|
[ Back to PHI 352 Home ] [ Link to
Sample Commentaries ] Writing Philosophical Commentaries -Compiled by Donovan Wishon, Fall 2004
Writing a philosophical commentary or response is slightly different from writing a paper in other classes (even other philosophy classes). Because professional commentaries are often presented at philosophy conferences, they need to be fairly condensed and organized so that their audience can readily follow the discussion. Generally, they should include clear subdivisions of sections, each of which have specific roles within the commentary. While Dave will furnish some sample commentaries to illustrate how they should be organized, the following describes the format for a typical philosophical commentary, and also provides some more general writing advice.
I. Introduction:
(1) A philosophical commentary should begin with a clear statement of the philosophical issue or problem addressed in the target paper. The problem should be “situated in intellectual space.” Often this is best accomplished by means of a quick example of the philosophical problem that the author of the target article addresses. You want your audience to have a fairly clear idea of the general philosophical issues under discussion as well as the importance of those issues. (2) Second, your introduction should include a clear statement of the target author’s position, conclusion, or resolution regarding that philosophical issue or problem. (3) Finally, your introduction should include a brief statement of your aims in your commentary. This should be an evaluative statement of the target author’s position as well as a statement of your position on the philosophical issue or problem. This does not mean that your commentary must be critical of the target article’s position. There are several strategies you might possibly employ. (a) You might want to expose some weakness, flaw, or gap in the reasoning in the position argued in the target article. (b) You might want to challenge the soundness of the article; in other words, you might want to criticize the target article’s position for resting upon a dubious premise or principle. (c) You might want to extend the conclusions of the target article to additional consequences not considered within the target article. (d) You might want bolster the argument within the target article by providing extra support for a weak premise or inference or by anticipating and addressing possible criticisms of the target article’s position. Note: You will do the actual work of employing these possible strategies within the body of your commentary; however, you want to clearly state what the aim of your commentary will be (for example, to criticize, to amplify/extend, or to further support the article’s position). These of course are not the only strategies you might employ; feel free to discuss any other ideas you might have with Dave or the editor of the class journal.
II. Short Distillation of Target Article’s Argument:
The second section of your commentary should be a short distillation of the target paper’s argument. This section should be between 1 and 3 paragraphs long. Summarize the author’s argument. Do not rehash your target paper blow-by-blow. Instead, condense the target article’s argument into its key propositions, defenses of premises, and conclusions. Try to give a charitable presentation of the target article and try to avoid evaluation.
III. Defending Your Assessment:
The largest portion of your commentary will be the defense of your assessment. You will probably want to begin by restating your evaluation of the target article. This is also the section where you do the actual work of attacking the reasoning of the target article’s arguments, attacking its soundness, pointing out additional implications of its arguments, or bolstering the argument’s conclusion by offering additional support for poorly-defended premises. Counterexamples are one highly effective way of demonstrating how a target article’s reasoning is bad. Whether you criticize or support the target article’s position, it is a good idea to anticipate possible criticisms of your own position. You shouldn’t try to address every possible criticism of your position, but you need to defend your position. Try to be concise and to use revealing examples. The length of this section of your commentary will be variable, but a length of 4 paragraphs is a good general guideline.
IV. Conclusion:
Your conclusion should restate your thesis and situate your position in “intellectual space.” If you supported the target article’s position, you might state what work still needs to be done. If you criticized the target article, you might suggest preferred strategies for addressing unresolved philosophical issues. This is your last chance to convince your reader that they have not wasted their time reading your commentary.
Some Additional Suggestions:
(1) Be sure to give your commentary a title. The editor is quite likely crazy, and you never know what title your commentary will end up with if you leave it up to someone else. (2) Your assessment claim should be your thesis. Be specific! Make your evaluation claim and indicate how your argument is going to unfold (i.e. how you are going to go about defending your assessment). Think of your thesis as providing a road map of what is coming up in the rest of your commentary. (3) Make sure you cite all of your quotes and paraphrasing. Furthermore, try to avoid quoting. Quote only when you think it is absolutely necessary. Paraphrasing in your own words is almost always preferable to direct quotes. However, if you must quote, be sure to introduce the quote. Also, you should explicate the quote and try to give some reason as to why it is there. (4) Keep in mind that commentaries are not simply a “trashing” of someone else’s work (even though that is fun). Be charitable. Point out what is valuable in the target article as well as what could stand for improvement. Don’t be a jerk. (5) Finally, be prepared to revise (and revise again). The editor and referee reports will almost certainly offer helpful suggestions for improving your commentary.
|