How to Read Philosophy 

Let's be honest: sometimes you're going to read an assigned reading (if at all) at great speed just before class. But if you want to get the most you can out of your philosophy class, you won't want to do that often. Instead, you'll want to read the papers that your instructor has selected, and read them properly. That may mean reading them more than once. Philosophical writing is often difficult to read, and understanding it takes time, concentration and effort--even for seasoned philosophers.

A philosophy paper is trying to address a philosophical question, and it will provide reasons for its answer to that question. So, when reading, your first task is to identify the paper's question, answer and reasons. Your other task is to consider what you think about the author's answer and reasons. 

Let's do this in three steps!

STEP 1. Skim the paper briefly.

Aim to identify the author's main argument, and the general structure of the paper. The opening and closing paragraphs are usually the most useful for these purposes. 

Keep an eye out for supporting arguments (arguments for important claims that the author uses in making their main argument) and logical connectives (words or phrases that signpost the connections between different parts of the argument.) Some examples of the latter are:

• On the one hand...On the other...

• Hence; thus; therefore; as a result; it follows that...

• But; nonetheless; however; and yet; despite...

STEP 2. Read the paper a second time, more slowly and carefully. 

Be sure to read actively:

• As you go, underline or highlight: the main points made; any definitions or distinctions the author introduces; and unargued assumptions you detect; any statements that are ambiguous (i.e. subject to diverse interpretations.)

• Write notes as you read, either on the article itself or in a separate doc: summarizing the author's main claims in bullet points; drawing diagrams or flow charts to help you follow the course of the argument; using different colors or fonts to represent opposing views or objections that the author raises in relation to their own position.

• Note down any questions or criticisms that occur to you. You can raise these with your instructor in class.

While doing all this, don't get so caught up in the details that you lose track of the argument as a whole and the broader debate in which it is situated. Take F.A. Hayek's advice:

“From time to time it is probably necessary to detach one’s self from the technicalities of the argument and to ask quite naively what it is all about." -- Hayek (1937)

STEP 3. Sit back and think.

Once you feel you understand the author’s argument, spend some time thinking about whether or not it’s a good one.  The following questions may help:  

• Are the main premises correct?  (If not, why not?) 

• Does the argument contain any unsupported premises, or unstated assumptions that might be challenged? (How?)

• Do you agree with the author’s conclusion?(If not, what do you think is wrong with the author’s argument for it?)

• Does the conclusion follow from the premises or are additional premises needed? (What might they be?)

• Could different conclusions also be drawnfrom the same premises? 

- Does the author’s argument assume the conclusion that it is attempting to prove (“beg the question”), use the same term to mean different things at different points (“equivocate”), or contradict itself?

- Do the premises or the conclusion have any implications that seem to you to be false, bizarre, morally repellant or otherwise unacceptable?

An excellent way to structure your thinking when evaluating an author’s argument is to assume the persona of the author’s most vicious critic.  Even if you find that you agree with what the author says, try to imagine what a less sympathetic opponent might say in response. Then consider what the author (or you) might say back. Write the exchange down in dialogue form if this helps you keep track of the various objections.                      

“Both teachers and learners go to sleep at their post, as soon as there is no enemy in the field.” -- John Stuart Mill (1859)    

"What, you've been asked to write your first philosophy paper? So grown up! We remember you when you were just a tiny flea.  

You'd best take a look at this, quicksmart!"