1. Philosophy Essay Writing
A few reminders before your gradebook assessment…

2. You already know the key things…

3. To improve, think about the weight of the arguments.
You can do this as you analyse the arguments themselves, as well as in the conclusion.
Think of some weighty words and phrases…

6. Judging the weight of criticisms -things to consider…
How strong is the criticism? Does it work?
Which bit of the argument is it attacking? One premise? The whole thing?
Does it refute the argument completely? Or just make it weaker/ harder to accept?
If it raises questions with the argument, how easily can the proponent of the argument answer them?
If there is a response to the criticism, how successful is it? Does the argument now work but in a weaker form?

7. Language to use in evaluations…
Make sure your conclusion is the right strength for your argument. There is a big difference between arguing that something is the case, and that it may be the case. Eg. After arguing that Anselm’s ontological argument is flawed, don’t conclude “therefore, God doesn’t exist”. All you have proved is that Anselm’s argument hasn’t proved that God does exist.
Remember that having a clear position does NOT mean 100% agreement or 100% disagreement with the claim. Your conclusion can be that elements of the question are true but not others. Your answer can be “it depends”, as long as you state exactly what it depends on.

8. Bad ways of evaluating arguments…
There are lots of criticisms of this argument, therefore it must be wrong.
This philosopher never responded to the criticism, therefore his argument has failed.
The arguments for this view are very complicated, therefore it can’t be true.
I don’t think this argument is very convincing, therefore it must be wrong.
This philosopher believed in God, therefore his argument must be wrong.

9. Better ways of evaluating arguments…
Although this philosopher can respond to these criticisms, in doing so he has significantly weakened his argument.
In order to accept this view, we must also accept unreasonable consequences such as…
Although the premises seem individually plausible, the logic of the argument is flawed, meaning that they don’t give sufficient support for the conclusion.
As X has shown, this philosopher cannot overcome the weakness in premise 2, so this argument remains unconvincing.
While he may be able to overcome problems 1,2 and 3, the crucial weakness in this argument is …
We can accept this conclusion, as long as we can also accept …