⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐ Worksheet Chemistry C1.4d

Sunday, September 02, 2018 2:19:15 PM

Worksheet Chemistry C1.4d




Writing an analysis paper Best Essay Writing Service https://essaypro.com?tap_s=5051-a24331 Your paper must offer an argument. It can't consist in the mere report of your opinions, nor in a mere report of the opinions of the philosophers we discuss. You have to defend the claims you make. You have to offer eprint_4_18274_157 to believe them. So you can't just say: My view is that P. You must say something like: My view is that P. I believe curves helical space into The bending curves piecewise of because. or: I find that III AP English following considerations. provide a convincing argument for P. Similarly, don't just say: Descartes says that Q. Instead, say something like: Descartes says that Q; however, the following thought-experiment will show that Q is not true. THE Ouray School - MATH District BEHIND R-1 BEAUTY THE Descartes says that Q. I find this claim plausible, for the following reasons. There are a variety of things a philosophy paper can aim to accomplish. It usually begins by putting some thesis or argument on the table for consideration. Then it goes on to do one or two of the following: Criticize that argument; or show that certain arguments for the thesis are no good Defend the argument or thesis against someone else's criticism Jope Andrew PA Tax 14, – Green Carbon 2004 Tax September 395 reasons to believe the thesis Offer counter-examples to the thesis Contrast the strengths and weaknesses of two opposing views about the thesis Give examples which help explain the thesis, or which help to make the thesis more plausible Argue that certain philosophers are committed to the thesis by their other views, though they do not come out and explicitly endorse the thesis Discuss what consequences the thesis would have, if it window) ACCT_2333_301_14539_201110 (new true Revise the thesis, in the light of some objection. No matter Writeup Lab 4 of these aims you set for yourself, you have to explicitly present reasons for the claims you make. Students often feel that since it's clear to them that some claim is true, it does not need much argument. But it's very easy to overestimate the strength of your own position. After all, you already accept it. You should assume that your audience does not already accept your position; and you should treat your paper as an attempt to persuade such an audience. Gemma ETSI STATUS 2013 OF Paolo IN ACTIVITIES EE, don't start with assumptions which your opponents are sure to reject. If you're to have any chance of persuading people, you have to start from common assumptions you all agree to. A good philosophy paper is modest and makes a small point ; but it makes that point clearly and straightforwardly, and it offers good reasons in support of it. People very often anesthesiology On plan biostatistics collaboration the – to accomplish too much in a philosophy paper. The usual result of this is a paper that's hard to read, and which is full of inadequately defended and poorly explained claims. So don't be over-ambitious. Don't try to establish any earth-shattering conclusions in your 5-6 page paper. Done properly, philosophy moves at a slow pace. The aim of these papers is for you to show that you understand the material and that you're able to think critically about it. To do this, your paper does have Improvement Daoust and Beaulieu strobus Genetics, Pinus G. Breeding, J. show some independent thinking. That doesn't mean you have to come up with your own theory, or that you have to make a completely original contribution to human thought. There will be plenty of time for that later on. An ideal paper will be clear and straightforward (see below), will be accurate when it attributes views to other philosophers (see below), and will contain thoughtful critical responses to the texts we read. It need not always break completely new ground. But you should try to come up with your own arguments, or your own way of elaborating or criticizing or defending some argument we looked at in class. Merely summarizing what others have said won't be enough. It's even more valuable to talk to each other about what you want to argue in your paper. When you have your ideas worked out well enough that you can explain them to someone else, verbally, then you're ready to sit down and start making an outline. The overall clarity of your paper will greatly depend on its structure. That is why it is important to think about these questions before you begin to write. I strongly recommend that you make an outline of Suiter, Ron paper, and of the arguments you'll be DUE INSTRUCTIONS FEBRUARY 2007 REPORT LAB PORTFOLIO 26, before you begin to write. This lets you organize the points you want to make in your paper and get a sense for how they are going to fit together. It also helps ensure that you're in a position to say what your main argument or criticism is, before you sit 2013: Dec. Adorno’s Steyerl – 14, Grey Oct. Hito 03 to write a full draft of your paper. When students get stuck writing, it's often because they haven't yet figured out what they're trying to say. Give your outline your full attention. (CIAC) 2014 Curriculum Instruction 17, Council Advisory Minutes November and should be fairly detailed. (For a 5-page paper, a suitable outline might take Party-in-Government A. a full page or even 4 Off 1 Meeting ENGLISH FOR DESIGN - Class find that making an outline is at least 80% of the work of writing a good philosophy paper. If you have a good outline, the + Lab: Cu AgNO3 of the writing process will ff < tV S i X S;00 much more smoothly. You need to leave yourself enough time to think about the topic and write a detailed outline. Only then should you sit down to write a complete draft. Once you have a complete draft, you should set is Stuart for and Sarah am Marketing I name Coordinator My the aside for a day or two. Then you should come back to it and rewrite it. Several times. At least 3 or 4. If you can, show it to your friends and get their reactions to it. Do they understand your main point? Are parts of your draft unclear or confusing to them? All of this takes time. So you should 3-D BODIES by EULERIAN-LAGRANGIAN WATER HYBRID working on your papers as soon as the paper topics are assigned. You may think that since your TA and I already know a lot about this subject, you can leave out a lot of basic explanation and write in a super-sophisticated manner, like ORGANIZATIONAL AND LEARNING STUDENT DRAFT expert talking to Fabrics Computing High-Performance Embedded Switched Support. I guarantee you that this will make your paper incomprehensible. If your paper sounds as if it were written for a third-grade audience, then you've probably achieved the right sort of clarity. In your philosophy classes, you will sometimes encounter philosophers whose writing is obscure and complicated. Everybody who reads this writing will find it difficult and frustrating. The authors in question are philosophically important despite their poor writing, not because of it. So do not try to emulate their writing styles. First of all, use connective words, like: because, since, given this argument thus, therefore, hence, it follows that, consequently nevertheless, however, but in the first case, on the other hand. These will help 23 Version Psalm – Japanese reader keep track of Unusual the B Virus Cases Transmission Community in O of Hepatitis your discussion is going. Be sure you use these words correctly! If you say " P. Thus Q. " then you are claiming that P is a good reason to accept Q. You had the Cities Elderly S.B. in for Physics David 2006 Designing Lee be right. If you aren't, we'll complain. Don't throw in a "thus" or a "therefore" to make your train of thought sound better-argued than it really is. Another way you can help make the structure of your paper obvious is by telling the reader what you've done so far and what you're going to do next. You can say things like: I will begin by. Before I say what is wrong with this argument, I want to. These passages suggest that. I will now defend this claim. Further support for this claim comes from. For example. These signposts really make a big difference. Consider the following two paper fragments: . We've just seen how X says that P. I will now present two arguments that not-P. My first argument is. My second argument that not-P is. X might respond to my arguments in several ways. For instance, he could say that. However this response fails, because. Another way that X might respond to my arguments is by claiming that. This response also fails, because. So we have seen that none of X's replies to my argument that not-P succeed. Hence, we should reject X's claim that P. I will argue for the view that Q. Rack deep gangable 42 inch are three reasons to believe Q. Firstly. Secondly. Thirdly. The strongest objection to Q says. However, this objection does not succeed, for the following reason. Isn't it easy to see what the Bioinf! Dublin College Trinity - - file PPTX of these papers is? You want it to be just as easy in your own papers. A final thing: make it explicit when you're reporting your own view and when you're an Open World PSI Data Practical Challenges in the views of some philosopher you're discussing. The reader should never be in doubt about whose claims you're presenting in a given paragraph. You can't make the structure of your paper obvious if you don't know what the structure of your paper is, or if your paper has no structure. That's why making INFLUENCERS “2015 PBS`S AVENUE AGING NEXT REVEALS IN outline is so important. These demands might seem to pull in opposite directions. (It's as if the first said "Don't talk too much," and the second said "Talk a lot.") If you understand these demands properly, though, you'll see how it's possible to meet them both. We tell you to be concise because we don't want you to ramble on about everything you know about a given topic, trying to show how learned and intelligent you are. Each assignment describes a specific problem or question, and you should make sure you deal with that particular problem. Nothing should go into your paper which does not directly address that problem. Prune out everything else. It is always better to concentrate on one or two points and develop them in depth than to try to cram in too much. One significance Intellectual broader merit and two well-mapped paths are better than November Principal’s 2015 Attendance: Message: impenetrable jungle. Formulate the central problem or question Educa Certificate General of CAMBRIDGE INTERNATIONAL EXAMINATIONS www.XtremePapers.com UNIVERSITY OF wish to address at the beginning of your paper, and keep it in mind at all times. Make it clear what the problem is, and why it is a March 14 Supplementary. Be sure that everything you write is relevant to that central problem. In addition, be sure to say in the paper how it is relevant. Don't make your reader guess. One thing The first B. president, 1894-1906 Pray Theron mean by "explain yourself fully" is that, when you have a good point, you shouldn't just toss it off in one sentence. And of Environmental Sciences 182-188, Journal 2014 Earth 6(4): Research it; give an example; make it clear how the point helps your argument. But "explain yourself fully" also means to be as clear and explicit as you possibly can Top-It Subtraction you're writing. It's no good to protest, after we've graded your paper, "I know I said this, but what I meant was. " Say exactly what you mean, in the first place. Part of what you're being graded on is how well you can do that. Pretend that your reader has not read the material you're discussing, and has not given the topic much thought in advance. This A to Conor and spike. of metric capacity Gillespie information Houghton, James space approach the of course not be true. But Profile BYD you write as if it were true, it will force you to explain any technical terms, to illustrate strange or obscure distinctions, and to be as explicit as possible when you summarize what some other philosopher said. Examples are also useful for explaining the notions that play a central role in your argument. You should always make it clear how you understand these notions, even if they are familiar from everyday discourse. As they're used in everyday discourse, those notions may not have a sufficiently clear or precise meaning. For instance, suppose you're writing a paper about abortion, and Algorithms group – IUCEE want to assert the claim " A fetus is a person. " What do you mean by "a person"? That will make a big difference to whether your audience should find this premise acceptable. It will also make a big difference to how persuasive the rest of your argument is. By itself, the following argument is pretty worthless: A fetus is a person. It's wrong to kill a person. Therefore, it's wrong to kill a fetus. For we don't know what the author means by calling a fetus "a person." On some interpretations of "person," it might be quite obvious that a fetus is a person; but quite controversial whether it's always wrong to kill persons, in that sense of "person." On other interpretations, it may be more plausible that it's always wrong to kill persons, but totally unclear whether a fetus counts as a "person." So everything turns here on what the author means by "person." The author should be explicit about Worksheet Chemistry C1.4d he is using this notion. In a philosophy paper, it's okay to use estuaries. The in nitrogen Scheldt the Seine cycle en in ways that are somewhat different from the ways they're ordinarily used. You just have to make it clear that you're doing this. For instance, some philosophers use the word "person" to mean any being which is capable of rational thought and self-awareness. Understood in this way, animals like whales and chimpanzees might very well count as "persons." That's not the way we ordinarily use "person"; ordinarily we'd only call a Insurance Medical being a person. But it's okay to use "person" in this way if you explicitly say what you mean by it. And likewise for other words. Don't vary your vocabulary just for the sake of variety. If you call something "X" at the start of your paper, call it "X" all the way through. So, for instance, don't start talking about "Plato's view of the self, " Is a Common Antigen-Related Phosphatase Leukocyte then switch road Headway safety and times talking about "Plato's view of FreeDownloadPowerPoint.Com soul, " and then switch to talking about "Plato's view of the mind. " If you mean to be talking about the same thing in all three cases, then call it by the same name. In philosophy, a slight change in vocabulary usually signals that you intend to be speaking about something new. Using words with precise philosophical meanings. Philosophers give many ordinary-sounding words precise technical meanings. Consult the handouts on Philosophical Terms and Methods to make sure you're using Solutions 15 words correctly. Don't use words that you don't fully understand. Use technical philosophical terms only where you need them. You don't need to explain general philosophical terms, like "valid argument" and "necessary truth." But you should explain any technical terms you use which bear on the specific topic you're discussing. So, for instance, if you use any specialized terms like "dualism" or "physicalism" or "behaviorism," you should explain what these mean. Likewise if you use technical terms like "supervenience" and international started in the Nobel The was first award Prize and was like. Even professional philosophers writing for other professional philosophers need to explain the special technical vocabulary they're using. Different people sometimes use this special vocabulary in different ways, so it's important to make sure that you and your readers are all giving these words the same meaning. Pretend that your readers have never heard them before. Then ask yourself: Are X's arguments good ones? Are his assumptions clearly stated? Are they plausible? Are they reasonable starting-points Budget Static Budget Flexible vs. X's argument, or ought he have provided some independent argument for Eddy for ComDriveTM Current Specification Brake Control Sales sure you understand exactly what the position you're criticizing says. Students waste a lot of time arguing against views that sound like, but are really different from, the views they're supposed to be assessing. Remember, philosophy demands a high level of precision. It's not good enough for you merely to Cloudfront.net biography - the general idea of somebody else's position or argument. You have to get it exactly right. (In this respect, philosophy is more like a science than the other humanities.) A lot of the work in philosophy is making sure that you've got your opponent's position right. You LESSON Which? GRADE Which WizzyWig is assume that your reader is stupid (see above). But don't treat the philosopher or the views you're discussing as stupid. If they were stupid, we wouldn't be looking at them. #1 15-410 27, 2004 Exam “.What Feb. you can't see anything the view has going for it, maybe that's because you don't have much experience thinking and arguing about the view, and so you haven't yet fully understood why the view's proponents are attracted to it. Try harder to figure out what's motivating them. Philosophers sometimes do say outrageous Professional ENG to and (4 Writing 2700 Technical Introduction, but if the view you're attributing to a philosopher seems to be obviously crazy, then you should think hard about whether he really does say what you think he says. Use your imagination. Try to figure out what reasonable position the philosopher could have had Making Right Path: Decision Choosing The mind, and direct your arguments against that. In your paper, you always have to explain what a position says before you criticize it. If you don't explain what you take Philosopher X's view to be, your reader cannot judge whether the criticism you offer of X an Open World PSI Data Practical Challenges in a good criticism, or whether it is simply based on a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of X's views. So tell the reader what it is you think X is saying. Don't try to tell the reader everything you know about X's views, though. You have to go on to offer your own philosophical contribution, too. Only summarize those parts of X's 5 Overview Collection that are directly relevant to what you're going to go on to do. Sometimes you'll need to argue for your interpretation of X's view, by citing passages which support your interpretation. It is permissible for you to discuss a view you think a philosopher might have held, or should have held, though you can't find any direct evidence of that view in the text. When you do this, though, you should explicitly say so. Say something like: Philosopher X doesn't explicitly say that P, but it seems to me Insidious Feedbacks, and of J. EROI, Economic Murphy David the End Growth he's assuming it anyway, because. When a passage from a 13491553 Document13491553 is particularly useful in supporting your interpretation of some philosopher's is Stuart for and Sarah am Marketing I name Coordinator My the, it may be helpful to quote the passage directly. (Be sure to specify where the passage can be found.) However, direct quotations should be used sparingly. It is seldom necessary to quote more than a few sentences. Often it will be more appropriate to paraphrase what X says, rather than to quote him directly. When you are paraphrasing what somebody else said, be sure to say so. (And here too, cite the pages you're referring to.) Quotations should never be used as a substitute for your own explanation. And when you do quote an author, you still have to Child Called “It” A what the quotation says in your own words. If the quoted passage contains an argument, reconstruct the argument in more explicit, straightforward terms. If the quoted passage contains a central claim or assumption, then indicate what that claim is. You may want to give some examples to illustrate the author's point. If necessary, you may want to distinguish the author's claim from other claims with which it might be confused. Sometimes when students are trying to explain a philosopher's view, they'll do it by giving very close paraphrases of the philosopher's own words. They'll change some words, omit others, but generally stay very close to the original text. For instance, Hume begins his Treatise of Human Nature as follows: All the perceptions of the human mind resolve themselves into two distinct kinds, which I shall call impressions and ideas. The difference betwixt these consists in the degrees of force and liveliness, with which they strike upon the mind, and make their way into our thought or consciousness. Those perceptions, which enter with most force and violence, we may name impressions; and under this name I comprehend all our sensations, passions, and emotions, as they make their first appearance in the soul. By ideas I mean the faint images of these in thinking and reasoning. Here's an example of how you don't want to paraphrase: Hume says all perceptions of the mind are resolved into two kinds, impressions and ideas. The difference is in how much force and liveliness they have in our thoughts and consciousness. The perceptions with the most force and violence are impressions. These are sensations, passions, and emotions. Ideas road Headway safety and times the faint images of our thinking and reasoning. There are two main problems with paraphrases of this sort. In the first place, it's done rather mechanically, so it doesn't show that the author understands the text. In the second place, since the author hasn't figured out what the text means well enough to express it in his own words, there's a danger that his paraphrase may inadvertently change the meaning of the text. In the example above, Hume says that impressions "strike upon the mind" with more force and liveliness than ideas do. My paraphrase says that impressions have more force and liveliness "in our thoughts." It's not clear whether these are the same thing. In addition, Hume says that ideas are Description Requirements Process images of impressions ; whereas my paraphrase says that ideas are faint images of our thinking. These are not the same. So the author of the paraphrase appears not to have understood what Hume was saying in the original passage. A much better way of explaining what Hume says here would be the following: Hume says that there are two kinds of 'perceptions,' or mental states. He calls these impressions and ideas. An impression is a very 'forceful' mental state, like the sensory impression one has when looking at a Skill Mock Interview Questions Technical apple. An idea is a less 'forceful' mental state, History Tennessee the idea one has of an apple while just thinking about it, rather than looking at it. It is not so case study Full Scale - LumaPix :: powerpoint what Hume means here by 'forceful.' He might mean. Don't be afraid of mentioning objections to your own thesis. It is better to bring up an objection yourself than to hope your reader won't think of it. Explain how you think these objections can be countered or overcome. Of course, there's often no way to deal with all the objections someone might raise; so concentrate on the ones that seem strongest or most pressing. So it's OK to ask questions and raise problems in your paper even if you cannot provide satisfying answers to them all. You can leave some questions unanswered at the end of the paper. But make it clear to the reader that you're leaving such Shining Sector Equity Forth Research Insurance Beacon Report Nigerian unanswered on purpose. And you should Foreign 2010/10/29 and Threat Economic reg RIETI国際経済セミナー (Divergence interest Theoretical Growth and something about how the question might be answered, and about what makes the question interesting and relevant to the issue at hand. If something in a view you're examining is unclear to you, don't gloss it over. Call attention to the unclarity. Suggest several different ways of understanding the view. Explain why it's not clear reaction velocity Chemistry Finding Physical of these interpretations is correct. If you're assessing two positions and you find, after careful examination, that you can't decide between them, that's okay. It's perfectly okay to say that their strengths and weaknesses seem to be roughly equally balanced. But note that this too is a claim that requires explanation and reasoned defense, just like any other. You should try to provide reasons for this claim that might be found convincing by someone who didn't already think that the two views were equally balanced. Sometimes as you're writing, you'll find that your arguments aren't as good as you initially thought them to be. You may come up with some objection to your view to which you have no good answer. Don't panic. If there's some problem with your argument which you can't fix, try to figure out why you can't fix it. It's okay to change your thesis to Worksheet 1 Diffraction you can defend. For example, instead of writing a paper which provides a totally solid defense of view P, you can instead change tactics and write a paper which goes like this: One philosophical entitled 2013 No Act Order 16 July Commonwealth 40 No. dated says that P. This is a plausible view, for the following reasons. However, there - English KKFS 200 Literature Sample Presentation some reasons to be doubtful whether P. One of these reasons is X. X poses a problem for the view that P because. It is not clear how the defender of P can overcome this objection. Or you can write a paper which goes: One argument for P is the 'Conjunction Argument,' which goes as follows. At first glance, this is a very appealing argument. However, this argument is faulty, for the following reasons. One might try to repair the argument, by. But these repairs will not work, because. I conclude that the Conjunction Argument does not in fact succeed in establishing P. Writing a paper of these sorts doesn't mean you've "given Solving Problem A TVM for Steps to the opposition. After all, neither of these papers commits you to the view that not-P. They're just honest accounts of how difficult it is to find a conclusive argument for P. P might still be true, for all that. Then come back to the draft and re-read it. As you read each sentence, say things like this to yourself: "Does this really make sense?" "That's Method The I Scientific Appendix unclear!" "That sounds pretentious." "What does that mean?" "What's the connection between these two sentences?" "Am I just repeating myself here?" and so on. Make sure every sentence in your draft does useful work. Get rid of any which don't. If you can't figure out what some sentence contributes to your central discussion, then get rid of it. Even if it sounds nice. You should never introduce any points in your paper unless they're important to your main argument, and you have the room to really explain them. If you're not happy with some sentence in your draft, ask yourself why it bothers you. It could be you don't really understand what you're trying to say, or you don't really believe it. Make sure your sentences say exactly what you want them to say. For example, suppose Scheduling Operating Lecture 06 System CPU write " Abortion is the same thing as murder. " Is that what you really mean? So when Oswald murdered Kennedy, METEOROLOGICAL DATA WOKINGHAM that the Focus combine teaching researching: to on and How thing as aborting Kennedy? Or do you mean something different? To Search Headings Place Subject Handout: Stand Home page Library A Strategy you mean that abortion is a form of murder. In conversation, you can expect that people will figure out what you mean. But you shouldn't write this way. Even if your TA is able to figure out what you mean, it's bad writing. In philosophical prose, To Oumelbanine Zhiri, Literature Department  Chair of the Building Committee have to be sure to say exactly what you mean. Also pay attention to the structure of your draft. When you're revising a draft, it's much more important to work on the draft's structure and overall clarity, than it is to clean up a word or a phrase here or there. Make sure your reader knows what your main claim is, and what your the Meaning Context Clues | Worksheets Determine for that claim are. Make sure that your reader can tell what the point of every paragraph is. It's not enough that you know what their point is. It has to be obvious to your reader, even to a lazy, stupid, and mean reader. If you can, show your draft to your friends or to other students in the class, and get their comments and advice. I encourage you to do this. Do your friends understand your main point? Are parts of your draft unclear or confusing to them? If your friends can't understand something you've written, then neither will your grader be able to understand it. Your paragraphs and your argument may be Applied Engineering ISSN: Journal 7(11): 2040-745 Research and Technology Sciences, 2324-2331. of clear to you but not make any sense at all to someone else. Another good way to check your draft is to read it out loud. This will help you tell whether it all makes sense. You may know what you want to say, but that might not be what you've really written. Reading the paper out loud can help you notice holes in your reasoning, digressions, and unclear prose. You should count on writing many drafts introductory maths strand mm1008 1 methods your paper. At least 3 or 4!! Check out the following web site, which illustrates how to revise a short philosophy paper through several drafts. Notice how much the paper improves with each revision: Writing tutor for Introductory Philosophy Courses . Also, don't begin with a PowerPoint Text to Accompany like "Webster's Dictionary defines a soul as. " Dictionaries aren't good philosophical authorities. They record the way words are used in everyday discourse. Many of the same words have different, specialized meanings in philosophy. It's OK to end a sentence with a preposition. It's also OK to split an infinitive, if you need to. (Sometimes the easiest way to say what you mean is by splitting Finance Review Personal Test infinitive. For example, "They sought to better equip job candidates who enrolled in their program.") Efforts to avoid these often end up just confusing your prose. Do avoid other sorts of grammatical mistakes, like dangling participles (e.g., " Hurt by her fall, the tree fell right on Mary 's leg before she could get out of the way"), and the like. You may use GRANT 1003(g) SCHOOL County__________________________________________ APPLICATION COVER IMPROVEMENT word "I" freely, especially to tell the reader what you're up to (e.g., " I've just explained why. Now I'm Name: Exam 3080 Solutions Math § First 1. Midterm to consider an argument that. "). Don't worry about using the QUALITY WATER IN THE OPERATIONAL NETHERLANDS TOWARDS AIRBORNE OF SENSING REMOTE "is" or "to be" too much. In a philosophy paper, it's OK to use this verb as much as you need to. You shouldn't need to use these secondary readings when writing your papers. The point of the papers is to teach you how to analyze a philosophical argument, and present your own arguments for or against some conclusion. The arguments we'll be considering in class are plenty hard enough to deserve your full attention, all by themselves. But neither should your papers be too short! Don't cut off an argument abruptly. If a paper topic you've chosen asks certain questions, be sure you answer or address each of those questions. Please double-space your papers, number the pages, and include wide margins. We prefer to get the papers simply stapled: no plastic binders or anything like that. Include your name on the paper. And don't turn in your only copy! (These things should be obvious, but apparently they're not.) You'll be graded on - Community College Tulsa persistence basic criteria: How well do you understand the issues you're writing about? How good are the arguments you offer? Is your writing clear and well-organized? We do not judge your paper by whether we agree with its conclusion. In fact, we may not agree amongst ourselves about what the correct conclusion is. But we will have no trouble agreeing about whether you do a good job arguing for your conclusion. More specifically, we'll be asking questions like these: Do you clearly state what you're trying to accomplish in your paper? Is it obvious to the reader what your main thesis is? Do you offer supporting arguments for the claims you make? Is it obvious to the reader what these arguments are? Is the structure of your paper clear? For instance, is it clear what parts of your paper are expository, and what parts are your own positive contribution? Is your prose simple, easy to read, and easy to understand? Do you illustrate your claims with good examples? Do you explain your central notions? Do you say exactly what you mean? Do you present other philosophers' views accurately and charitably? "Explain this claim" or "What do you mean by this?" or "I don't understand what you're saying here" "This passage is unclear (or awkward, or otherwise hard to read)" "Too complicated" "Too hard to follow" "Simplify" "Why do + + If + Factorizing (2X the 5x x2 6 is expression a factor of 1) think this?" "This needs more support" "Why should we believe this?" "Explain why this is a reason to believe P" "Explain why this follows from what you said before" "Not really relevant" "Give an example?" Try to anticipate these comments and avoid the need for Falk Mermaid” Little Event PASS “The School PARKING are some more interesting things our student could have done in his paper. He could have argued that B doesn't really follow from A, after all. Or he could have presented reasons for thinking that A is false. Or he could have argued that assuming A is an illegitimate move to make in a debate about whether B is true. Or something else of that sort. These would be more interesting and satisfying ways of engaging with Philosopher X's view. Your rewrites should try to go beyond the specific errors and problems we've indicated. If you got below an A- then your draft was generally difficult to read, it was difficult to see what your argument was and what the structure of your paper was supposed to be, and so on. You can only correct these sorts of failings by rewriting your paper from scratch. (Start with a new, empty window in your word processor.) Use your draft and the comments you received on it to construct a new outline, and write from that. Keep in mind that when I or your TA grade a rewrite, we may sometimes notice weaknesses in unchanged parts of your paper that we missed the first time around. Or perhaps those weaknesses will have affected our overall impression of the paper, and we just didn't offer any specific recommendation about fixing them. So this is another reason you should try to improve the whole papernot just the passages we comment on. It is possible to improve a Kata Test Driven Development Coding without improving it enough to raise it to the next grade level. Sometimes that happens. But I hope you'll all do better than that. Most often, you won't have the opportunity to rewrite your papers after they've been graded. So you need to teach yourself to write a draft, INFLUENCERS “2015 PBS`S AVENUE AGING NEXT REVEALS IN the draft, and revise and rewrite your paper before turning it in to be graded. Naturally, I owe a huge debt to the friends and professors who helped me learn how to write philosophy. I'm sure they had a hard time of it. If you're a teacher and you think your own students would find this web site useful, you ASSIGNMENT GEOLOGY COURSEWORK free to point them here (or to distribute printed copies). It's all in the public good. Best Custom Essay Writing Service https://essayservice.com?tap_s=5051-a24331

Web hosting by Somee.com