Term Paper

Posted: Tue, Nov 11, 2025

“I came to theory,” writes bell hooks, “because I was hurting—the pain within me was so intense that I could not go on living. I came to theory desperate, wanting to comprehend—to grasp what was happening around and within me.”

I want us to wrestle with an issue that deeply troubles us, and to use it to think through how it challenges normative theorizing as it stands and how philosophical reflection could help us in turn. This may or may not be an issue we’ve touched on in class.

Your job is to make a substantive, original argument on a normative dimension of your chosen issue.

Substantive: Your argument should develop a non-obvious response to some genuine issue of normative concern or significance.
Original: Your argument should go beyond merely reproducing ideas from our readings and discussions—it must reflect your own voice in a way that is insightful to the rest of the class.

Annotated Bibliography (Ungraded)

Due: Monday, November 24, by midnight, to CourseWorks.
Format: Any citation style so long as you consistently apply it (use Chicago Author-Date if you don’t have a favorite), any sensible spacing/font/margins.

Your annotated bibliography should consist of:

A short (100–200 words) description of the issue you are interested in pursuing; and
A list of 5–7 sources you’ve identified through your research, each with a one-sentence explanation for why you think it may be relevant to your project.
- At least one of your sources must have been published in a peer-reviewed philosophy journal.
- At least one of your sources must not include a philosopher among its author(s).
- At least one of your sources must have first been published in the last five years.
- At least one of your sources must be a book you check out from a library.

Some useful places to look:

Rough Draft (Ungraded)

Due: Friday, December 5, by midnight, to CourseWorks.

The rough draft does not need to be complete (for example, feel free to use placeholders and outlines to indicate what you plan to fill in). However, the more complete a draft you turn in, the more useful feedback you will likely receive. If there are specific aspects of the draft you are unsure about, you are welcome to leave a short note for your readers.

Peer Feedback (Graded)

Due: Friday, December 12, by midnight, to CourseWorks.
Format: 1-page letter along with the annotated draft for each classmate in your writing group.

I will divide the class into small writing groups. Please read and comment on the drafts of the other members of your writing group.

Your comments should include both marginal notes that respond to specific passages (something that puzzles you, seems insightful to you, etc.) and general notes that respond to the draft as a whole.
Try to get into the mindset of a reader who is curious but new to the issue (has the author explained in an accessible way everything a novice reader needs to know to follow the discussion?), shy of reading between the lines (is the reader clearly and explicitly told how a conclusion follows or how an interpretation is supported by textual evidence?), prone to be misled (how well does a certain word or sentence convey what the author may have meant to say?), and skeptical yet open to being persuaded (does the author do a good job of not just asserting, but actually arguing for, their own view?).
Be constructive but also don’t be afraid to point out problems or ask questions—you can do this in a supportive way.

Beyond this, I would also encourage each writing group to find a time to get together and offer each other feedback and advice. But this is not a requirement.

If you are concerned about the dynamics of your assigned writing group, please let me know as early as possible.

Revision (Graded)

Due: Friday, December 19, by midnight, to CourseWorks.
Format (note the increased upper limit): 1,500–2,400 words (excluding bibliography), along with a 1-page, single-spaced cover letter addressed to me.

Please revise your paper in light of your own critical assessment of the feedback you’ve received. Revision does not mean simply changing a few words here and there; create a new document in your favorite word processor and start afresh. Of course, you can and should recycle language from your previous drafts, but you should do so critically and selectively—think carefully about what a passage adds to the present draft, find creative ways to adapt old language for new purposes, and don’t be afraid to decide when it’s best to rewrite a passage from scratch.

The cover letter is an invitation to reflect on the comments received (what do you find helpful and what not so much, and why or why not?) and discuss how they have shaped the revision (this is also the place to discuss feedback that you’ve decided not to adopt). If you feel comfortable doing so, I encourage you to share what you think of the revision yourself—what problems have been especially challenging, what are you proud of, and perhaps what do you still find unsatisfying? (Being conscious and critical of your own writing is an overall beneficial skill to acquire as a writer, and it will not negatively affect your grade!)

Integral to scholarship is the acknowledgment of all the feedback, assistance, and support that have shaped and contributed to our thinking and writing. You can do this by including an “Acknowledgments” section and/or placing footnotes at the specific places where you have been helped; consult the more recent papers we’ve read for examples. (Though you don’t need to thank me for comments or suggestions! I’m just happy to help 😊.)

Assessment

Term papers will be evaluated based on the extent to which the paper demonstrates your ability to understand the materials discussed, to present existing ideas and arguments in the literature clearly, accurately, and thoughtfully to a non-specialist audience, to charitably but critically assess those ideas and arguments, and to defend your own view by oﬀering your own argument.