Preliminary matters– this should have been accomplished through Research 3 and 4
Make sure the article is a philosophical treatment of a topic in the philosophy of “X”, not an article in some X, not the psychology of X, or social science of X, but the philosophy of X. Be sure to review any comments I made on that matter in Assign 2 Submit.
Make sure it is an article (not a book review, not an editorial) from a journal a periodical, a peer reviewed publication.
RESEARCH 5 (Research 6 will be the second part– the continuation)
1. Identify the article that you have chosen to further examine: author, title, publication source, pages.
2. Read and analyze that article (not just the abstract): Identify the principal stages of the author’s presentation. There are likely to be two major phases in the article that will need examination and explanation:
250 to 300 words: A philosophical issue or problem will be stated which warrants treatment.
Explain that issue and why the issue needs treatment (the author’s reason)
For example, the author(s) might identify
(a) an established thesis of an earlier writer or school of thought with which the author disagrees
(b) an inadequacy in a concept or theory which is shown to be in need of a new
(c) a debate, a confusion, a vagary of some theory or idea already prominent in the field that the author
believes is in need of examination and/or clarification
This, then, is the author’s set up, the rationale for the article.
STOP RESEARCH 5 — go to Submit (but take a quick look below first)
Research 6 will ask for the author’s resolution, concluding argument, solution, or theoretical recommendation. Might there be some overlap between Research 5 and 6? Yes, there might.
Research 6, however, will have more to it than that.
0 comments