disposability is the norm and development is change, for millions life is too short to dwell on ‘being’. So we are all engaged in a frantic rush to grab as much as we can, because utility-value is short-lived. Is this philosophy?

Aristotle left us a philosophy of essence that we have paid lip service to both intellectually and emotionally without having embraced its true essence. But true philosophy is that process from ‘self’ to ‘Self’. Think about it. Don’t take my word.

Ignatius Udunuwara, Crescent Head, NSW

Philosophy is the lived life; you either live to philosophize or philosophize to live. You can consciously learn and continuously question your existence, and/or you can unconsciously but doggedly form habits and habitually create meaning to become aware of. However you operate, you carry out philosophy. All those who question the relevance of philosophy in the everyday, or its importance as a subject, have already proved its legitimacy by questioning it in the first place.

Albert Camus remarked that the only real philosophical problem was that of suicide. Strangely, contemplating the voluntary termination of one’s own life is a helpful beginning when explaining what philosophy is, because it focuses you on the moment when the individual desire for reason and meaning is met by the silence of the world, resulting in the sudden realisation of the absurdity of human existence. This realisation creates the dilemma that you can either continue the pursuit of reason, but in vain, or you can give in, and end it all.

Philosophy could thus be defined as the human desire for reason which is never met. It is the constant attempts to understand a reality when we know we can never get beyond our limited consciousness. Therefore you are locked in a process of continuously philosophising in a futile attempt to reify your place within reality.

Aimee Skelton, Shropshire

Between our word ‘wisdom’ and the Greek ‘sophia’ there exists a world and 2,500 years of difference. As K. J. Dover notes in Greek Popular Morality in the Time of Plato and Aristotle , by describing an individual as ‘sophron’ (the adjectival form of the verb sophia which features in ‘philosophy’), one could mean the individual was ‘careful’, ‘law-abiding’, ‘prudent’, ‘chaste’, ‘sober’, ‘sensible’, or ‘wise’. It is important that we note that what is absent from this list is anything which even nearly corresponds to our notion of abstract, objective knowledge which is often these days claimed to be the realm of the philosophers. That’s denoted in Greek by the etymologically-distant ‘episteme’.

What links these various meanings of ‘sophron’? It can only be their relation to the sphere of action – each is an instance of knowing what it is best to do in a given situation; of knowing how one ought to act in society, and in the world. Thus the Greek would describe an individual who was a model of what we would now call ‘practical rationality’ by possessing sophrosyne, that is, as loving wisdom.

J. P. Walsh, Southwark, London

Next Question of the Month

To celebrate the launch of Mark Vernon’s new book The Meaning of Friendship (Palgrave Macmillan) the next Question of the Month is: What is Love? The prize is a signed copy of the book ( Philosophy Now is your friend). Let the world know what love is in less than 400 words, please. Subject lines or envelopes should be marked ‘Question of the Month’, and must be received by 8th November. If you want a chance of getting a signed book, please include your physical address. Submission implies permission to reproduce your answer physically and electronically.

This site uses cookies to recognize users and allow us to analyse site usage. By continuing to browse the site with cookies enabled in your browser, you consent to the use of cookies in accordance with our privacy policy . X

1000-Word Philosophy: An Introductory Anthology

Philosophy, One Thousand Words at a Time

How to Read Philosophy

Author: The Editors of 1000-Word Philosophy Category: Student Resources Word Count: 1000

When you are reading philosophy in any form—a book, essay, dialogue, or anything else—it’s going to take time: philosophy isn’t the kind of subject to be taken in passively while you sit back and relax. [1] There may be ideas and claims that you don’t immediately understand, but this is completely normal: philosophy, more than many other subjects, requires actively trying to understand what the text means.

Practically, this means that before you read, you should find a comfortable place to read without distractions. You should also mark up the text or take notes, especially when an author defines any important terms or theories.

This essay will help you get the most out of your reading by providing a 3-step strategy for reading philosophical texts.

1. Step 1: Skim to Get the Lay of the Land

Once you’re ready, you can start by skimming the text to try to figure out the topic : e.g., God’s existence, what knowledge is, the morality of abortion, or any other philosophical topic.

Next, look for the author’s main point , their conclusion on that topic. In contemporary philosophy articles, this will often be in the introduction, sometimes explicitly stated as a thesis. In older writings, the main point may not become clear until the end of the text. But it’s OK to skip to the end! Philosophy isn’t a mystery—there aren’t spoilers.

When you start reading, it’s OK not to know whether you agree with the author’s main point. In fact, it’s best to hold off on forming an opinion until you find their argument , or their support for that main claim. [2] At this stage, your goal is just to know where the author is going.

Sometimes it is difficult to find the main point by skimming, especially if the text is a dialogue or a poem. But it can still be worthwhile to skim to see what’s coming up and how it’s organized. You might even write a brief outline of the text to keep track of its organization. Sometimes the author will do this for you—contemporary articles often summarize their organization at the end of the introduction.

2. Step 2: Read Slowly and Actively

Once you know the lay of the land, you should start reading more slowly and seriously, starting from the beginning. Look for the author’s argument for their main point—the reasons they provide for their conclusion. As you go, check in with yourself about how comfortable you feel that you understand what the author is saying. When you feel your confidence slipping, slow down.

Don’t assume the author agrees with a claim they’re talking about

Philosophers sometimes write at length about some view or argument, even though they don’t agree with it. Sometimes this sets up a contrast with their own views. If an author brings up conflicting ideas, it can seem like they are contradicting themselves. But be on the lookout for indications of which ideas are accepted by the author and which aren’t.

Ask yourself what you think about the author’s ideas

Philosophers very often write in response to questions and objections that they think readers will have. If you are reading passively, and not forming questions and objections, it can be unclear why the author is talking about something. As you take notes, mark up where you find yourself doubting a claim and why.

Read charitably

Whenever we can, we should interpret someone’s ideas in the strongest possible form. Philosophers call this the principle of charitable interpretation . [3]

Suppose an author argues that we do not have free will. This will seem ridiculous or simplistic, since surely people do things all the time—they’re not frozen in place! But stop yourself and ask what the author means by “free will.” Perhaps it is not the idea that people never do things , but rather that everything people do is determined by past events . This is more plausible.

It’s always worth looking for a charitable interpretation, even if afterwards the idea is still implausible. Doing so helps ensure that you are considering the best possible argument.

3. Step 3: Pause When You Need Help

When you get confused, it’s tempting to just skip ahead a few paragraphs and hope that the text starts making sense. Occasionally this works, but often you’ll end up more confused. Philosophical ideas and arguments build gradually, incorporating previous concepts as they go. When you get confused, backtrack a little ways, and try to pinpoint exactly where you got lost.

Apply your own words and examples

A good test for understanding a text is whether you can put the author’s ideas in your own words. With a difficult passage, try “translating” it into words that make sense to you.

Sometimes you understand the words, but find the ideas very abstract. In this case, fill in your own examples of what the author is saying. Imagine how you would apply a concept or a claim to a simple, concrete case.

Look up any confusing terms

When you are confused because there is a specific word that you don’t know, or which seems to be used in a strange way, look it up in a reference specific to philosophy , such as:

• 1000-Word Philosophy
• The Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy
• The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy

Some of these entries are long, but you don’t need to read the entire entry—just read until you understand the technical term. Sometimes philosophy is about how to define a concept, and the entry will contain lengthy discussion of the term. Nevertheless, a reference can still give you the gist of it.

Try an alternative translation where applicable

If the text was translated from another language, try a different translation of a confusing passage.

Talk to other people

It will be easier to work out puzzling passages with people reading the same text—especially if all of you are using the strategies above.

4. Conclusion

Reading philosophy can be disorienting, even baffling. But if you develop good reading habits like the ones above, philosophy will be more comprehensible, rewarding, and enjoyable. [4]

[1] For an introductory explanation of what philosophy is, see What is Philosophy? by Thomas Metcalf.

[2] For an explanation of what philosophers tend to mean by an “argument,” see Arguments: Why Do You Believe What You Believe? by Thomas Metcalf.

[3] Using the principle of charity in reading and, really, all forms of listening to understand other people is part of being a critical thinker. For an introduction to critical thinking, see Critical Thinking: What is it to be a Critical Thinker? by Carolina Flores.

[4] Philosophy is easier to read when it is better written. For an introductory guide to writing philosophy, see How to Write a Philosophical Essay . by the Editors of 1000-Word Philosophy.

For Further Reading

David W. Concepción: “Reading As A Philosopher.”

Jim Pryor: “Guidelines on Reading Philosophy.”

Kimberly Blessing: “I Re-Read, Therefore I Understand.”

Crystal L’Hote: “Reading Philosophy – Some Tips”

Related Essays

How to Write a Philosophical Essay by the Editors of 1000-Word Philosophy

What is Philosophy? by Thomas Metcalf

Arguments: Why Do You Believe What You Believe? by Thomas Metcalf

Critical Thinking: What is it to be a Critical Thinker? by Carolina Flores

Translation

Turkish , Korean

PDF Download

Download this essay in PDF . 

Follow 1000-Word Philosophy on Facebook and Twitter and subscribe to receive email notifications of new essays at 1000WordPhilosophy.com .

Share this:.

Quick links

• Make a Gift
• Directories

Why Study Philosophy?

What is philosophy, and why should i study it.

“Philosophy” comes from Greek words meaning “love of wisdom.”  Philosophy uses the tools of logic and reason to analyze the ways in which humans experience the world.  It teaches critical thinking, close reading, clear writing, and logical analysis; it uses these to understand the language we use to describe the world, and our place within it.  Different areas of philosophy are distinguished by the questions they ask.  Do our senses accurately describe reality?  What makes wrong actions wrong?  How should we live?  These are philosophical questions, and philosophy teaches the ways in which we might begin to answer them.

Students who learn philosophy get a great many benefits from doing so.  The tools taught by philosophy are of great use in further education, and in employment.  Despite the seemingly abstract nature of the questions philosophers ask, the tools philosophy teaches tend to be highly sought-after by employers.  Philosophy students learn how to write clearly, and to read closely, with a critical eye; they are taught to spot bad reasoning, and how to avoid it in their writing and in their work.  It is therefore not surprising that philosophy students have historically scored more highly on tests like the LSAT and GRE, on average, than almost any other discipline.  Many of our students combine studying philosophy with studying other disciplines.

The most important reason to study philosophy is that it is of enormous and enduring interest.  All of us have to answer, for ourselves, the questions asked by philosophers.  In this department, students can learn how to ask the questions well, and how we might begin to develop responses.  Philosophy is important, but it is also enormously enjoyable, and our faculty contains many award-winning teachers who make the process of learning about philosophy fun.  Our faculty are committed to a participatory style of teaching, in which students are provided with the tools and the opportunity to develop and express their own philosophical views.  

Critical Thinking “It was in philosophy where I learned rigorous critical thinking, a skill that is invaluable when creating art.” - Donald Daedalus, BA ‘05, Visual Artist “Philosophy taught me to think critically and was the perfect major for law school, giving me an excellent start to law school and my career.” - Rod Nelson, BA ‘75, Lawyer

Tools for Assessing Ethical Issues “The courses I took for my minor in philosophy ... have provided a valuable framework for my career work in the field of global health and have given me a strong foundation for developing a structured, logical argument in various contexts.” - Aubrey Batchelor, Minor ‘09, Global Health Worker “Bioethics is an everyday part of medicine, and my philosophy degree has helped me to work through real-world patient issues and dilemmas.” - Teresa Lee, BA ‘08 Medical Student “The ability to apply an ethical framework to questions that have developed in my career, in taking care of patients ... has been a gift and something that I highly value.” - Natalie Nunes, BA ‘91, Family Physician Analytic Reasoning “... philosophy provided me with the analytical tools necessary to understand a variety of unconventional problems characteristic of the security environment of the last decade.” - Chris Grubb, BA ‘98, US Marine “Philosophy provides intellectual resources, critical and creative thinking capacity that are indispensable for success in contemporary international security environment “ - Richard Paz, BA ‘87, US Military Officer

Understanding Others’ Perspectives “... philosophy grounds us in an intellectual tradition larger than our own personal opinions. ... *making+ it is easier to be respectful of and accommodating to individual differences in clients (and colleagues)...” - Diane Fructher Strother, BA ‘00, Clinical Psychologist “... comprehensive exposure to numerous alternative world/ethical views has helped me with my daily interaction with all different types of people of ethnic, cultural, and political orientation backgrounds.” - David Prestin, BA ‘07, Engineer

Evaluating Information “Analyzing information and using it to form logical conclusions is a huge part of philosophy and was thus vital to my success in this position.” - Kevin Duchmann, BA ‘07, Inventory Control Analyst

Writing Skills “My philosophy degree has been incredibly important in developing my analytical and writing skills.” - Teresa Lee, BA ‘08, Medical Student

•   Twitter
•   YouTube
•   Facebook
•   Newsletter
•   More ways to connect

• school Campus Bookshelves
• menu_book Bookshelves
• perm_media Learning Objects
• login Login
• how_to_reg Request Instructor Account
• hub Instructor Commons

Margin Size

• Download Page (PDF)
• Download Full Book (PDF)
• Periodic Table
• Physics Constants
• Scientific Calculator
• Reference & Cite
• Tools expand_more
• Readability

selected template will load here

This action is not available.

1.1: What is Philosophy?

• Last updated
• Save as PDF
• Page ID 162126

• Nathan Smith et al.

\( \newcommand{\vecs}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vecd}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash {#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\) \( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\) \( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\) \( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\) \( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\inner}[2]{\langle #1, #2 \rangle}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\)

\( \newcommand{\id}{\mathrm{id}}\)

\( \newcommand{\kernel}{\mathrm{null}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\range}{\mathrm{range}\,}\)

\( \newcommand{\RealPart}{\mathrm{Re}}\)

\( \newcommand{\ImaginaryPart}{\mathrm{Im}}\)

\( \newcommand{\Argument}{\mathrm{Arg}}\)

\( \newcommand{\norm}[1]{\| #1 \|}\)

\( \newcommand{\Span}{\mathrm{span}}\) \( \newcommand{\AA}{\unicode[.8,0]{x212B}}\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorA}[1]{\vec{#1}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorAt}[1]{\vec{\text{#1}}}      % arrow\)

\( \newcommand{\vectorB}[1]{\overset { \scriptstyle \rightharpoonup} {\mathbf{#1}} } \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorC}[1]{\textbf{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorD}[1]{\overrightarrow{#1}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectorDt}[1]{\overrightarrow{\text{#1}}} \)

\( \newcommand{\vectE}[1]{\overset{-\!-\!\rightharpoonup}{\vphantom{a}\smash{\mathbf {#1}}}} \)

Learning Objectives

By the end of this section, you will be able to:

• Identify sages (early philosophers) across historical traditions.
• Explain the connection between ancient philosophy and the origin of the sciences.
• Describe philosophy as a discipline that makes coherent sense of a whole.
• Summarize the broad and diverse origins of philosophy.

It is difficult to define philosophy. In fact, to do so is itself a philosophical activity, since philosophers are attempting to gain the broadest and most fundamental conception of the world as it exists. The world includes nature, consciousness, morality, beauty, and social organizations. So the content available for philosophy is both broad and deep. Because of its very nature, philosophy considers a range of subjects, and philosophers cannot automatically rule anything out. Whereas other disciplines allow for basic assumptions, philosophers cannot be bound by such assumptions. This open-endedness makes philosophy a somewhat awkward and confusing subject for students. There are no easy answers to the questions of what philosophy studies or how one does philosophy. Nevertheless, in this chapter, we can make some progress on these questions by (1) looking at past examples of philosophers, (2) considering one compelling definition of philosophy, and (3) looking at the way academic philosophers today actually practice philosophy.

Historical Origins of Philosophy

One way to begin to understand philosophy is to look at its history. The historical origins of philosophical thinking and exploration vary around the globe. The word philosophy derives from ancient Greek, in which the philosopher is a lover or pursuer ( philia ) of wisdom ( sophia ). But the earliest Greek philosophers were not known as philosophers; they were simply known as sages . The sage tradition provides an early glimpse of philosophical thought in action. Sages are sometimes associated with mathematical and scientific discoveries and at other times with their political impact. What unites these figures is that they demonstrate a willingness to be skeptical of traditions, a curiosity about the natural world and our place in it, and a commitment to applying reason to understand nature, human nature, and society better. The overview of the sage tradition that follows will give you a taste of philosophy’s broad ambitions as well as its focus on complex relations between different areas of human knowledge. There are some examples of women who made contributions to philosophy and the sage tradition in Greece, India, and China, but these were patriarchal societies that did not provide many opportunities for women to participate in philosophical and political discussions.

The Sages of India, China, Africa, and Greece

In classical Indian philosophy and religion, sages play a central role in both religious mythology and in the practice of passing down teaching and instruction through generations. The Seven Sages, or Saptarishi (seven rishis in the Sanskrit language), play an important role in sanatana dharma , the eternal duties that have come to be identified with Hinduism but that predate the establishment of the religion. The Seven Sages are partially considered wise men and are said to be the authors of the ancient Indian texts known as the Vedas. But they are partly mythic figures as well, who are said to have descended from the gods and whose reincarnation marks the passing of each age of Manu (age of man or epoch of humanity). The rishis tended to live monastic lives, and together they are thought of as the spiritual and practical forerunners of Indian gurus or teachers, even up to today. They derive their wisdom, in part, from spiritual forces, but also from tapas , or the meditative, ascetic, and spiritual practices they perform to gain control over their bodies and minds. The stories of the rishis are part of the teachings that constitute spiritual and philosophical practice in contemporary Hinduism.

Figure 1.2 depicts a scene from the Matsya Purana, where Manu, the first man whose succession marks the prehistorical ages of Earth, sits with the Seven Sages in a boat to protect them from a mythic flood that is said to have submerged the world. The king of serpents guides the boat, which is said to have also contained seeds, plants, and animals saved by Manu from the flood.

Despite the fact that classical Indian culture is patriarchal, women figures play an important role in the earliest writings of the Vedic tradition (the classical Indian religious and philosophical tradition). These women figures are partly connected to the Indian conception of the fundamental forces of nature—energy, ability, strength, effort, and power—as feminine. This aspect of God was thought to be present at the creation of the world. The Rig Veda, the oldest Vedic writings, contains hymns that tell the story of Ghosha, a daughter of Rishi Kakshivan, who had a debilitating skin condition (probably leprosy) but devoted herself to spiritual practices to learn how to heal herself and eventually marry. Another woman, Maitreyi, is said to have married the Rishi Yajnavalkya (himself a god who was cast into mortality by a rival) for the purpose of continuing her spiritual training. She was a devoted ascetic and is said to have composed 10 of the hymns in the Rig Veda. Additionally, there is a famous dialogue between Maitreyi and Yajnavalkya in the Upanishads (another early, foundational collection of texts in the Vedic tradition) about attachment to material possessions, which cannot give a person happiness, and the achievement of ultimate bliss through knowledge of the Absolute (God).

Another woman sage named Gargi also participates in a celebrated dialogue with Yajnavalkya on natural philosophy and the fundamental elements and forces of the universe. Gargi is characterized as one of the most knowledgeable sages on the topic, though she ultimately concedes that Yajnavalkya has greater knowledge. In these brief episodes, these ancient Indian texts record instances of key women who attained a level of enlightenment and learning similar to their male counterparts. Unfortunately, this early equality between the sexes did not last. Over time Indian culture became more patriarchal, confining women to a dependent and subservient role. Perhaps the most dramatic and cruel example of the effects of Indian patriarchy was the ritual practice of sati , in which a widow would sometimes immolate herself, partly in recognition of the “fact” that following the death of her husband, her current life on Earth served no further purpose (Rout 2016). Neither a widow’s in-laws nor society recognized her value.

In similar fashion to the Indian tradition, the sage ( sheng ) tradition is important for Chinese philosophy. Confucius, one of the greatest Chinese writers, often refers to ancient sages, emphasizing their importance for their discovery of technical skills essential to human civilization, for their role as rulers and wise leaders, and for their wisdom. This emphasis is in alignment with the Confucian appeal to a well-ordered state under the guidance of a “philosopher-king.” This point of view can be seen in early sage figures identified by one of the greatest classical authors in the Chinese tradition, as the “Nest Builder” and “Fire Maker” or, in another case, the “Flood Controller.” These names identify wise individuals with early technological discoveries. The Book of Changes , a classical Chinese text, identifies the Five (mythic) Emperors as sages, including Yao and Shun, who are said to have built canoes and oars, attached carts to oxen, built double gates for defense, and fashioned bows and arrows (Cheng 1983). Emperor Shun is also said to have ruled during the time of a great flood, when all of China was submerged. Yü is credited with having saved civilization by building canals and dams.

These figures are praised not only for their political wisdom and long rule, but also for their filial piety and devotion to work. For instance, Mencius, a Confucian philosopher, relates a story of Shun’s care for his blind father and wicked stepmother, while Yü is praised for his selfless devotion to work. In these ways, the Chinese philosophical traditions, such as Confucianism and Mohism, associate key values of their philosophical enterprises with the great sages of their history. Whether the sages were, in fact, actual people or, as many scholars have concluded, mythical forebearers, they possessed the essential human virtue of listening and responding to divine voices. This attribute can be inferred from the Chinese script for sheng , which bears the symbol of an ear as a prominent feature. So the sage is one who listens to insight from the heavens and then is capable of sharing that wisdom or acting upon it to the benefit of his society (Cheng 1983). This idea is similar to one found in the Indian tradition, where the most important texts, the Vedas, are known as shruti , or works that were heard through divine revelation and only later written down.

Although Confucianism is a venerable world philosophy, it is also highly patriarchal and resulted in the widespread subordination of women. The position of women in China began to change only after the Communist Revolution (1945–1952). While some accounts of Confucianism characterize men and women as emblematic of two opposing forces in the natural world, the Yin and Yang, this view of the sexes developed over time and was not consistently applied. Chinese women did see a measure of independence and freedom with the influence of Buddhism and Daoism, each of which had a more liberal view of the role of women (Adler 2006).

A detailed and important study of the sage tradition in Africa is provided by Henry Odera Oruka (1990), who makes the case that prominent folk sages in African tribal history developed complex philosophical ideas. Oruka interviewed tribal Africans identified by their communities as sages, and he recorded their sayings and ideas, confining himself to those sayings that demonstrated “a rational method of inquiry into the real nature of things” (Oruka 1990, 150). He recognized a tension in what made these sages philosophically interesting: they articulated the received wisdom of their tradition and culture while at the same time maintaining a critical distance from that culture, seeking a rational justification for the beliefs held by the culture.

CONNECTIONS

The chapter on the early history of philosophy covers this topic in greater detail.

Among the ancient Greeks, it is common to identify seven sages. The best-known account is provided by Diogenes Laërtius, whose text Lives and Opinions of Eminent Philosophers is a canonical resource on early Greek philosophy. The first and most important sage is Thales of Miletus. Thales traveled to Egypt to study with the Egyptian priests, where he became one of the first Greeks to learn astronomy. He is known for bringing back to Greece knowledge of the calendar, dividing the year into 365 days, tracking the progress of the sun from solstice to solstice, and—somewhat dramatically—predicting a solar eclipse in 585 BCE. The eclipse occurred on the day of a battle between the Medes and Lydians. It is possible that Thales used knowledge of Babylonian astronomical records to guess the year and location of the eclipse. This mathematical and astronomical feat is one of Thales’s several claims to sagacity. In addition, he is said to have calculated the height of the pyramids using the basic geometry of similar triangles and measuring shadows at a certain time of day. He is also reported to have predicted a particularly good year for olives: he bought up all the olive presses and then made a fortune selling those presses to farmers wanting to turn their olives into oil. Together, these scientific and technical achievements suggest that at least part of Thales’s wisdom can be attributed to a very practical, scientific, and mathematical knowledge of the natural world. If that were all Thales was known for, he might be called the first scientist or engineer. But he also made more basic claims about the nature and composition of the universe; for instance, he claimed that all matter was fundamentally made of up water. He also argued that everything that moved on its own possessed a soul and that the soul itself was immortal. These claims demonstrate a concern about the fundamental nature of reality.

Another of the seven sages was Solon, a famed political leader. He introduced the “Law of Release” to Athens, which cancelled all personal debts and freed indentured servants, or “debt-slaves” who had been consigned to service based on a personal debt they were unable to repay. In addition, he established a constitutional government in Athens with a representative body, a procedure for taxation, and a series of economic reforms. He was widely admired as a political leader but voluntarily stepped down so that he would not become a tyrant. He was finally forced to flee Athens when he was unable to persuade the members of the Assembly (the ruling body) to resist the rising tyranny of one of his relatives, Pisistratus. When he arrived in exile, he was reportedly asked whom he considered to be happy, to which he replied, “One ought to count no man happy until he is dead.” Aristotle interpreted this statement to mean that happiness was not a momentary experience, but a quality reflective of someone’s entire life.

Beginnings of Natural Philosophy

The sage tradition is a largely prehistoric tradition that provides a narrative about how intellect, wisdom, piety, and virtue led to the innovations central to flourishing of ancient civilizations. Particularly in Greece, the sage tradition blends into a period of natural philosophy, where ancient scientists or philosophers try to explain nature using rational methods. Several of the early Greek schools of philosophy were centered on their respective views of nature. Followers of Thales, known as the Milesians , were particularly interested in the underlying causes of natural change. Why does water turn to ice? What happens when winter passes into spring? Why does it seem like the stars and planets orbit Earth in predictable patterns? From Aristotle we know that Thales thought there was a difference between material elements that participate in change and elements that contain their own source of motion. This early use of the term element did not have the same meaning as the scientific meaning of the word today in a field like chemistry. But Thales thought material elements bear some fundamental connection to water in that they have the capacity to move and alter their state. By contrast, other elements had their own internal source of motion, of which he cites the magnet and amber (which exhibits forces of static electricity when rubbed against other materials). He said that these elements have “soul.” This notion of soul, as a principle of internal motion, was influential across ancient and medieval natural philosophy. In fact, the English language words animal and animation are derived from the Latin word for soul ( anima ).

Similarly, early thinkers like Xenophanes began to formulate explanations for natural phenomena. For instance, he explained rainbows, the sun, the moon, and St. Elmo’s fire (luminous, electrical discharges) as apparitions of the clouds. This form of explanation, describing some apparent phenomenon as the result of an underlying mechanism, is paradigmatic of scientific explanation even today. Parmenides, the founder of the Eleatic school of philosophy, used logic to conclude that whatever fundamentally exists must be unchanging because if it ever did change, then at least some aspect of it would cease to exist. But that would imply that what exists could not exist—which seems to defy logic. Parmenides is not saying that there is no change, but that the changes we observe are a kind of illusion. Indeed, this point of view was highly influential, not only for Plato and Aristotle, but also for the early atomists, like Democritus, who held that all perceived qualities are merely human conventions. Underlying all these appearances, Democritus reasoned, are only atomic, unchanging bits of matter flowing through a void. While this ancient Greek view of atoms is quite different from the modern model of atoms, the very idea that every observable phenomenon has a basis in underlying pieces of matter in various configurations clearly connects modern science to the earliest Greek philosophers.

Along these lines, the Pythagoreans provide a very interesting example of a community of philosophers engaged in understanding the natural world and how best to live in it. You may be familiar with Pythagoras from his Pythagorean theorem, a key principle in geometry establishing a relationship between the sides of a right-angled triangle. Specifically, the square formed by the hypotenuse (the side opposite the right angle) is equal to the sum of the two squares formed by the remaining two sides. In the figure below, the area of the square formed by c is equal to the sum of the areas of the squares formed by a and b. The figure represents how Pythagoras would have conceptualized the theorem.

The Pythagoreans were excellent mathematicians, but they were more interested in how mathematics explained the natural world. In particular, Pythagoras recognized relationships between line segments and shapes, such as the Pythagorean theorem describes, but also between numbers and sounds, by virtue of harmonics and the intervals between notes. Similar regularities can be found in astronomy. As a result, Pythagoras reasoned that all of nature is generated according to mathematical regularities. This view led the Pythagoreans to believe that there was a unified, rational structure to the universe, that the planets and stars exhibit harmonic properties and may even produce music, that musical tones and harmonies could have healing powers, that the soul is immortal and continuously reincarnated, and that animals possess souls that ought to be respected and valued. As a result, the Pythagorean community was defined by serious scholarship as well as strict rules about diet, clothing, and behavior.

Additionally, in the early Pythagorean communities, it was possible for women to participate and contribute to philosophical thought and discovery. Pythagoras himself was said to have been inspired to study philosophy by the Delphic priestess Themistoclea. His wife Theano is credited with contributing to important discoveries in the realms of numbers and optics. She is said to have written a treatise, On Piety , which further applies Pythagorean philosophy to various aspects of practical life (Waithe 1987). Myia, the daughter of this illustrious couple, was also an active and productive part of the community. At least one of her letters has survived in which she discusses the application of Pythagorean philosophy to motherhood. The Pythagorean school is an example of how early philosophical and scientific thinking combines with religious, cultural, and ethical beliefs and practices to embrace many different aspects of life.

How It All Hangs Together

Closer to the present day, in 1962, Wilfrid Sellars, a highly influential 20th-century American philosopher, wrote a chapter called “Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man” in Frontiers of Science and Philosophy . He opens the essay with a dramatic and concise description of philosophy: “The aim of philosophy, abstractly formulated, is to understand how things in the broadest possible sense of the term hang together in the broadest possible sense of the term.” If we spend some time trying to understand what Sellars means by this definition, we will be in a better position to understand the academic discipline of philosophy. First, Sellars emphasizes that philosophy’s goal is to understand a very wide range of topics—in fact, the widest possible range. That is to say, philosophers are committed to understanding everything insofar as it can be understood. This is important because it means that, on principle, philosophers cannot rule out any topic of study. However, for a philosopher not every topic of study deserves equal attention. Some things, like conspiracy theories or paranoid delusions, are not worth studying because they are not real. It may be worth understanding why some people are prone to paranoid delusions or conspiratorial thinking, but the content of these ideas is not worth investigating. Other things may be factually true, such as the daily change in number of the grains of sand on a particular stretch of beach, but they are not worth studying because knowing that information will not teach us about how things hang together. So a philosopher chooses to study things that are informative and interesting—things that provide a better understanding of the world and our place in it.

To make judgments about which areas are interesting or worthy of study, philosophers need to cultivate a special skill. Sellars describes this philosophical skill as a kind of know-how (a practical, engaged type of knowledge, similar to riding a bike or learning to swim). Philosophical know-how, Sellars says, has to do with knowing your way around the world of concepts and being able to understand and think about how concepts connect, link up, support, and rely upon one another—in short, how things hang together. Knowing one’s way around the world of concepts also involves knowing where to look to find interesting discoveries and which places to avoid, much like a good fisherman knows where to cast his line. Sellars acknowledges that other academics and scientists know their way around the concepts in their field of study much like philosophers do. The difference is that these other inquirers confine themselves to a specific field of study or a particular subject matter, while philosophers want to understand the whole. Sellars thinks that this philosophical skill is most clearly demonstrated when we try to understand the connection between the natural world as we experience it directly (the “manifest image”) and the natural world as science explains it (the “scientific image”). He suggests that we gain an understanding of the nature of philosophy by trying to reconcile these two pictures of the world that most people understand independently.

Read Like a Philosopher

“philosophy and the scientific image of man”.

This essay, “ Philosophy and the Scientific Image of Man ” by Wilfrid Sellars, has been republished several times and can be found online. Read through the essay with particular focus on the first section. Consider the following study questions:

• What is the difference between knowing how and knowing that? Are these concepts always distinct? What does it mean for philosophical knowledge to be a kind of know-how?
• What do you think Sellars means when he says that philosophers “have turned other special subject-matters to non-philosophers over the past 2500 years”?
• Sellars describes philosophy as “bringing a picture into focus,” but he is also careful to recognize challenges with this metaphor as it relates to the body of human knowledge. What are those challenges? Why is it difficult to imagine all of human knowledge as a picture or image?
• What is the scientific image of man in the world? What is the manifest image of man in the world? How are they different? And why are these two images the primary images that need to be brought into focus so that philosophy may have an eye on the whole?

Unlike other subjects that have clearly defined subject matter boundaries and relatively clear methods of exploration and analysis, philosophy intentionally lacks clear boundaries or methods. For instance, your biology textbook will tell you that biology is the “science of life.” The boundaries of biology are fairly clear: it is an experimental science that studies living things and the associated material necessary for life. Similarly, biology has relatively well-defined methods. Biologists, like other experimental scientists, broadly follow something called the “scientific method.” This is a bit of a misnomer, unfortunately, because there is no single method that all the experimental sciences follow. Nevertheless, biologists have a range of methods and practices, including observation, experimentation, and theory comparison and analysis, that are fairly well established and well known among practitioners. Philosophy doesn’t have such easy prescriptions—and for good reason. Philosophers are interested in gaining the broadest possible understanding of things, whether that be nature, what is possible, morals, aesthetics, political organizations, or any other field or concept.

• Search Menu
• Browse content in Arts and Humanities
• Browse content in Archaeology
• Anglo-Saxon and Medieval Archaeology
• Archaeological Methodology and Techniques
• Archaeology by Region
• Archaeology of Religion
• Archaeology of Trade and Exchange
• Biblical Archaeology
• Contemporary and Public Archaeology
• Environmental Archaeology
• Historical Archaeology
• History and Theory of Archaeology
• Industrial Archaeology
• Landscape Archaeology
• Mortuary Archaeology
• Prehistoric Archaeology
• Underwater Archaeology
• Urban Archaeology
• Zooarchaeology
• Browse content in Architecture
• Architectural Structure and Design
• History of Architecture
• Residential and Domestic Buildings
• Theory of Architecture
• Browse content in Art
• Art Subjects and Themes
• History of Art
• Industrial and Commercial Art
• Theory of Art
• Biographical Studies
• Byzantine Studies
• Browse content in Classical Studies
• Classical History
• Classical Philosophy
• Classical Mythology
• Classical Literature
• Classical Reception
• Classical Art and Architecture
• Classical Oratory and Rhetoric
• Greek and Roman Epigraphy
• Greek and Roman Law
• Greek and Roman Papyrology
• Greek and Roman Archaeology
• Late Antiquity
• Religion in the Ancient World
• Digital Humanities
• Browse content in History
• Colonialism and Imperialism
• Diplomatic History
• Environmental History
• Genealogy, Heraldry, Names, and Honours
• Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing
• Historical Geography
• History by Period
• History of Emotions
• History of Agriculture
• History of Education
• History of Gender and Sexuality
• Industrial History
• Intellectual History
• International History
• Labour History
• Legal and Constitutional History
• Local and Family History
• Maritime History
• Military History
• National Liberation and Post-Colonialism
• Oral History
• Political History
• Public History
• Regional and National History
• Revolutions and Rebellions
• Slavery and Abolition of Slavery
• Social and Cultural History
• Theory, Methods, and Historiography
• Urban History
• World History
• Browse content in Language Teaching and Learning
• Language Learning (Specific Skills)
• Language Teaching Theory and Methods
• Browse content in Linguistics
• Applied Linguistics
• Cognitive Linguistics
• Computational Linguistics
• Forensic Linguistics
• Grammar, Syntax and Morphology
• Historical and Diachronic Linguistics
• History of English
• Language Acquisition
• Language Evolution
• Language Reference
• Language Variation
• Language Families
• Lexicography
• Linguistic Anthropology
• Linguistic Theories
• Linguistic Typology
• Phonetics and Phonology
• Psycholinguistics
• Sociolinguistics
• Translation and Interpretation
• Writing Systems
• Browse content in Literature
• Bibliography
• Children's Literature Studies
• Literary Studies (Asian)
• Literary Studies (European)
• Literary Studies (Eco-criticism)
• Literary Studies (Romanticism)
• Literary Studies (American)
• Literary Studies (Modernism)
• Literary Studies - World
• Literary Studies (1500 to 1800)
• Literary Studies (19th Century)
• Literary Studies (20th Century onwards)
• Literary Studies (African American Literature)
• Literary Studies (British and Irish)
• Literary Studies (Early and Medieval)
• Literary Studies (Fiction, Novelists, and Prose Writers)
• Literary Studies (Gender Studies)
• Literary Studies (Graphic Novels)
• Literary Studies (History of the Book)
• Literary Studies (Plays and Playwrights)
• Literary Studies (Poetry and Poets)
• Literary Studies (Postcolonial Literature)
• Literary Studies (Queer Studies)
• Literary Studies (Science Fiction)
• Literary Studies (Travel Literature)
• Literary Studies (War Literature)
• Literary Studies (Women's Writing)
• Literary Theory and Cultural Studies
• Mythology and Folklore
• Shakespeare Studies and Criticism
• Browse content in Media Studies
• Browse content in Music
• Applied Music
• Dance and Music
• Ethics in Music
• Ethnomusicology
• Gender and Sexuality in Music
• Medicine and Music
• Music Cultures
• Music and Religion
• Music and Media
• Music and Culture
• Music Education and Pedagogy
• Music Theory and Analysis
• Musical Scores, Lyrics, and Libretti
• Musical Structures, Styles, and Techniques
• Musicology and Music History
• Performance Practice and Studies
• Race and Ethnicity in Music
• Sound Studies
• Browse content in Performing Arts
• Browse content in Philosophy
• Aesthetics and Philosophy of Art
• Epistemology
• Feminist Philosophy
• History of Western Philosophy
• Metaphysics
• Moral Philosophy
• Non-Western Philosophy
• Philosophy of Science
• Philosophy of Language
• Philosophy of Mind
• Philosophy of Perception
• Philosophy of Action
• Philosophy of Law
• Philosophy of Religion
• Philosophy of Mathematics and Logic
• Practical Ethics
• Social and Political Philosophy
• Browse content in Religion
• Biblical Studies
• Christianity
• East Asian Religions
• History of Religion
• Judaism and Jewish Studies
• Qumran Studies
• Religion and Education
• Religion and Health
• Religion and Politics
• Religion and Science
• Religion and Law
• Religion and Art, Literature, and Music
• Religious Studies
• Browse content in Society and Culture
• Cookery, Food, and Drink
• Cultural Studies
• Customs and Traditions
• Ethical Issues and Debates
• Hobbies, Games, Arts and Crafts
• Lifestyle, Home, and Garden
• Natural world, Country Life, and Pets
• Popular Beliefs and Controversial Knowledge
• Sports and Outdoor Recreation
• Technology and Society
• Travel and Holiday
• Visual Culture
• Browse content in Law
• Arbitration
• Browse content in Company and Commercial Law
• Commercial Law
• Company Law
• Browse content in Comparative Law
• Systems of Law
• Competition Law
• Browse content in Constitutional and Administrative Law
• Government Powers
• Judicial Review
• Local Government Law
• Military and Defence Law
• Parliamentary and Legislative Practice
• Construction Law
• Contract Law
• Browse content in Criminal Law
• Criminal Procedure
• Criminal Evidence Law
• Sentencing and Punishment
• Employment and Labour Law
• Environment and Energy Law
• Browse content in Financial Law
• Banking Law
• Insolvency Law
• History of Law
• Human Rights and Immigration
• Intellectual Property Law
• Browse content in International Law
• Private International Law and Conflict of Laws
• Public International Law
• IT and Communications Law
• Jurisprudence and Philosophy of Law
• Law and Politics
• Law and Society
• Browse content in Legal System and Practice
• Courts and Procedure
• Legal Skills and Practice
• Primary Sources of Law
• Regulation of Legal Profession
• Medical and Healthcare Law
• Browse content in Policing
• Criminal Investigation and Detection
• Police and Security Services
• Police Procedure and Law
• Police Regional Planning
• Browse content in Property Law
• Personal Property Law
• Study and Revision
• Terrorism and National Security Law
• Browse content in Trusts Law
• Wills and Probate or Succession
• Browse content in Medicine and Health
• Browse content in Allied Health Professions
• Arts Therapies
• Clinical Science
• Dietetics and Nutrition
• Occupational Therapy
• Operating Department Practice
• Physiotherapy
• Radiography
• Speech and Language Therapy
• Browse content in Anaesthetics
• General Anaesthesia
• Neuroanaesthesia
• Browse content in Clinical Medicine
• Acute Medicine
• Cardiovascular Medicine
• Clinical Genetics
• Clinical Pharmacology and Therapeutics
• Dermatology
• Endocrinology and Diabetes
• Gastroenterology
• Genito-urinary Medicine
• Geriatric Medicine
• Infectious Diseases
• Medical Toxicology
• Medical Oncology
• Pain Medicine
• Palliative Medicine
• Rehabilitation Medicine
• Respiratory Medicine and Pulmonology
• Rheumatology
• Sleep Medicine
• Sports and Exercise Medicine
• Clinical Neuroscience
• Community Medical Services
• Critical Care
• Emergency Medicine
• Forensic Medicine
• Haematology
• History of Medicine
• Browse content in Medical Dentistry
• Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery
• Paediatric Dentistry
• Restorative Dentistry and Orthodontics
• Surgical Dentistry
• Browse content in Medical Skills
• Clinical Skills
• Communication Skills
• Nursing Skills
• Surgical Skills
• Medical Ethics
• Medical Statistics and Methodology
• Browse content in Neurology
• Clinical Neurophysiology
• Neuropathology
• Nursing Studies
• Browse content in Obstetrics and Gynaecology
• Gynaecology
• Occupational Medicine
• Ophthalmology
• Otolaryngology (ENT)
• Browse content in Paediatrics
• Neonatology
• Browse content in Pathology
• Chemical Pathology
• Clinical Cytogenetics and Molecular Genetics
• Histopathology
• Medical Microbiology and Virology
• Patient Education and Information
• Browse content in Pharmacology
• Psychopharmacology
• Browse content in Popular Health
• Caring for Others
• Complementary and Alternative Medicine
• Self-help and Personal Development
• Browse content in Preclinical Medicine
• Cell Biology
• Molecular Biology and Genetics
• Reproduction, Growth and Development
• Primary Care
• Professional Development in Medicine
• Browse content in Psychiatry
• Addiction Medicine
• Child and Adolescent Psychiatry
• Forensic Psychiatry
• Learning Disabilities
• Old Age Psychiatry
• Psychotherapy
• Browse content in Public Health and Epidemiology
• Epidemiology
• Public Health
• Browse content in Radiology
• Clinical Radiology
• Interventional Radiology
• Nuclear Medicine
• Radiation Oncology
• Reproductive Medicine
• Browse content in Surgery
• Cardiothoracic Surgery
• Gastro-intestinal and Colorectal Surgery
• General Surgery
• Neurosurgery
• Paediatric Surgery
• Peri-operative Care
• Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery
• Surgical Oncology
• Transplant Surgery
• Trauma and Orthopaedic Surgery
• Vascular Surgery
• Browse content in Science and Mathematics
• Browse content in Biological Sciences
• Aquatic Biology
• Biochemistry
• Bioinformatics and Computational Biology
• Developmental Biology
• Ecology and Conservation
• Evolutionary Biology
• Genetics and Genomics
• Microbiology
• Molecular and Cell Biology
• Natural History
• Plant Sciences and Forestry
• Research Methods in Life Sciences
• Structural Biology
• Systems Biology
• Zoology and Animal Sciences
• Browse content in Chemistry
• Analytical Chemistry
• Computational Chemistry
• Crystallography
• Environmental Chemistry
• Industrial Chemistry
• Inorganic Chemistry
• Materials Chemistry
• Medicinal Chemistry
• Mineralogy and Gems
• Organic Chemistry
• Physical Chemistry
• Polymer Chemistry
• Study and Communication Skills in Chemistry
• Theoretical Chemistry
• Browse content in Computer Science
• Artificial Intelligence
• Computer Architecture and Logic Design
• Game Studies
• Human-Computer Interaction
• Mathematical Theory of Computation
• Programming Languages
• Software Engineering
• Systems Analysis and Design
• Virtual Reality
• Browse content in Computing
• Business Applications
• Computer Security
• Computer Games
• Computer Networking and Communications
• Digital Lifestyle
• Graphical and Digital Media Applications
• Operating Systems
• Browse content in Earth Sciences and Geography
• Atmospheric Sciences
• Environmental Geography
• Geology and the Lithosphere
• Maps and Map-making
• Meteorology and Climatology
• Oceanography and Hydrology
• Palaeontology
• Physical Geography and Topography
• Regional Geography
• Soil Science
• Urban Geography
• Browse content in Engineering and Technology
• Agriculture and Farming
• Biological Engineering
• Civil Engineering, Surveying, and Building
• Electronics and Communications Engineering
• Energy Technology
• Engineering (General)
• Environmental Science, Engineering, and Technology
• History of Engineering and Technology
• Mechanical Engineering and Materials
• Technology of Industrial Chemistry
• Transport Technology and Trades
• Browse content in Environmental Science
• Applied Ecology (Environmental Science)
• Conservation of the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Environmental Sustainability
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Environmental Science)
• Management of Land and Natural Resources (Environmental Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environmental Science)
• Nuclear Issues (Environmental Science)
• Pollution and Threats to the Environment (Environmental Science)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Environmental Science)
• History of Science and Technology
• Browse content in Materials Science
• Ceramics and Glasses
• Composite Materials
• Metals, Alloying, and Corrosion
• Nanotechnology
• Browse content in Mathematics
• Applied Mathematics
• Biomathematics and Statistics
• History of Mathematics
• Mathematical Education
• Mathematical Finance
• Mathematical Analysis
• Numerical and Computational Mathematics
• Probability and Statistics
• Pure Mathematics
• Browse content in Neuroscience
• Cognition and Behavioural Neuroscience
• Development of the Nervous System
• Disorders of the Nervous System
• History of Neuroscience
• Invertebrate Neurobiology
• Molecular and Cellular Systems
• Neuroendocrinology and Autonomic Nervous System
• Neuroscientific Techniques
• Sensory and Motor Systems
• Browse content in Physics
• Astronomy and Astrophysics
• Atomic, Molecular, and Optical Physics
• Biological and Medical Physics
• Classical Mechanics
• Computational Physics
• Condensed Matter Physics
• Electromagnetism, Optics, and Acoustics
• History of Physics
• Mathematical and Statistical Physics
• Measurement Science
• Nuclear Physics
• Particles and Fields
• Plasma Physics
• Quantum Physics
• Relativity and Gravitation
• Semiconductor and Mesoscopic Physics
• Browse content in Psychology
• Affective Sciences
• Clinical Psychology
• Cognitive Psychology
• Cognitive Neuroscience
• Criminal and Forensic Psychology
• Developmental Psychology
• Educational Psychology
• Evolutionary Psychology
• Health Psychology
• History and Systems in Psychology
• Music Psychology
• Neuropsychology
• Organizational Psychology
• Psychological Assessment and Testing
• Psychology of Human-Technology Interaction
• Psychology Professional Development and Training
• Research Methods in Psychology
• Social Psychology
• Browse content in Social Sciences
• Browse content in Anthropology
• Anthropology of Religion
• Human Evolution
• Medical Anthropology
• Physical Anthropology
• Regional Anthropology
• Social and Cultural Anthropology
• Theory and Practice of Anthropology
• Browse content in Business and Management
• Business Strategy
• Business Ethics
• Business History
• Business and Government
• Business and Technology
• Business and the Environment
• Comparative Management
• Corporate Governance
• Corporate Social Responsibility
• Entrepreneurship
• Health Management
• Human Resource Management
• Industrial and Employment Relations
• Industry Studies
• Information and Communication Technologies
• International Business
• Knowledge Management
• Management and Management Techniques
• Operations Management
• Organizational Theory and Behaviour
• Pensions and Pension Management
• Public and Nonprofit Management
• Strategic Management
• Supply Chain Management
• Browse content in Criminology and Criminal Justice
• Criminal Justice
• Criminology
• Forms of Crime
• International and Comparative Criminology
• Youth Violence and Juvenile Justice
• Development Studies
• Browse content in Economics
• Agricultural, Environmental, and Natural Resource Economics
• Asian Economics
• Behavioural Finance
• Behavioural Economics and Neuroeconomics
• Econometrics and Mathematical Economics
• Economic Systems
• Economic History
• Economic Methodology
• Economic Development and Growth
• Financial Markets
• Financial Institutions and Services
• General Economics and Teaching
• Health, Education, and Welfare
• History of Economic Thought
• International Economics
• Labour and Demographic Economics
• Law and Economics
• Macroeconomics and Monetary Economics
• Microeconomics
• Public Economics
• Urban, Rural, and Regional Economics
• Welfare Economics
• Browse content in Education
• Adult Education and Continuous Learning
• Care and Counselling of Students
• Early Childhood and Elementary Education
• Educational Equipment and Technology
• Educational Strategies and Policy
• Higher and Further Education
• Organization and Management of Education
• Philosophy and Theory of Education
• Schools Studies
• Secondary Education
• Teaching of a Specific Subject
• Teaching of Specific Groups and Special Educational Needs
• Teaching Skills and Techniques
• Browse content in Environment
• Applied Ecology (Social Science)
• Climate Change
• Conservation of the Environment (Social Science)
• Environmentalist Thought and Ideology (Social Science)
• Natural Disasters (Environment)
• Social Impact of Environmental Issues (Social Science)
• Browse content in Human Geography
• Cultural Geography
• Economic Geography
• Political Geography
• Browse content in Interdisciplinary Studies
• Communication Studies
• Museums, Libraries, and Information Sciences
• Browse content in Politics
• African Politics
• Asian Politics
• Chinese Politics
• Comparative Politics
• Conflict Politics
• Elections and Electoral Studies
• Environmental Politics
• European Union
• Foreign Policy
• Gender and Politics
• Human Rights and Politics
• Indian Politics
• International Relations
• International Organization (Politics)
• International Political Economy
• Irish Politics
• Latin American Politics
• Middle Eastern Politics
• Political Methodology
• Political Communication
• Political Philosophy
• Political Sociology
• Political Behaviour
• Political Economy
• Political Institutions
• Political Theory
• Politics and Law
• Public Administration
• Public Policy
• Quantitative Political Methodology
• Regional Political Studies
• Russian Politics
• Security Studies
• State and Local Government
• UK Politics
• US Politics
• Browse content in Regional and Area Studies
• African Studies
• Asian Studies
• East Asian Studies
• Japanese Studies
• Latin American Studies
• Middle Eastern Studies
• Native American Studies
• Scottish Studies
• Browse content in Research and Information
• Research Methods
• Browse content in Social Work
• Addictions and Substance Misuse
• Adoption and Fostering
• Care of the Elderly
• Child and Adolescent Social Work
• Couple and Family Social Work
• Developmental and Physical Disabilities Social Work
• Direct Practice and Clinical Social Work
• Emergency Services
• Human Behaviour and the Social Environment
• International and Global Issues in Social Work
• Mental and Behavioural Health
• Social Justice and Human Rights
• Social Policy and Advocacy
• Social Work and Crime and Justice
• Social Work Macro Practice
• Social Work Practice Settings
• Social Work Research and Evidence-based Practice
• Welfare and Benefit Systems
• Browse content in Sociology
• Childhood Studies
• Community Development
• Comparative and Historical Sociology
• Economic Sociology
• Gender and Sexuality
• Gerontology and Ageing
• Health, Illness, and Medicine
• Marriage and the Family
• Migration Studies
• Occupations, Professions, and Work
• Organizations
• Population and Demography
• Race and Ethnicity
• Social Theory
• Social Movements and Social Change
• Social Research and Statistics
• Social Stratification, Inequality, and Mobility
• Sociology of Religion
• Sociology of Education
• Sport and Leisure
• Urban and Rural Studies
• Browse content in Warfare and Defence
• Defence Strategy, Planning, and Research
• Land Forces and Warfare
• Military Administration
• Military Life and Institutions
• Naval Forces and Warfare
• Other Warfare and Defence Issues
• Peace Studies and Conflict Resolution
• Weapons and Equipment

• < Previous chapter
• Next chapter >

1 What is Philosophy?

• Published: May 2018
• Cite Icon Cite
• Permissions Icon Permissions

This chapter addresses the question ‘What is philosophy?’, which it suggests is absurd. It argues that it is not so much the question that is absurd as the attempt to answer it. It contends that it is much better—more reliable—to look at what a philosopher does in a particular case than to listen to what he or she says about what is being done. It also asserts that philosophy does not necessarily exist—and certainly does not thrive—in every society or culture; that religious belief or religious thought is not the same as philosophy, or philosophical thought; and that philosophy is an activity, not a set of doctrines or truths at all. The chapter concludes that ‘What is philosophy?’ is a question to be treated rather than answered.

Signed in as

Institutional accounts.

• GoogleCrawler [DO NOT DELETE]
• Google Scholar Indexing

Personal account

• Sign in with email/username & password
• Get email alerts
• Save searches
• Purchase content
• Activate your purchase/trial code
• Add your ORCID iD

Institutional access

Sign in with a library card.

• Sign in with username/password
• Recommend to your librarian
• Institutional account management
• Get help with access

Access to content on Oxford Academic is often provided through institutional subscriptions and purchases. If you are a member of an institution with an active account, you may be able to access content in one of the following ways:

IP based access

Typically, access is provided across an institutional network to a range of IP addresses. This authentication occurs automatically, and it is not possible to sign out of an IP authenticated account.

Sign in through your institution

Choose this option to get remote access when outside your institution. Shibboleth/Open Athens technology is used to provide single sign-on between your institution’s website and Oxford Academic.

• Click Sign in through your institution.
• Select your institution from the list provided, which will take you to your institution's website to sign in.
• When on the institution site, please use the credentials provided by your institution. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.
• Following successful sign in, you will be returned to Oxford Academic.

If your institution is not listed or you cannot sign in to your institution’s website, please contact your librarian or administrator.

Enter your library card number to sign in. If you cannot sign in, please contact your librarian.

Society Members

Society member access to a journal is achieved in one of the following ways:

Sign in through society site

Many societies offer single sign-on between the society website and Oxford Academic. If you see ‘Sign in through society site’ in the sign in pane within a journal:

• Click Sign in through society site.
• When on the society site, please use the credentials provided by that society. Do not use an Oxford Academic personal account.

If you do not have a society account or have forgotten your username or password, please contact your society.

Sign in using a personal account

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members. See below.

A personal account can be used to get email alerts, save searches, purchase content, and activate subscriptions.

Some societies use Oxford Academic personal accounts to provide access to their members.

Viewing your signed in accounts

Click the account icon in the top right to:

• View your signed in personal account and access account management features.
• View the institutional accounts that are providing access.

Signed in but can't access content

Oxford Academic is home to a wide variety of products. The institutional subscription may not cover the content that you are trying to access. If you believe you should have access to that content, please contact your librarian.

For librarians and administrators, your personal account also provides access to institutional account management. Here you will find options to view and activate subscriptions, manage institutional settings and access options, access usage statistics, and more.

Our books are available by subscription or purchase to libraries and institutions.

• About Oxford Academic
• Publish journals with us
• University press partners
• What we publish
• New features  
• Open access
• Rights and permissions
• Accessibility
• Advertising
• Media enquiries
• Oxford University Press
• Oxford Languages
• University of Oxford

Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide

• Copyright © 2024 Oxford University Press
• Cookie settings
• Cookie policy
• Privacy policy
• Legal notice

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

What is Philosophy in Your Own Words?

What is philosophy? Philosophy is a broad, controversial subject with a lot of different definitions. The term philosophy is derived from the Greek philosophia, which means “love of wisdom.” It is the active use of human intelligence. In a nutshell, philosophy is the study of the human condition and its relationship to nature and society. In this article, we’ll examine some of the major questions philosophical thought addresses.

Common sense

What is common sense? The term itself relates to the ideas that most people agree on and do not argue with. Common sense is based on a common understanding of a concept or principle that is based on our experience and proportional to our scale of thinking. Using common sense as a basis for philosophical arguments is not the same as using philosophy as a method. The philosophy of common sense is based on the understanding that our own experiences and knowledge are sufficient to form a basis for understanding something.

The concept of common sense has a long history and originated with John Locke in his essay An Essay Concerning Human Understanding. Common sense is the result of phenomenological experience. We are guided by our senses, but our judgment is based on our experiences. This unification process, referred to as common sense, links the various senses into one single impression. It is opposed to judgment, fancy, and judgment. Many empiricist philosophers believe in common sense and have given it different names.

In the late eighteenth century, the Scottish School of Common Sense was born. It developed as a response to the ideas of German and English philosophers . Berkeley used Locke’s doctrine of ideas as his foundation for resolving the external world into ideas. David Hume claimed that the mind is a sequence of states produced by experience. According to Hume, there is no foundation for the assumption that there is any mental substance.

The relationship between common sense and philosophy is complex. While most philosophers disagree, they both start with commonsensical principles. Commonsense, if used improperly, often leads us to wrong conclusions. Commonsense can be dangerously utopian. Nevertheless, it can serve as a tool to challenge prejudices and challenge assumptions. It is an essential part of human thought and is often an invaluable resource for the philosophical community.

Study of deep questions about human condition

The fundamental question in philosophy is how to define ‘human nature. Historically, philosophical accounts of human nature have focused on the perspective of the participant. But recent developments in the field have begun to challenge this traditional model. Some philosophers argue that we should look beyond this participant perspective to examine what is really going on. Let us look at the two main approaches to the study of human nature. This article will briefly discuss each of them.

Critical thinking is one of the key tools that philosophers use to address many enigmas. This technique has been perfected by philosophers for thousands of years. Despite the sacrifice of their intelligent work, philosophers still strive to condense the essence of critical thinking into one single principle. The resulting theory is critical thinking. Despite its abstract nature, philosophy has profound implications. Here are some of the major benefits of critical thinking:

Study of nature

Aristotle characterized the study of nature as both natural and scientific. He distinguished between metaphysical science and mathematical science, and distinguished between natural and other scientific approaches. In this article, we will follow Aristotle’s order, discussing the scope of nature as a philosophy of science . In a brief summary, we can see that natural science is the study of bodies in motion. In addition, we will consider the difference between science and philosophy of nature, and we will examine each separately.

The study of nature is often called natural philosophy, and is the branch of philosophy that treats the world of nature as a whole. Philosophers have traditionally focused on questions such as how we define matter, motion, time, and life. They also speculate on the components of the universe. A major challenge facing philosophers of nature is to distinguish the discipline from metaphysics, while protecting it from being eclipsed by modern science.

The term “nature” is not new. It is present in many ancient texts. Moreover, it has been traced back to ancient Greek. In his Book of Nature, Aristotle identifies the meaning of nature by comparing it to the concept of “soil” and “air.

In the European dictionaries, the word “nature” has a variety of meanings. It is often used as a keyword and varies widely between disciplines. But no single definition of nature is universally accepted. In fact, there are four major categories that exist. These categories are:

Study of relationships

The Study of Relationships in Philosophy is an important aspect of the philosophy of science. This branch of philosophy focuses on relationships and the properties of these relations. Philosophers usually have special antipathy toward relations or a strong appreciation for them. Their primary goal is to find out what it is about relations that makes them so special or so lovable. The study of relationships in philosophy has been an important area of philosophical inquiry for many centuries.

The Greeks studied the difference between things and relations, and eventually concluded that things could only be known through their relations. Continuing debates about the nature of relations and whether they exist in the mind have been at the heart of this discipline. Let’s take a look at a few of the most prominent theories of relationships in philosophy. Here’s a quick overview of some of the key ideas behind these two branches of philosophy.

The logical distinctions between properties and relations have become important in contemporary debate on the nature of the world. The difference between objects and people is often expressed as a matter of order. Relationships are different from properties in many ways, but they do share some commonalities. For example, properties and relations can be asymmetrical. Objects can be asymmetrical, or one way but not the other. These differences make the Study of Relationships in Philosophy essential to understanding the nature of objects and their relationships.

The different views of relational theories of reality vary in their reticence. Relative positonalism, which relies on a theory of roles, can handle relations of arbitrary complexity. It can also handle symmetrical and partially symmetrical relations. An onto-thematic role approach, however, does not provide a recipe for positing roles and instead requires systematic investigation into the nature of the relations in question.

Study of abstract questions

The distinction between abstract and concrete objects has a curious status in contemporary philosophy. The distinction between abstract and concrete objects is of fundamental importance, but there is no consensus as to what constitutes an “object” in this sense. Certain paradigm cases are classified as “abstract” (i.e., non-existent) or “concrete” (existing). Nevertheless, we still use expressions to refer to both types of entities in our everyday language.

To begin a discussion on the distinction between abstract and concrete, it is essential to first identify the categories. Although Lewis used various examples and methods to conceptualize abstract objects, he was frustrated with the inability to draw clear distinctions between them. Ultimately, he chose to define the categories according to their significance in philosophy. While this distinction is helpful in explaining the nature of concepts, it also makes philosophically-informed debates more fruitful.

A number of philosophers have offered different approaches to this problem. Aristotle, for instance, has advocated a comprehension principle for abstract objects. Zalta (1983, 1988) suggested a different approach. His proposal uses the concept of “plenty” to define abstract objects, but rejects Zalta’s idea of a “comprehension principle.”

Both platonism and nominalism raise difficult questions, but they share common ground. Platonists must provide a theory for abstract objects and explain how we have access to them cognitively. Nominalists have to provide a logical explanation of how such objects can be cognizable. In the case of mathematical objects, Benacerraf (1973) posed a dilemma, arguing that causality theories fail to provide an explanation for the truth conditions of mathematical statements.

Similar Posts

Philosophical Study of Government, Objectivism and Libertarianism

Philosophical study of government, alternative conception of human nature, Influences of John Stuart Mill, Objectivism and Libertarianism. Is there a political philosophy that fits your life? If you’re not sure, I suggest reading up on these subjects first. Whether you want to be a liberal or a conservative, you have many options. In this article,…

What is a Deep Philosophical Question?

If you haven’t ever asked yourself this question before, then you’re missing out on a wonderful opportunity to learn about deep philosophy. After all, philosophical questions are what make us human and make us unique. And while a list of deep philosophical questions can be lengthy, it’s worth the effort because it’s sure to provoke…

Plato Quotes – Unrighteousness Runs Faster Than Death

“Unrighteousness runs faster than death”, this philosophical aphorism, describes how the mind orders everything. Oftentimes, we are shackled by the chains we have created for ourselves, and this causes us to be misled by our methods. But we can change our circumstances if we want to. This article will give us an overview of Plato’s…

A Brief Introduction to Plato

In this article, I will discuss Plato’s view on the Intelligible World, the theory of Forms, and love. I will also discuss His views on rulers and states. This article is not meant to be an exhaustive analysis of Plato. The goal is to provide a brief introduction to the philosopher. To read Plato’s entire…

The Origin of Greek Philosophy

This article will explore the contributions of Pythagoras, Socrates, Diogenes the Cynic, and other ancient Greek philosophers. The tenets of these philosophers still shape our world today. In addition, ancient Greek philosophy shook the cultural foundations of its time. It was the first philosophical movement to examine the underlying causes of human behavior and how…

The Nietzsche Philosophy of Higher Human Beings

The Nietzsche philosophy of higher human beings is the most controversial and difficult to understand among the modern philosophers. This article explores Nietzsche’s response to historical nihilism, the theory of drives, and the concept of morality. It concludes with a brief summary of the philosophical implications of Nietzsche’s philosophy. If you’re looking for a good…

What Is Philosophy in Simple Words?

By Andreas Matthias

If you like reading about philosophy, here's a free, weekly newsletter with articles just like this one: Send it to me!

If you prefer, you can listen to an audio version of this article right here or in your podcast player. Look for the “Accented Philosophy Podcast”.

Philosophy and its main areas

“Philosophy” sounds like a daunting topic to many, something incredibly complex and boring. But, in its most basic form, it is very close to what we all did as children: ask questions about the world.

Philosophy is a field of study that attempts to answer questions that cannot be answered by providing some fact, but that require a deeper understanding of the question itself. For example:

• What is the meaning of “beauty”? (Aesthetics)
• Which actions do we consider to be right or wrong? ( Ethics )
• How can we make correct arguments and avoid mistakes in thinking? ( Critical Thinking )
• What it means to really “know” something? (epistemology)
• What is science and what is the proper way to do science? (philosophy of science)
• What is the ultimate nature of things? (metaphysics)
• What is a good state or government? (political philosophy)

Ethics is the study of how we ought to behave, and why. There are many different theories of ethics, which we briefly discuss in this article.

Philosophy’s aim is to clarify the questions we ask

Because of this focus that philosophy puts on asking the right questions, it has sometimes been labelled “the study of asking the right questions.” This is particularly important because we sometimes tend to ask questions that cannot be answered because the question itself is asked in the wrong way. For example:

“Does God exist?” This question cannot be answered like that. We first would have to clarify what “existing” means for a being like God. We can see and touch physical, material things, but not everything exists in the same way as a bottle or a table. For example, numbers. The number 42 certainly exists, but where is it? I cannot point at anything in the material world that is the number 42.

Or that idea for a poem that I had yesterday. Certainly, in some way, my idea exists. I can remember it, I can recite the poem. But where is it? Is my idea lying on the table over there? No. Numbers, ideas and many other things exist in a different way from material objects, but they certainly do “exist” in a real way. Christianity exists too, but I cannot locate it.

Or, say, the government of Germany. Even this very real thing I cannot locate or point at. It is not a particular building. The government offices can move to another place, or they may even be entirely destroyed (say, in an earthquake) without destroying the government itself. The government is also not the people. The people that make up the government change all the time, but the government stays the same government. If I owe a thousand dollars to the government in taxes, then I owe the same thousand dollars to the same government even if all the politicians have changed after an election.

This is why a philosopher would not accept the question “does God exist?” without further clarifications. If we think about the way different kinds of things “exist” long enough, we will end up with a much more complex question, but perhaps one that has a better chance of actually being answered.

Aristotle (384-322 BC), born in Stageira, Greece, is one of the most influential philosophers who ever lived. He worked not only in philosophy, but also wrote dozens of books on all topics, from astronomy and biology to literary theory.

The “Philosophy of …”

Apart from these core questions of philosophy, there are many areas of study that are usually called “philosophy of (something)” and that inquire deeper into some subject than normal science would, by applying the methods of philosophical questioning to this particular subject.

For example, the Philosophy of Happiness asks what the concept of happiness really means, what the conditions for happiness are, what it means to be “truly” happy (as opposed to superficially happy), what the relationship is between the political organisation of a society and the happiness of its citizens, how economic systems (like capitalism) or different religions affect human happiness, how happiness relates to moral behaviour (is it always morally right to make others happy?) and so on.

The Philosophy of Love examines what love means and how it is different from friendship or charity, whether love is exclusive or whether we can love multiple people at the same time, how the love of parents or siblings is different from erotic love, whether we can love a country or an animal, whether animals can love, what the relationship is between love and sexuality, how love’s understanding and practices have changed over the centuries, whether love is the same all over the world or perceived differently in different cultures, and how social or technological developments affect love (online sex, prostitution, sex with robots, love towards AI systems).

A Philosophy of Cinema might ask what makes a movie a movie, why we want to watch movies that make us feel sad or frightened, what it is that makes a funny movie be funny, how our perception of reality in a movie is different from actual reality (for example, how years of time can be compressed in a movie to two hours and still feel like years to the audience), and whether violence in movies is acceptable or whether it contributes to violence in society.

Similarly, there is Philosophy of Cities , dealing with questions like: what is a city, how do cities change the lives and the perception of the citizens who live inside them, what is a good city, how can we create better cities that enable citizens to have better lives and so on.

A Philosophy of Space Exploration might ask: to whom does space belong, who should have access to resources in space, how does space travel affect our views of life, the connection between space travel and religion, is it theoretically possible that we might fly faster than light or travel through time, if we discovered life on other worlds, how would we recognise it and communicate with it, and which moral duties would we have towards alien life?

There is almost no limit to the “philosophy of” sub-disciplines. There is philosophy of religion, philosophy of history, philosophy of music, philosophy of culture, philosophy of transport, philosophy of technology, philosophy of education, philosophy of fashion, philosophy of food and countless others.

Where does the word “philosophy” come from?

The word “philosophy” comes from ancient Greek. “Philos” means friend or lover, and “Sophia” means wisdom. Philosophy, therefore, means “the love of wisdom” or “loving wisdom.”

How philosophers think: An example

As an example of how philosophers might think, let’s just look at a pen. A very common, normal, single-use plastic pen. If you look at it with your everyday eyes, you’d say, this is a pen. It’s something we can use to write. And that’s it.

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash.

The philosopher would not stop here, but begin asking more questions of the pen. First, what does it mean to say that a pen is used for writing? What if I use it for something else? If I take the pen, remove the cap, and use it to stab someone, is it still a pen, or has it become a weapon? Perhaps it’s now both, a pen and a weapon. Is it wrong to use a pen as a weapon? I can take out the inside bit with the ink and then I’m left with a clear plastic tube, like a thick straw. I can use that to drink. Is it wrong to use a pen as a straw? Is there a difference whether I use it as a weapon or as a straw? And if I kill someone with my pen/weapon, is this then, at least in part, also the responsibility of the pen’s manufacturer? Would he have to justify his decision to make pens that can be used as weapons? But then, cannot everything be used as a weapon?

You see, we’re getting into responsibility, liability and ethics here, and also into questions of definition: if things fall into multiple categories, is there a primary category? How do I determine which one it is? Is the thing I’m holding a pen that is used as a weapon, or is it a weapon that looks like a pen?

But the pen has more to tell us.

When I’ve used it up, I will have to throw the pen away. There’s little I can do with a pen like this after it’s out of ink. The pen will end up in a landfill and eventually pollute the environment. It will decompose into microplastic particles, which will enter the water cycle, and end up in someone’s glass of water years later. This might be dangerous and cause cancer in that person who thinks that they are drinking water, but in reality they are also drinking parts of my discarded pen.

What should we make of this?

Should the government ban such single-use pens? Does the government have a duty to protect me (and others) from the consequences of using (and then throwing away) such single-use plastic objects? Or should I be free to make my own choice? Here then we would go into the role of the state in relation to free enterprise and a consumer society. How much power should the state have to regulate our lives? Can we be forced to abandon something convenient (a single-use pen) for the greater benefit of all in the long run? These are vital questions that are just now at the centre of the debates about global warming. So the pen has brought us to environmental and political philosophy, to questions of state regulation vs freedom, state paternalism and many more.

We could also see the pen as technology, as part of a bigger system of things that need to work together in order to give meaning to the pen. A pen alone is of little use. A single pen in the jungle would not benefit us much. A pen requires paper to work. Paper and pen must be produced in factories, distributed, paid for. They require a reliable infrastructure that provides roads, power, safety, a commercial environment in which the pen can be sold, and many other things. So we get into all sorts of economic questions about the pen, and also into issues of geopolitical power structures: the pen is made of plastic and plastic is made of oil. Few countries have commercially viable oil, and this had led, throughout the 20th century, to the enormous rise in power of the Middle East. Suddenly, a whole part of the world that would otherwise be just desert is elevated into a key political player that can dictate world-wide policies. This raises questions of international cooperation and ethical duties towards other societies, colonialism and international justice.

But this pen is also a capitalist pen. It cannot be made by happy farmers in a pre-industrial, agrarian society. It needs a factory that can process plastics and this is only available in what we call “developed” economies. Often, these economies concentrate the money in the hands of few; in this case, all the people who use pens are going to pay for them, but all that money is flowing into one direction and towards a small number of people: those who own the factory. So right there, you have a question of power within society, of power struggle, of wealth and poverty, of factory workers and factory bosses, of alienation, Marxism and the dream of a better society.

A comprehensive overview of Erich Fromm’s philosophy of happiness. We discuss his life, his ideas and his main works, both in their historical context and how they are still relevant for us today.

Then you could look at the pen as a part of someone’s self-definition as a particular kind of person. Some professions depend on pens more than others, and wearing a pen in one’s shirt pocket is a message to one’s surroundings, a statement that the wearer of the pen is a particular kind of person: an intellectual, an office worker, a teacher. So the pen, like any artefact, has a role to play in defining the kind of person who uses it, and so now we are at Heidegger’s ideas on how human beings realise their Being through their choice of tools. A “teacher” is not someone who has a particular education to be a teacher. The education might be necessary in some countries, but is not what really makes or defines a teacher. Someone in a less developed part of the world might be a teacher without having a formal education. They would still be a teacher though, if they actually teach. While a teacher with an education, who is out of a teaching job and now driving a bus, would not be considered a teacher but a bus driver. So actually having and using this pen in a teaching context is what would help define a teacher as a teacher. This pen then becomes part of the self-description and realisation of a particular human role.

So you see how much there is to talk about when we just look at something as common and unremarkable as a cheap, plastic pen. And we could go on for much longer, examining the way the pen looks (aesthetics), the pen’s contribution to society’s traditions and rituals (Confucian ethics), the power-structures that steer society towards needing pens (philosophy of technology), the pen’s contribution to one’s happiness or unhappiness (Epicureanism), the pen’s purpose inside the whole of society and the universe (Aristotle and Natural Law theory) and much more. But we will stop here.

I’d be interested to hear what your take on the question is, whether you are a professional philosopher or just occasionally interested in philosophy. What is philosophy for you? What makes it different from other areas of knowledge? Tell me in the comments!

If you are interested in learning more about philosophy, don’t hesitate to look around this site ! You can also find excellent, understandable introductions to philosophy as books. A review of the best introductions to philosophy is here:

We discuss the three best introductory books to philosophy.

Cover image by Danika Perkinson on Unsplash.

Teaching Philosophy

Ai generator.

Teaching philosophy is grounded in one’s beliefs, core values , and views on teaching , learning , and action plan for educators . Whether you adhere to a single approach or adapt over time, understanding diverse perspectives on teaching philosophy is invaluable. This article explores various teaching philosophies, offering insights into how different educators approach their practice, and highlighting the importance of reflecting on and articulating one’s own teaching philosophy. By examining these different views, teachers can gain a broader understanding of effective teaching strategies and the underlying principles that guide them.

What is Teaching Philosophy?

A teaching philosophy statement in simple terms is principle-based mainly on how a person views teaching. Teaching philosophy statements are written documents that describe  personal values , professional values, personal beliefs, and personal and professional views. This is regarding both teaching and learning.

Teaching Philosophy Statement Examples

1. student-centered learning.

“I believe that education should be student-centered, focusing on each student’s unique learning style and strengths. My goal is to create a classroom environment where students feel valued and motivated to engage deeply with the material.”

2. Active Learning

“My teaching philosophy is rooted in active learning. I strive to create interactive lessons that encourage students to participate, ask questions, and collaborate with their peers. This approach helps students develop critical thinking skills and retain information more effectively.”

3. Inclusive Education

“I am committed to creating an inclusive classroom where all students feel welcome and supported. I use diverse teaching strategies to accommodate different learning needs and ensure that every student has the opportunity to succeed.”

4. Growth Mindset

“I believe in fostering a growth mindset in my students. I encourage them to view challenges as opportunities for growth and to persist in the face of difficulties. By promoting a positive attitude towards learning, I help students build resilience and confidence.”

5. Real-World Connections

“My teaching philosophy emphasizes the importance of connecting classroom learning to real-world experiences. I incorporate practical examples and hands-on activities to help students see the relevance of what they are learning and apply it to their lives.”

6. Collaborative Learning

“I believe that learning is a social process. I create a collaborative classroom environment where students work together on projects, share ideas, and learn from each other. This approach not only enhances their understanding but also develops their communication and teamwork skills.”

7. Critical Thinking

“My goal as a teacher is to develop my students’ critical thinking skills. I encourage them to question assumptions, analyze information, and consider multiple perspectives. By fostering a critical mindset, I prepare students to become thoughtful and informed citizens.”

8. Reflective Practice

“I believe that reflection is a key component of learning. I regularly ask my students to reflect on their learning experiences, set goals, and identify areas for improvement. This practice helps them take ownership of their education and become self-directed learners.”

9. Technology Integration

“I integrate technology into my teaching to enhance student learning and engagement. I use a variety of digital tools and resources to create interactive lessons, provide immediate feedback, and facilitate collaboration. Technology also allows me to differentiate instruction and meet the diverse needs of my students.”

10. Culturally Responsive Teaching

“I am dedicated to culturally responsive teaching. I incorporate diverse perspectives into my curriculum and create a classroom environment that respects and values cultural differences. By doing so, I help students develop a deeper understanding of the world and prepare them to thrive in a multicultural society.”

11. Hands-On Learning

“I believe in the power of hands-on learning. I design lessons that involve experiments, projects, and real-life applications to make learning more engaging and meaningful. This approach helps students develop practical skills and a deeper understanding of the subject matter.”

12. Lifelong Learning

“I aim to instill a love of learning in my students. I encourage curiosity, exploration, and a willingness to take risks. By modeling a passion for learning myself, I inspire students to become lifelong learners who continuously seek knowledge and personal growth.”

13. Supportive Environment

“My teaching philosophy centers on creating a supportive and nurturing classroom environment. I build strong relationships with my students, provide emotional support, and create a safe space where they feel comfortable taking risks and expressing themselves.”

14. Interdisciplinary Approach

“I believe in an interdisciplinary approach to teaching. I connect concepts from different subjects to help students see the interconnectedness of knowledge. This approach not only broadens their understanding but also encourages them to think critically and creatively.”

15. Assessment for Learning

“I use assessment as a tool for learning rather than just a measure of performance. I provide regular, formative feedback to help students understand their progress and identify areas for improvement. This approach encourages a growth mindset and helps students take charge of their learning.

Teaching Philosophy Examples for Elementary

Example 1: student-centered learning.

My teaching philosophy centers around the belief that each child is unique and learns in their own way. I strive to create a classroom environment where students feel safe, valued, and empowered to explore their interests and strengths. By incorporating hands-on activities, collaborative projects, and individualized instruction, I aim to foster a love of learning and encourage critical thinking. I believe in the importance of building strong relationships with my students and their families to support their educational journey and help them reach their full potential.

Example 2: Holistic Development

I believe in nurturing the whole child, focusing not only on academic growth but also on social, emotional, and physical development. My classroom is a place where children learn to respect themselves and others, develop resilience, and become responsible citizens. I integrate social-emotional learning into my curriculum and provide opportunities for students to practice empathy, cooperation, and problem-solving skills. By creating a supportive and inclusive classroom community, I aim to help students develop a strong sense of self and a lifelong love of learning.

Example 3: Inquiry-Based Learning

My teaching philosophy is grounded in the principles of inquiry-based learning. I encourage students to ask questions, explore, and engage with the material in a meaningful way. By designing lessons that are open-ended and student-driven, I aim to cultivate curiosity and a deeper understanding of the subject matter. I believe that when students are active participants in their learning, they develop critical thinking skills and a sense of ownership over their education. My goal is to create a classroom where students feel confident to take risks, make mistakes, and learn from them.

Example 4: Inclusive Education

I believe that every child deserves an education that meets their individual needs and respects their unique background and experiences. My teaching philosophy emphasizes the importance of inclusive education, where all students, regardless of their abilities or differences, are welcomed and supported. I use differentiated instruction, assistive technology, and collaborative teaching strategies to ensure that every student can access the curriculum and achieve success. By fostering a culture of acceptance and diversity, I aim to help students develop a positive self-image and an appreciation for the differences in others.

Example 5: Constructivist Approach

I subscribe to a constructivist approach to teaching, where students build their own understanding and knowledge through experiences and reflections. I see my role as a facilitator, guiding students as they construct meaning and make connections between new information and their prior knowledge. My classroom is a dynamic environment where students are encouraged to experiment, discuss, and collaborate. Through project-based learning and real-world applications, I aim to make learning relevant and engaging, helping students to see the value and purpose of their education.

Example 6: Growth Mindset

My teaching philosophy is inspired by the concept of a growth mindset, the belief that abilities and intelligence can be developed through dedication and hard work. I strive to instill this mindset in my students by creating a positive and encouraging classroom atmosphere. I celebrate effort, perseverance, and improvement, and I help students understand that mistakes are an essential part of the learning process. By setting high expectations and providing the support needed to meet them, I aim to help students develop resilience, confidence, and a lifelong love of learning.

Example 1: Holistic Development

Philosophy Statement: I believe that education should foster the holistic development of students, addressing their intellectual, emotional, social, and ethical growth. My teaching aims to create a supportive and nurturing environment where students can develop critical thinking skills, emotional intelligence, and a strong sense of ethics.

Implementation:

• Integrated Curriculum: I design my curriculum to include elements that promote not just academic learning but also personal growth, such as ethical discussions, emotional regulation strategies, and social skills development.
• Mentorship: I view my role as a mentor who guides students not just academically but also in their personal development, offering advice and support on a range of issues.
• Community Engagement: I incorporate service-learning projects that encourage students to engage with and contribute to their communities, fostering a sense of social responsibility and ethical awareness.

Example 2: Culturally Responsive Teaching

Philosophy Statement: I believe that culturally responsive teaching is essential in today’s diverse educational landscape. My goal is to create an inclusive learning environment that respects and values the diverse cultural backgrounds of my students, integrating their experiences and perspectives into the learning process.

• Diverse Content: I include diverse voices and perspectives in my curriculum, ensuring that students see themselves reflected in the course material and learn about cultures different from their own.
• Inclusive Pedagogy: I use teaching methods that are inclusive and adaptable to different cultural contexts, such as storytelling, collaborative learning, and culturally relevant examples.
• Student Voice: I encourage students to share their cultural experiences and perspectives in class discussions and assignments, fostering a richer and more inclusive learning environment.

Example 3: Research-Driven Instruction

Philosophy Statement: I believe that integrating research into the teaching process enhances learning by encouraging students to engage deeply with the subject matter and develop critical thinking skills. My approach emphasizes the importance of research and evidence-based learning.

• Research Projects: I design assignments that require students to conduct their own research, analyze data, and present their findings. This helps them develop essential skills in inquiry and analysis.
• Evidence-Based Teaching: I base my teaching strategies on current educational research, continuously updating my methods to incorporate the latest findings in pedagogy.
• Research Mentorship: I mentor students in their research projects, providing guidance and support throughout the research process, from formulating questions to presenting results.

Example 4: Lifelong Learning and Adaptability

Philosophy Statement: I believe that education should prepare students for lifelong learning and adaptability in an ever-changing world. My teaching philosophy focuses on equipping students with the skills and mindset needed to continuously learn, adapt, and thrive in their personal and professional lives.

• Skill Development: I emphasize the development of transferable skills such as critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication that students can apply in various contexts.
• Adaptability: I incorporate flexible and adaptive learning activities that encourage students to embrace change and uncertainty, preparing them for the dynamic nature of the modern world.
• Continuous Improvement: I model a commitment to lifelong learning by continuously seeking professional development opportunities and staying current with advancements in my field.

Example 5: Reflective Practice

Philosophy Statement: I believe that reflective practice is key to effective learning and teaching. By encouraging students to reflect on their experiences and learning processes, I help them develop self-awareness and a deeper understanding of the material.

• Reflective Assignments: I include assignments that require students to reflect on their learning experiences, such as reflective journals, self-assessments, and reflective essays.
• Feedback Loops: I provide regular, constructive feedback and encourage students to reflect on this feedback and use it to improve their performance.
• Metacognitive Strategies: I teach metacognitive strategies that help students become more aware of their learning processes and develop skills to monitor and regulate their own learning.

Example 6: Problem-Based Learning

Philosophy Statement: I believe that problem-based learning (PBL) is an effective way to engage students and develop their critical thinking and problem-solving skills. By presenting students with real-world problems, I encourage them to apply their knowledge and skills in meaningful ways.

• Real-World Problems: I design course activities and assignments around real-world problems that are relevant to the course content, encouraging students to apply what they have learned in practical contexts.
• Collaborative Learning: I use group work and collaborative projects as a key component of PBL, helping students learn to work effectively with others and leverage diverse perspectives.
• Facilitative Teaching: I take on the role of a facilitator, guiding students through the problem-solving process and providing support and resources as needed, rather than simply delivering information.

Teaching Philosophy Examples for Higher Education

Teaching philosophy examples for high school, example 1: growth mindset and resilience.

Teaching Philosophy:

I believe that fostering a growth mindset is crucial for students’ academic and personal development. In my classroom, I emphasize the value of effort, perseverance, and learning from mistakes. I create a supportive environment where students are encouraged to take risks and view challenges as opportunities to grow. By modeling resilience and a positive attitude towards learning, I help students build the confidence and grit necessary to overcome obstacles and achieve their goals.

Example 2: Real-World Connections

Education should connect students to the real world, making learning relevant and meaningful. I design my lessons to bridge the gap between classroom concepts and real-life applications. Through project-based learning, community involvement, and interdisciplinary approaches, I aim to show students the practical significance of their studies. This approach not only enhances engagement but also helps students develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills that are essential for their future careers and everyday lives.

Example 3: Collaborative Learning

Collaboration is a key component of effective learning. I believe that students learn best when they work together, share ideas, and support each other’s growth. In my classroom, I encourage group activities, peer tutoring, and cooperative projects. By fostering a collaborative learning environment, I help students develop communication, teamwork, and leadership skills. This not only enhances their academic performance but also prepares them for success in a collaborative world.

Example 4: Individualized Instruction

Every student is unique, with their own strengths, interests, and learning needs. My teaching philosophy revolves around individualized instruction, where I tailor my teaching strategies to meet the diverse needs of my students. By using formative assessments, differentiated instruction, and personalized feedback, I ensure that each student receives the support and challenge they need to thrive. My goal is to help every student reach their full potential and develop a lifelong love of learning.

Example 5: Integrating Arts and Creativity

Creativity and the arts play a vital role in education, enhancing students’ cognitive abilities and emotional well-being. I integrate arts and creative activities into my teaching to make learning more engaging and enjoyable. Whether through visual arts, music, drama, or creative writing, I encourage students to express themselves and explore their creativity. This approach not only enriches their learning experience but also helps them develop critical thinking, empathy, and a deeper appreciation for the world around them.

Teaching Philosophy Essay

Fostering a Growth Mindset

Central to my teaching philosophy is the concept of a growth mindset, as advocated by psychologist Carol Dweck. I believe that intelligence and abilities are not fixed traits but can be developed through dedication and hard work. This perspective is essential in encouraging students to embrace challenges, persist in the face of setbacks, and view effort as a pathway to mastery. To nurture a growth mindset, I emphasize the importance of effort, strategy, and progress over innate ability. I provide constructive feedback that focuses on specific strategies and behaviors, rather than labeling students’ abilities, and celebrate improvements and perseverance alongside achievements.

Creating an Inclusive and Supportive Classroom Environment

An inclusive and supportive classroom environment is vital for student engagement and success. I am committed to creating a space where all students feel valued, respected, and empowered to express their ideas and perspectives. This involves recognizing and addressing diverse learning needs, backgrounds, and experiences. I employ differentiated instruction strategies to cater to varied learning styles and provide multiple means of engagement, representation, and expression. By fostering a culture of mutual respect and collaboration, I encourage students to learn from one another and develop a sense of community and belonging.

Integrating Real-World Applications

Connecting classroom learning to real-world applications is crucial in making education relevant and meaningful. I strive to bridge the gap between theoretical knowledge and practical experience by incorporating real-life examples, case studies, and problem-solving activities into my lessons. This approach not only enhances students’ understanding and retention of concepts but also equips them with critical thinking and problem-solving skills essential for their future endeavors. By demonstrating the practical implications of academic content, I aim to inspire students to see the value and relevance of their education beyond the classroom.

Reflective Practice and Continuous Improvement

As an educator, I am committed to reflective practice and continuous improvement. I regularly assess and refine my teaching methods based on feedback from students, colleagues, and self-reflection. I stay informed about current educational research and best practices and seek professional development opportunities to enhance my skills and knowledge. By modeling a commitment to lifelong learning, I aim to inspire my students to adopt a similar mindset.

In conclusion, my teaching philosophy is grounded in the belief that every student has the potential to succeed when provided with a supportive, inclusive, and engaging learning environment. By fostering a growth mindset, creating a sense of community, integrating real-world applications, and continuously reflecting on and improving my practice, I strive to empower my students to become confident, curious, and capable learners. Education is not merely about imparting knowledge but about inspiring a lifelong love of learning and equipping students with the skills and mindset needed to navigate and contribute to an ever-changing world.

How to Write a Teaching Philosophy?

1. reflect on your beliefs about teaching and learning.

Consider what you believe about:

• The purpose of education.
• How students learn best.
• The role of a teacher in the learning process.
• The most important outcomes of education.

2. Identify Your Teaching Methods

Think about the strategies and techniques you use or plan to use:

• How do you engage students?
• How do you assess student understanding and progress?
• What instructional methods do you prefer (e.g., lectures, group work, hands-on activities)?

3. Provide Examples

Use specific examples to illustrate your teaching methods and beliefs:

• Describe a successful lesson or activity.
• Share anecdotes or experiences that highlight your approach.
• Explain how you’ve adapted to meet the needs of diverse learners.

4. Discuss Your Goals for Students

What do you hope students gain from your teaching?

• Critical thinking skills .
• Subject-specific knowledge.
• Lifelong learning habits.

5. Explain How You Assess and Reflect on Your Teaching

How do you measure your effectiveness as a teacher?

• Student feedback.
• Self-reflection.
• Professional development activities.

6. Keep It Personal and Specific

Your teaching philosophy should reflect your unique approach and experiences. Avoid generic statements; instead, focus on what makes your teaching style distinctive.

7. Structure Your Statement

A well-organized teaching philosophy might include:

• Introduction : Brief overview of your teaching beliefs.
• Body : Detailed description of your teaching methods, goals, and examples.
• Conclusion : Summary of your teaching philosophy and its implications for your future practice.

8. Revise and Edit

• Ensure clarity and coherence.
• Seek feedback from colleagues or mentors.
• Revise for conciseness and impact.

Why teaching Philosophy is Important?

A teaching philosophy is important for several reasons, serving as a foundational element for educators. Here are key reasons why it’s important:

1. Clarifies Your Teaching Approach

• Articulates Beliefs : It helps you articulate your beliefs about education, learning, and teaching.
• Defines Methods : It clarifies the methods and strategies you use in the classroom.

2. Guides Professional Development

• Reflection : Writing a teaching philosophy encourages self-reflection on your teaching practices and experiences.
• Improvement : It highlights areas for professional growth and improvement.

3. Enhances Communication

• Transparency : It provides transparency to students, colleagues, and administrators about your approach to teaching.
• Expectations : It sets clear expectations for your students about what they can expect from you as an educator.

4. Supports Career Advancement

• Job Applications : A well-crafted teaching philosophy is often required in job applications for teaching positions.
• Promotion and Tenure : It can be a critical component of promotion and tenure dossiers in academic settings.

5. Improves Student Learning

• Consistency : A teaching philosophy helps maintain consistency in teaching practices, which can improve student learning outcomes.
• Alignment : It ensures that your teaching methods are aligned with your educational goals and objectives.

1. Teaching Philosophy Template

2. Teaching Philosophy Sample

3. Teaching Philosophy Statement

4. Components of Teaching Philosophy Statement

A teaching philosophy is a reflective statement outlining an educator’s beliefs, values, and practices about teaching and learning.

It guides instructional strategies, shapes classroom environment, and communicates teaching values to students and colleagues.

Reflect on your teaching beliefs, methods, and goals. Begin with a clear introduction stating your educational principles.

Typically, a teaching philosophy is 1-2 pages long, concisely covering key points.

It provides a consistent, thoughtful approach to teaching, enhancing student learning and engagement.

Yes, it evolves with new experiences, reflections, and educational advancements.

Yes, concrete examples illustrate your teaching practices and philosophy in action.

Revisit and update it annually or when significant teaching experiences occur.

Use it in job applications, tenure dossiers, and as a reflective tool for continuous improvement.

Text prompt

• Instructive
• Professional

10 Examples of Public speaking

20 Examples of Gas lighting

Symposium of Student Scholars

• < Previous Event
• Next Event >

Home > Data and Research > Research Centers > OUR > Student Scholars > spring2024 > 317

Spring 2024 Symposium of Student Scholars

Making Abstract Philosophy Concrete Through Collaborative Art

Logan Mossor Follow

• Disciplines

Comparative Philosophy | Continental Philosophy | Interactive Arts | Interdisciplinary Arts and Media | Other Philosophy

Abstract (300 words maximum)

Philosophy and art overlap and entwine throughout history. Existentialist philosopher Albert Camus suggests artistic creation as an answer to existing in an absurd world. Chicana feminist philosopher Gloria Anzaldúa used hand drawn illustrations called "glifos" during her lectures to aid attendees in better understanding her philosophy. The late thirteenth century ink painting "The Pleasures of Fishes" by Zhou Dongqing depicts a passage from the book "Zhuangzi," an important Daoist text. In each of these examples, art is a means to better understand philosophy. I am a visual artist, and I intend to use one of my own chosen artforms, collaborative art, to accomplish the same end. As a collaborative artist, I gather many people together to realize one artistic vision. I have staged over twenty collaborative art events over the past three years, and have used research methods from Rita Irwin’s essay “Communities of A/r/tographic Practice” and concepts from Allan Kaprow’s essay “Manifesto” to better understand how participants are impacted by collaborative art. My research has led me to believe that collaborative art will excel at making abstract philosophical concepts accessible to a larger audience. To explore this belief, I intend to stage three collaborative art events, each one designed to introduce a philosophical movement in a concrete and accessible way. The first event will be inspired by Albert Camus' "The Myth of Sisyphus," and will demonstrate existentialist philosophy. The second event will be inspired by Gloria E. Anzaldúa's "Light in the Dark/Luz en Lo Oscuro: Rewriting Identity, Spirituality, Reality," and will demonstrate Chicana feminist philosophy. The third event will be inspired by Laozi's "Daodejing" and Zhuangzi's "Zhuangzi," and will demonstrate Daoist philosophy. My presentation of these three events will demonstrate the value of using collaborative art as a means of teaching difficult philosophical concepts.

Academic department under which the project should be listed

COTA - Art and Design

Primary Investigator (PI) Name

Jonathan Fisher

This document is currently not available here.

Advanced Search

• Notify me via email or RSS
• All Collections
• Conferences
• Faculty Works
• Open Access
• Research Support
• Student Works
• Symposium Website

At a Glance

• Top 10 Downloads All time
• Recent Additions 20 most recent additions
• Activity by year

Paper of the Day

• Understanding Millennials Regarding Online Versus In-Store Grocery Shopping Preferences Timothy L. Schauer
• Explore works by discipline
• View Larger
• Find us on Facebook

Home | About | FAQ | My Account | Accessibility Statement

Privacy Copyright