RECIPE FOR SUCCESS!
Suggestions on How to Write an Outline for a Philosophy Paper
A paper has three main parts: introduction, body, conclusion.
Introduction should contain your thesis and whatever other minimal introductory comments you think
are necessary to set your paper up.
Body should contain (i) clarification of important concepts and/or thesis, (ii) your argument (reasons
for believing your thesis), and (iii) responses to potential objections to your argument.
Conclusion should contain a summary of your argument. Avoid introducing new ideas.
A philosophy paper, like all other papers, will have this very general structure. But the devil is in the
details. Here are some suggestions as to how to generate a philosophy paper using this general format set in
outline form.
FIRST, here is a sample outline structure based on a series of questions your paper must answer.
I.
II.
III.
IV.
V.
What am I going to argue as my main point in this paper? (thesis)
What necessary (textual?) background do I need to provide or how can I clarify my main point?
What reasons (including illustrations or examples) support this main point?
How might someone object to either my thesis or the reasons I have offered for my thesis? And
how might I respond to such an objection?
How can I quickly summarize the main points of my argument?
Note that the introduction will correspond to I or possibly I and II. The body of the paper will correspond
to either II. Through IV. Or III. And IV. The conclusion will be V.
NEXT, let’s put this into action, using one of our previous paper assignments as a guide.
I.
II.
III.
Thesis: In the film American Beauty, the character Lester Burnham represents a person quite
similar to those described by Socrates in his “Allegory of the Cave.”
Necessary Background and Clarifications
A. Textual Background: Explain allegory. Socrates interprets the Allegory to
represent effect of education or the lack of it on a person. Those who are educated
see what is real; the rest are not in touch with reality, though they think they are.
But conformity is a type of shackle that can keep us from seeing reality. So we can
also read this allegory as tracing the development of a person from conformity to
social norms to rebellion against social norms.
B. Clarifying Thesis: Like the prisoners Lester is someone who moves from being
shackled in the cave to someone who is freed from his shackles and ascends to the
outer world. Like the prisoners in the Allegory, this ascent can be read as a
metaphor for the development of the self from a state of conformity to social norms
to a rejection of these norms and the establishment of radical individuality. This is
what I will argue.
Argument for Thesis
A. We find that at the beginning the film Lester has been living a life of conformity to various
social norms.
1. He follows the various rules imposed him at his work. Cite specific examples
2. He follows the rules that have been imposed on him in his family life by his
wife. Cite specific examples.
IV.
V.
wife. Cite specific examples.
3. He follows rules imposed him by his social-class. Cite examples.
B. Later in the film, however, Lester breaks from these norms.
1. He consciously deviates from the norms imposed on him at work. E.g.,
Blackmails his company.
2. He consciously deviates from the norms imposed on him in his family. E.g.,
doesn’t let his wife run his life.
3. He consciously deviates from the norms imposed on him by his social class,
E.g., admits that he marriage is a sham.
Objection to Argument and Response:
A. Objection to Argument: There are good reasons to suppose that Lester remains conformed
to externally imposed standards even at the end of the film, and thus he never truly
completely rebels to find his individuality. For example, we find that he refuses to have sex
with Angela at the end, something which would have been a clear case of non-conformity to
the standards of sexual normalcy imposed upon him his culture and social class. His
conformity here is evidence that he has not exited the cave, because he remains subject to
moral codes imposed on him by society, codes that say it is wrong for an older man to have
sex with a teenage girl.
B. Response to Objection: It is true that Lester does not have sex with Angela at the end of
the film, though much of the film has revolved around his sexual obsession with her, much of
what defined his rebellion to external standards. However, his reason for not having sex with
her does not derive from his desire to follow socially accepted standards, but to follow his
own internal sense of rightness or his own moral code. While this internal sense of rightness
evolves during the film, it takes place within the context of a basic defiance against all
standards imposed on Lester from others. Hence, despite the observation made by the
objection, it is still very reasonable to believe that Lester is a character who has exited the
cave through an evolving form of non-conformity throughout the film.
Conclusion: In this paper I have argued that, if we interpret the Allegory of the Cave as an
extended metaphor for the transition from conformity to rebellion against externally imposed
norms or standards, we should view Lester as someone who has moved from being in the cave to
someone who eventually exits the cave. We have seen, however, that this development is
complex. While one may argue that Lester ends up conforming to externally imposed standards
at the end of the film, I have argued that this evidence is best construed as Lester’s ability to act
in terms of a sense of moral rightness he imposed on himself. Hence, the initial thesis of the
paper remains intact.
FINALLY, this is obviously a very detailed sort of outline developed using complete sentences for the most
part. It is a polished outline. But you can make similar outlines that are not as polished as you work through
your ideas for a paper. I give you the above outline to show you how it is that a final draft of a good paper
can grow out of an outline. Such a paper will at the very least include all that it should include, be very
well organized, and exemplify clear reasoning. This is necessary if you expect to write a good philosophy
paper.
Professor Sudduth