Peter Horban, Department of Philosophy, Simon Fraser University

The following abbreviations will allow more numerous and detailed comments on your paper than time would permit otherwise. Furthermore, the time saved can be used to add more individualized remarks. All of the problems listed here affect your paper’s grade. In general, if an abbreviation includes a number, the higher the number, the more serious the defect within that group. This list of abbreviations is modeled after one developed by Martin Hahn of the SFU Philosophy Department.

TRUTH: Truth is desirable in any paper. In a philosophy paper, though, the truth with regards to a particular topic is likely to be in dispute. That means that the position you wish to maintain must be well defended. It is necessary to marshal arguments on behalf of it, and to anticipate and respond to (argue against) objections that might reasonably be raised by a critic.

T1 I happen to think that this is true, but others might not. You should support this claim.

T3 Your opponent would almost certainly deny this claim. You must argue for it here.

T4 This seems to be false; at any rate, most people would deny it.

T5 This is false as it stands. Either you have failed to say what you intended, or else you are misinformed.

ARGUMENTATION: The comments in this section pertain to how you have argued. In the first three of these cases, the conclusion you want does not follow from the premises you have presented. That is, it is logically possible that the conclusion be false, even if all of the premises you have presented are true.

A1 An important premise is missing from your argument. You need to add something similar to what I have indicated.

A2 There are ways to make this argument valid, but they involve premises which are controversial and need to be argued for themselves.

A3 The argument which you have presented is clearly invalid, and there seems to be no ready way to save it.

A4 This argument begs the question. Unless your reader already grants the conclusion, he or she will not likely accept the indicated premise(s).

A5 It is not at all clear to me what your argument is here.

RELEVANCE: The problems here range from simple padding to a lack of understanding as to what is at issue in your paper.

RO Omit the indicated material. It does nothing to advance the argument of your paper. Instead, it undermines your goal of tracing a clear line of argument from your premises to the conclusion.

RR This is just repetition. You’ve already said this and it doesn’t bear repeating.

RV The indicated passage is verbose. It might well be relevant, but you have devoted more space to it than is warranted in this paper.

R1 This looks like it might be relevant, but you haven’t shown that it is.

R2 This may or may not be relevant. You should argue for its inclusion. Convince the reader that this is worth reading.

R3 This is irrelevant to the topic at hand. Its inclusion indicates that you have not really understood the issue.

CITATIONS: This category deals with the way in which you have (or have not) cited an author. Inexperienced writers tend to quote too frequently and give credit too seldom. The tendency to quote at length likely indicates a failure to understand the material for yourself. Putting someone else’s argument into your own words, acknowledging where the argument came from, indicates that you understand it.

CQ Quotations do not show that you understand the material. In general, you should argue in your own words, giving credit where credit is due for a specific line of reasoning. Put the indicated quotation in your own words. If you can’t, then you probably don’t understand it. Leave it out.

C1 The author holds this view, but it doesn’t appear in the passage cited.

C2 It’s not clear that the author actually maintains the view that you attribute to him or her. Provide some evidence for your attribution.

C3 The author would likely deny this. Either you have not quoted the source accurately, or you have not understood what you have read.

C4 A reference is missing. You must indicate where this passage comes from.

C5 It is not clear how much of this is your own thinking. You must indicate precisely what you are attributing to another source. (What specific words, claims or arguments are you are using? And where can these be found?) Failure to do so can result in a charge of plagiarism.

MEANING and clarity: In a philosophy paper, clarity is essential. Whatever the characteristics of your individual style, there is no such thing as a piece of good philosophical writing that is muddled and unclear. Unclear writing is usually the product of unclear thinking. The abstract nature of your subject matter demands that you take great care to say exactly what you mean. A rough idea of what you have in mind simply will not do. I cannot read your mind. I cannot even ask what you mean. Your paper must stand on its own.

MA This expression is ambiguous. The wording is such that it can be taken to mean at least two different things (as indicated). It must be reworded to eliminate the ambiguity.

MR The meaning is not clear because the reference (usually of a pronoun) is not clear. What are you referring to with the indicated term?

M1 I think I know what you are trying to say here, but it isn’t very clear.

M2 I’m not sure that I know what you mean here.

M3 I can make little sense of this. Is something missing? Have you said exactly what you intended?

M4 It’s clear that you haven’t said what you intended here.

M5 This is mere mush and slop—not the stuff of clear thought or expression. No philosophy paper containing passages like this merits a passing grade.

LANGUAGE: This section is closely related to the previous one on meaning and clarity. The correct use of English is essential for getting your meaning across. The English language is the medium for expressing your thoughts in this course. That requires more than simply using the right words. They must be combined in accordance with established rules of grammar and punctuation. The comments in this section typically deal with more specific units (individual words, sentences, technical terms, etc.,) than do those in the section on meaning.

W1 This is not the best word to use here. An alternative is given.

W2 This word is clearly misused here. It doesn’t mean what you seem to think it does.

W3 This is not an English word.

S1 This sentence is too long. Its meaning would be clearer if it were broken down into smaller units.

S2 This is an awkward sentence. It should be reworded. An alternative wording may be given, provided there are not too many items of this sort in your paper.

S3 This sentence does not say what you seem to think it does.

S4 This is not an English sentence. Check to see whether it expresses a complete thought when considered in isolation. Does it contain a grammatical error? Does it need to be written as two sentences? (Do you have some other punctuation mark where a period is required?)

TT1 You are using a technical term here without indicating clearly what it means.

TT2 You have misused this technical term. In the context at hand, the term has a clearly defined technical sense; but you are not using it that way.

GR This is a serious grammatical error. Check for such things as agreement in number (singular or plural) between subject and verb, and between pronoun and antecedent. Is it clear what the subject of the sentence is and what the predicate is? Grammatical errors may be dealt with in greater detail if time permits, and recurring mistakes will likely be noted and corrected at least once.

SP This word is spelled incorrectly. For the most part I will leave it to you to look up the correct spelling. Recurring mistakes will likely be noted in the first instance only.

SQ Why the scare quotes? Their legitimate uses are quite rare. If the expression in question doesn’t capture your meaning exactly, use another. If it does, omit the quotes.

AWK The indicated passage is awkward at best. Perhaps you have failed to preserve grammatically parallel structure. In any event, the passage needs to be reworked.

IL The indicated passage constitutes inappropriate language or tone for a scholarly paper. Certain minimum standards of formality ought to be maintained, and the overall tone should be one of simple dignity.

Return/transfer to Writing a Philosophy Paper.
Return/transfer to Peter Horban's Home Page.

Top of Page