SUGGESTIONS FOR WRITING PAPERS

based on a handout by Professor Suisheng Zhao

Your papers will be evaluated not on what position you take, but on the accuracy and relevance of your data, the clarity of your prose, and quality of the arguments you make to support your views. Your paper should have a point to make, and it should support the point by making an argument. If you are not familiar with what it means to "make an argument," this page is designed to help you. It is meant to be suggestive only; what follows are "hints" on how to make a good argument. They are emphatically not "instructions" on how to write a paper.

1. It is always helpful to remember the five elements of an "ideal" moral judgment: (a) conceptual clarity; (b) accurate information; (c) rationality/logical consistency; (d) impartiality (making morally relevant distinctions between cases); and (e) coolness. You might check through the rough draft of your paper to see if your essay stands up to each of these "tests".

2. One technique I myself have found helpful in writing an argument is to follow the style of a "proof" in geometry. You state your position ("to prove"), define your terms, give your assumptions ("axioms" that stand behind your reasoning), and then proceed to deduce your position from them, giving reasons for each link ("theorem") in your logical chain. In doing so, you should refute counter-arguments to your position. You should also be careful to consider whether your "axioms" are universally accepted or not. Basing your whole argument on a premise that is itself subject to dispute won't produce a very solid argument.

3. Another good technique is to (a) state your position; (b) describe all (or at least some -- there are limits to how much you can cover in one paper!) of the most important arguments against your position; (c) show why these arguments are wrong; and (d) finally, show why arguments supporting your position are not subject to these weaknesses. I suspect that often you will find it easier to state why the other arguments are wrong than to start off by simply declaring why you hold the views you have. (But remember to end up defending your position, too!)

4. In constructing your own arguments, you are expected to draw on the reading assigned in the course as well as on the additional sources you found yourself. This does not mean simply saying "I agree with XXX" and then copying or summarizing XXX's article. It means that you may agree with XXX, and then independently reject arguments against his position. In short, you must make the argument, and not expect your sources to make it for you. You may cite from your sources on occasion, but your paper should not simply be a string of quotations from one or several authors. Please indicate the source of your quotation and of any data. At the end of the paper, your sources must be listed in the appropriate fashion in a bibliography. If you have any doubts about how extensively you should be quoting from the reading, the safest strategy is not to do it: just summarize an author's position in your own words.

5. It is important to consciously distinguish between different kinds of sources:

• Primary sources are the original writings from the period under study. In our case, an article by D'Alembert, a book by Euler, a historical account in Montucla's book would all be primary sources.

• Secondary sources are scholarly works based on the primary sources. This would include articles in Isis, Historia Mathematica, and so on.

• Tertiary sources are expository accounts based on the secondary sources. Often articles in more popular publications are of this kind. Pages on the web are also often of this kind.

6. What is plagiarism? Plagiarism occurs when you copy from a reading and don't say so. If you put long paragraphs in quotations and give the author credit (by, say, putting his/her name in your footnote) this is not plagiarism. However, bear in mind that, as noted above, if your paper is one long string of quotations, it suggests that you did the reading but did not do any thinking of your own. This will not be considered plagiarism, but it will also not be considered a very good paper. (Needless to say, copying another student's paper -- traditionally called "cheating" -- is also a case of plagiarism.)

7. Never finish your paper on the day it is due. Instead, print out a final draft a day or two in advance, and let it lie on your desk overnight. Then re-read it (if possible, read it aloud, either to yourself or to a friend). You will almost certainly find things you would like to correct or modify slightly before you turn it in.

8. Grading Policy

This is just intended to give a rough idea of how your paper will be graded. The papers described here are somewhat idealized: in reality, no paper will ever have all or the characteristics described. Use this and the self-evaluation checklist when you proofread your paper.

• A Papers: The paper begins with a good thesis (argument) and is well-organized. The factual material is accurate and is relevant to the thesis. The mathematics is correct. The ideas are presented in a clear and logical fashion, and the arguments are supported by the evidence. The paper demonstrates a sound understanding of the period and of the issues. There are no spelling or grammatical errors, and the writing is clear and effective.

• B papers: The thesis is relatively weak or is only partially supported by evidence. Some of the evidence presented is incorrect, or contradicts the thesis. Some relevant evidence is missing. Some statements indicate an incomplete understanding of the mathematics and science or of the historical situation. The style needs improvement and/or there are a few spelling and grammatical errors.

• C Papers: The paper has a weak thesis and the thesis is poorly supported by evidence. The paper is entirely descriptive or shows confusion about key facts and concepts. Facts that are covered are not well related to the thesis, or contradict it. The sources are mostly tertiary sources of dubious quality. The paper contains rudimentary or stereotypical generalizations that reflect a poor understanding of the subject. There are significant spelling or grammatical errors, or there are enough stylistic problems to make it hard to follow what you want to say.

• D Papers: The paper contains no thesis and demonstrates a very poor knowledge of the subject matter. It shows little evidence of original thought. The writing is very hard to understand, laced with spelling and grammatical errors, and uses words inappropriately. There are only one or two sources, and those are of dubious quality. The paper shows signs of having been written very quickly.

• Are there F papers? I hope not.