UNIT 3 PHILOSOPHY SAC 2 CRITICAL COMPARISON Pointers for essay structure

What you need to do:  Present your knowledge of the viewpoints of TWO (or more) philosophers in relation to the good life  Analyse, or explain in detail these viewpoints and the arguments they used in the set texts to support these  Compare and contrast these viewpoints – this means identify BOTH similarities AND differences  Evaluate the arguments they have used – assess whether they are sound, or if they rest on assumptions  Reach a conclusion about the relative value of the arguments, this means state which (if either) you hold the most valid and/or convincing and/or relevant  Justify your conclusion

Possible ordering – Approach A  Person 1- essential aspects of the good life - arguments used to justify these  Evaluation of Person 1’s arguments  Person 2 - essential aspects of the good life which are similar to Person 1 - arguments used to justify these  Person 2 – essential aspects of the good life which are different to Person 1 - arguments used to justify these  Evaluation of Person 2’s arguments  Overall support for Person 1’s viewpoints - justification for this support (including justification for NOT supporting Person 2’s arguments)

Approach B  Aspect of the good life I support  This aspect as presented by Person 1 Arguments Person 1 used to present this viewpoint Evaluation of these arguments  Contrast this viewpoint with that of Person 2 Arguments Person 2 used to present this viewpoint Evaluation of these arguments  Point of similarity between Person 2 and Person 1 (and/or own stance) Arguments used to present these viewpoints Evaluation of these arguments  Raise potential flaws with own approach to the good life  Identify how Person 1 would respond to these flaws Arguments used to support this counter-claim Evaluation of these arguments  Reiteration of initial aspect of the good life I support

Approach C  Person 1’s approach to the good life Arguments used to support this  Contrast with Person 2’s approach to the good life Arguments used to support this  Contrast with Person 3’s approach to the good life Arguments used to support this  Evaluation of Person 1’s arguments  Evaluation of Person 2’s arguments  Evaluation of Person 3’s arguments  Statement of own approach to the good life based on evaluations.

Important features of essay structure  There is no real right or wrong way to structure your response, however  You must have a clear introduction in which you introduce the topic, the philosophers you will consider and your own stance/or the relevance of this discussion  Each body paragraph must have a clear, independent purpose. This should be stated in a topic sentence  You must have a clear conclusion in which you state which approach you support and why

Important features cont…  Do not waffle, exaggerate or get off topic  Do not give your own opinion as if it is only that – you should be offering reasonable and objective arguments with specific examples in support of your viewpoint  Do not simply state the philosophers’ viewpoints – you must ANALYSE – ie. explain in some detail the arguments they presented  Evaluation is not whether you like or agree with an argument – it is whether the argument is strong or weak, based on unsupported assumptions, relevance etc

Expression  You can use 1 st Person, but be careful not to resort to a personal rant. You must present your stance rationally and objectively in the form of arguments  Use real life examples wherever possible, this shows your understanding of the application of the arguments.  However, make sure the examples are appropriate, straightforward and relevant  Avoid emotive language as much as possible. Try to remain calm, neutral and objective at all times – remember this is a critical essay, not a persuasive one.

Referencing  When you quote directly from a set text you reference as such: (Nietzsche, 37) (Plato, 5)  If you have sourced quotes from these philosophers but from different texts use (Nietzsche, Thus Spake Zarathustra, pg 231)  If you have quoted from a website or a text not written by one of the philosophers use footnotes  You do not need a bibliography for this essay

Keep in mind…  You don’t need to address all possible aspects of the good life, just the ones relevant to the philosophers you analyse  A thorough analysis of two or three central points is better than a vague acknowledgement of several  You need to consider more than just the most obvious similarities and differences. You will be rewarded for finding more subtle points of comparison  Don’t try to tell me everything you know about that philosopher – your discussion should directly and consistently address the key viewpoints on the good life raised  You will not be assessed on your eloquence or your spelling – you will be assessed on the clarity, technicality and objectivity of your expression