Methodology

(How to Study Philosophy)

Class Notes
(Taken at a Pontifical University)

First Lesson:

The nature of university studies:

University is meant to be a scientific institution which has two aims:
a) transmission of knowledge
b) education of future scientists
Universities appeared in the 12th century. In the 1st universities the 1st place was assigned to philosophy.
Other subjects: Theology, law, medicine. The institutions were at the service of the country. Universities
have retained an important place in society.

Study (definition):
Concentrate all the personal resources in order to gather/assimilate different data/information, make a
relationship between them, how they are linked, in order to understand problems, give solutions, control
problems. Gather information for the sake of operation, solving problems, not only a passive activity and
reasoning. It is a serious productive intellectual activity.

To know how to study means to coordinate two dimensions with maximum responsibility (thinking and
acting). Learning how to study means learning to coordinate my being on the level of doing research and
activities. Studies: Change of growth. A kind of formation, not only an assimilation, reflecting data, but also
creative actualization.

Children asked magician after he showed tricks: “Is there a magical formula for studying?” The magician
answered: “Just one: Hard work!”

Egyptian priest came to the library of Alexandria, said to the assisting person: “Need to learn as quick as
possible, because I want to hunt, too.” Scholar answered: “ In your country there are two different ways: For
normal people and for royalty. In learning there is only one road. There is no royal easy road.”

Methodology is needed, because it’s a part of our life. Our life as such is very complex. Today we are
surrounded by a lot of information. Methodology will make us able to prepare peculiarly. Methodology will

1
enable us to be updated constantly on what is going on. We learn how to master tools, to build our
knowledge in a personal way. It is not enough to learn, we have to learn how to learn.

Method (meaning):
- Etymologically:
Method = Greek (meta + hodos), means: towards (meta) + street (hodos) = a path which
brings to a determinate objective/end = A set of reasoned and rational procedures. It is a
set of particular procedures by which we come to a determined end.
- Scientifically:
Process, which a human mind has to form and follow in order to reach a knowledge of a
truth. Kind of way, path or procedure, which we have to follow in our investigation.

Methodology (meaning):
- Etymologically: Method = Greek (meta + hodos + logos), means: towards (meta) +
street (hodos) + research/science (logos) = a science of the method.
- Gathering of techniques/procedures helping us in our scientific investigations. Here
Methodology is equivalent with method as such. This is the meaning we will focus on.

Methodology requires practice and self-criticism on my side. It requires an analysis of how I study/work.

A certain methodology is indispensable for us in our whole life. If we want to live a meaningful life (not
giving in to nihilism), we have to have a certain knowledge of our life, know to what end we want to live.
Once we know that, we need to know a certain way, in order to achieve that end. To live means to act.
Whatever is alive, acts. If our acting has no final cause it will go in circles. If we act towards a particular
end, we have to plan this acting. Life needs reflection.

Studying is nothing else but a part of our life and it needs method, especially philosophy. Specific nature of
philosophy studies, because philosophy involves invention of concepts. Abstract concepts, which are
manipulated by means of different representations. To organize these concepts you need method in order to
not get disoriented or confused. This will cause discouragement and you lose energy/momentum.

Images might be in act in my head, without me knowing it. We might think that others are super-students,
have all the positive qualities, are organized, have good notes, know answers etc.; while I have difficulties,
have holes in my notes, lack organization etc.
Don’t create in your head the super-student, because he does not exist. Idealization has a result increasing of
a poor attitude towards studies in you, increases lack of self-confidence.

2
Be confident about your own capacities to study.

Sometimes you will be asked questions or want to ask questions. While you are timid or have language
problems others give answers and ask. But don’t judge yourself and your colleagues, because the one who
contributes most to the class in a quantitative sense, does not have to be more intelligent.

Meet people from 2nd/3rd year and ask them about professors, you get an image which might be totally
wrong.

How important is the level of our IQ? Important, but not the bees knees. Good IQ usually is the result of
hard work, hardly anybody is born as a genius. You can always become a better student than you are right
now. With methodology you can succeed, if you want!

Second Lesson:

2 ways of studying: passive (having)/active (being)

= must combine both attitudes in study

Study Habits: A set of skills or techniques which can help us in efficient studies; habit (garment)

Three kind of skills which are basic for good studies

1. Ability to find out what you want
2. Fixing it in your mind
3. Organizing it for your own use

Third Lesson:

Five general guidelines or attitudes, which are good to have in order to study in an efficient way:
1.) Try to know your potential and talents and use them up to the max! Discover the
qualities, that may be hidden.
2.) Try to increase your accuracy in learning. Means that if you learn a new technique of
doing something you make errors but with practice you can decrease the errors. It is the
same with learning.
3.) Right attitude towards studying. Means that you have to examine your way of studying
and see if you are happy with it. Do I know in the morning, how I am going to spend the

3
 day? Do I have sufficient time for studies? Do I find it difficult to get down to work?
Do I waste time? Do I often work under pressure? Is my work left unfinished? Or is it
left in inferior quality? Do I postpone difficult assignments? Am I aware of having any
kind of method in studying?
4.) Count my own successes! Keep them in mind. Need feedback for further progress.
Feedback can come from the answers I give during the lectures or from written papers.
Satisfaction of having done things well.
5.) Know how to stimulate myself for studying. Give rewards to myself, if I studied well.

Indication of five general guidelines/five basic skills, which are good to have, no matter if you write a paper
or read a text:
1.) Foreseeing: This is important because this capacity is the best to get rid of anxiety.
Means you have to have a general vision of your task. Don’t look until next Monday,
but further. Philosophy will last two years! General exam for baccalaureate! Have a
global vision of the work during the next two years.
2.) Inquiring: It is a capacity of being in dialogue with what I am reading/listening to.
Constantly interview whatever is the object of the current study. The aim of this is to
make me ask many questions in such a way that the ideas which are contained become
alive. Increases my concentration and helps to understand the matter and remember it
much longer. Obtain certain information by asking questions. Spirit of questioning is
one of the most important tools of a good student. It makes you an active person, not a
passive receiver, because the attitude of questioning creates in me a helpful tension
with the material. If you approach material which you are reading or listening to with a
question in mind you will be more able to pick out the detail. E.g.: You will read a
newspaper more thoroughly with a certain question in mind.
3.) Reacting: Means first of all to study, listen, read in a critical way. Being critical.
Suggests a mental activity or being alert to what you are listening to. Participate, be
involved in a particular task. Our minds are at rest sometimes, when we are listening or
reading. Ears and eyes are at work, but mind is always asleep. If you try to react to the
text you will stay awake and alert. We have to learn to react, because it is a personal act.
The way I react will depend on my personality, because it involves thinking and
emotions. A book sometimes makes you angry, sometimes it makes you want to laugh.
Reacting can be a spontaneous thing. Often, especially in difficult philosophical text,
such reactions want to be spontaneous. “It is boring” is not a reaction. React in a critical
way, before you react in an intelligent way. Aim of reacting is to make me mentally
active, become sensitive to what I am reading. In order to react correctly, I have to ask

4
 these questions: Enter into a relation/dialogue with the text. Not a monologue, make the
text answer my concrete questions. Ask about the arguments the author is using. Can
the theses be opposed by other theses? It is useful to ask, what the questions are, that the
author is trying to answer. Try to ask if the facts presented are correct. Is the author
distinguishing between opinions and facts. Are the conclusions following the premises?
Would other conclusions be equally correct? Are the conclusions in agreement with my
opinion? Two people observing one situation can easily agree on facts, but they are
always less likely to agree on interpretation of the facts.
4.) Speaking out: Verify how and what I do learn. It is the best method providing me with
the feedback of what I learn and how correctly I learn. Once I learned a certain
argument following: Something is like that because of this and that. Best thing to know
if I learned it is to speak it out loud. Prove if I understood the chain of argument.
Explain it to someone, because this really shows if you not only got the conclusion but
also the arguments/premises. All this verifies a lever of precision of what I know. Easy
to grasp the main ideas, but when asked about details, most people are lost. Check if
you know!
5.) Teleprinting: Try to fix the matter of studies in my memory. Imprinting in my memory
so that I have a certain amount of information. Re-read my notes, repeat them to myself.
Do it often. I have to prevent my mind from losing what I have learned.

Fourth Lesson:

There are two more things to concentrate on in this course: The capacities for writing papers and the
capacities for reading.

Writing papers:
There are basically three kinds of papers:
1.) The analysis of a text: You read a text and say what it is about
2.) Comment: You have to make your own critical assessment of the text.
3.) You chose a thing/topic that you write about and you develop it

If you are asked to write a paper according to the third kind of paper, you have some problems to solve. The
first problem will be the choice of the topic. Sometimes a teacher will give you a list of topics to write on. If
not, you have to define what you are going to write about. What criteria should guide me in defining the
theme? There are five elements, subjective criteria, to keep in mind:

5
1.) The topic has to be sufficiently delimited. The topic has to be adequate to the kind of
paper I write. So if I am asked to write ten pages, I cannot pick a very general topic or
one that is linked with other topics or simply too complex. Focus on the length of the
paper. I also have to take into consideration the time that I have for writing the paper.
Be clear about the main topic, so I know on what to focus, before diving into the books.
Know if something is relevant, no matter how interesting it is.
2.) The topic has to be remarkable. It has to be meaningful for me. If I am going to
dedicate countless hours to writing a paper, I should make sure, that it has a meaning for
me.
3.) The topic has to be original. It has to be a thing that could possibly bring a new
development to the science (philosophy). Sometimes it might seem, that the topic is
exhausted. But if you do a good research, you will see, that there is nothing like
exhaustion. If it is me, who is developing thing, it will be my point of view on the topic,
so it is likely to be original, because it is different from the points of view from which
the topic was looked at before. This is s strict demand for the doctorate thesis, but it
doesn’t hurt to start the practice early.
4.) The topic has to be interesting. Scientific work is very arduous, brings obstacles, it is
tiring at times. So if the work is interesting, it will be much easier.
5.) The topic has to be realizable. Is the topic workable? Can it be done? Do I have enough
preparation, enough competence, to face the topic? Will I find the material I need?

What are the steps I have to follow to write a definition/to formulate of my paper/topic/ theme? Usually it is
a progressive report from wide to particular.
The first step would be to see what in general is the type of matter to which I feel attracted.
The second step would be to individualize a sector/area of research, which represents a particular interest for
me. Don’t get too narrow too soon, because you might miss an interesting point.
The third step would be to deepen my knowledge about the matter. Start with general writings like
encyclopedia, or monographic reading/general critical studies in this field. Specialized readings will then
allow me to pass from a matter of general interest to a particular problem/question.
The fourth step would be to look for the advice of the professor. He can tell me, if it can be done or not. He
will help clarifying stuff.

Once the topic is chosen or once a topic on which to write on is received, you can proceed like that:
The first step to take would be the analysis and comprehension of the topic. Sounds banal, but isn’t. If you
don’t do it, you can make lots of mistakes. Spend some time with the thing itself and give it some attention.
Don’t start writing or reading yet.

6
The second step would be to convince myself, that the thing is intelligible. You have to be convinced that
the theme has a meaning/has sense. Therefore my intelligence can work on it. Do not have prejudices.
The third step is to distrust my memory. Sometimes a theme might seem familiar, so that plenty of
information comes to mind. But these memories can put at risk the work. Don’t take a thing as something
you have already seen, because my memory might trick me. Consider the thing itself, not what you thing
you understood about the thing. Allow the thing, not my memory about it, to speak to me.
The fourth step would be to study carefully the formulation of the theme. Sometimes details make
differences, especially in philosophy.

Never try to transform the topic!

If I don’t understand the topic immediately and if I don’t really try to understand, I might feel the temptation
to modify the topic, bring it into a formulation, that sounds more familiar.
This is a very big NO-NO!

So once you understood what you are asked to write, once you understood the topic, remain faithful to it!
Always check, if you’re still with the topic!

The topic has to guide me in my writing. This means, that I have to be faithful to it, the topic will give me
the orders, I am subjected to it. I have to be careful to understand the demands of the topic, to understand the
natural order, dictated by the topic. I have to respect the topic.

Fifth Lesson:

Bibliographical research:
How to do a proper bibliographical research, when I picked my topic? Of course the research has to
correspond with the paper I am writing. There are different methods of research, depending on whether you
write a doctorate paper or a simple paper. It still has to be a full research. You have to make a systematical
identification and analysis of the literature containing information on my topic. The first bibliographical
research has four objectives:
- Limit the material
- Give a complete vision of the material regarding my problem
- Find out the level of research on my topic
- Enable a provisional outline of my work

How do I find the material I need? Personal contact with the documents is important, because you do not

7
only need a list of titles, but also have to verify the content of the books.
Check out encyclopedias for articles on my topic, because at the end of these articles I will find literature-
tips on the subject. Check out general scientific works on my topic for the same reason. Check out book
reviews.
“Bulletin Thomiste” (includes book reviews)
“International scientific bibliography” (by the university of Louvain)

How do you evaluate a bibliography?

- You have to make a reference to good books/articles. You need a critical sense. You
can look at certain external criteria, like the books mentioned above or philosophical
reviews, critical opinions on the books, competence of the author (is he known, does he
have qualification for this topic…), the editorial house (reputation), whether the book is
one of more volumes on the same topic, the number of reprints the book had, the
number of quotes an author gets by other authors and the date of publication (if the
book is old, it doesn’t have to be without value).
- You have to evaluate the material itself. Judge on the basis of critiques according to the
content of the book. The criteria I have to look for are clarity, coherence, richness,
directness etc. Read the preface of the author, the table of contents and the index.
Briefly go to some pages of the book, read them and see how clear it is, how the writing
makes me feel. Is the writing just a presentation of opinions without evidence, is the
argumentation consequent or not? Pay attention so the sobriety of the style. Are there
emotions or is the argumentation cool?
- Classify the material you find. You can separate the material into the following four
main blocks:
- The basic material. Books that I recognize as essential in my research.
- The useful material. Books that speak about marginal aspects of my topic, or the
ones that clarify a certain context that my not relate directly to the topic, but still
help to get a clearer view.
- The publications of general character. Books written for a broader public may be
useful, but they are not very valuable. The documents I want to track down or
consult eventually. The books that might be something but just aren’t there right
now.

Divide bibliography into two parts: Primary sources and secondary sources. Primary sources are the first-
hand documents, which regard my topic. They are writings not based on other writers work, but are the
original sources dealing with my topic, presenting it to me directly.

8
Secondary sources are a far larger group, because this is the material discussing the primary sources.

What is a good way to take notes during the bibliographical research? Do not write in a book, because I
might want to re-arrange, carry notes around etc. Use bibliographical cards instead. What data should these
cards contain? Author, title, publication details, short but specific content (also important for later work).

After the completion of the bibliographic research I have to write a preliminary outline, in order to gather
the material in an ordered way. The preliminary outline: Organize the facts/ideas gained during the first
bibliographical research. Don’t waste too much time on that. Do not start writing without having a plan.
Write down certain points in which I want to develop my topic. How? Try to see what the possible, logical
order of the arguments/the arrangement is. Try to see the possible controlling or central idea of the topic.
After writing down the plan, gather some documentation. This consists in getting a personal relationship
with what I have found out in the initial bibliographical research. Start a proper research by reading the
material I have found. From the first moment I need a critical evaluation of what I am reading. Otherwise I
will read in a superficial way and be dispersed or I might neglect important information. One criterion is the
relevance. Is this, what I am reading, relevant to my topic? Take notes while I am reading. This is very
important.

Sixth Lesson:
Research (continued): Make content cards. Don’t write down stuff in a book, but only on single sheets, so
you can rearrange. Content card should contain just one piece of data. And this data should be complete.
Again, having only one piece of information on a card helps you to rearrange later. Also, the information
must have integrity. The card has to contain all the essential elements, all the elements necessary to
understand the complete data. When writing content card, never forget to write down, where you got the
information (book, chapter, page etc.), so you don’t have to make another research. Quote exactly! Even
possible mistakes have to be quoted and indicated in this way: [sic.].
Next step: Organization of the material. Bring an order to the material. There are two different ways: You
order the content alphabetically. Or you can order the material according to the preliminary outline. This has
the advantage that you see if you have enough material for all the points.
Next step: Elaborate a documentation. First go through all the notes. Do it quickly, because remembering is
not important here. This is more about impregnating the mind with as much data as possible. Eliminate
duplicates, if there are any. Fill in gaps. You might want to change the outline. So insert new points,
suppress others. Suppressing usually is more difficult (psychologically). You might feel the need to make
use of what you have found. The only criterion, though, should be: Is the point relevant or not?
Next step: Try to create a final outline. If it’s not possible, go back to research and fill the gaps. If you
create the outline, make a division (and do it properly -> no single division in sub-chapters!)

9
Next step: Write!
Next step: Leave the paper alone. Take it up after a week or so and notice how you react: “Did I actually
write that crap?” Give the paper to somebody else, gather some critique and then improve.

The text needs some characteristics:

Flow: Natural transition between paragraphs.
Unity: The idea of a paragraph is to have one part of the text that deals with just one idea. Each paragraph
needs unity.
Coherence: Enables the reader to grasp the wholeness of the paper. Try to make evident the link between
sections. Show that the passage between sections is natural, logical, reasonable.
Shape/emphasis: Papers sometimes lack shape/emphasis. Each part seems to be equally important. There is
no development towards a climax. Try to avoid that.
Correct grammar: Speaks for itself.
Correct argumentation: Are the arguments correct? Don’t contradict yourself! Make sure, arguments have
a logical sequence, relate to previous arguments. Can the arguments be questioned? Are the arguments
leading to a general and final conclusion?
Documentation: Don’t submit a paper with direct quotation and no indication of sources! Don’t plagiarize!
Add a bibliography!

Try to keep a good balance between the chapters and sub-chapters. Don’t make one chapter tiny and let
another grow out of control.

Do all that correctly and you SCORE!

Three main parts of a paper:

Preliminary part: Title page, foreword (where needed), table of contents, list of abbreviations (where
needed), without-whoms (where needed) etc.
Central part: Introduction, chapters (general body of the essay), conclusion
Complementary part: Appendix (where needed), bibliography (obligatory!), indexes (where needed)

Title page:
Top middle: Pontifical University of St. Thomas Aquinas, next line: Faculty of Philosophy; Center middle:
My name, next line: title,
Bottom middle: Moderator’s name (the one with whom you are writing the paper), next line: Rome, 2006

10
Seventh Lesson:

Continuation of Division of Writing a Paper

Table of Contents / Index

Listing down all of the parts the paper contains except title page and tables of contents itself

Lists of Abbreviations
*When quoting an author who writes several different books, abbreviate his works
Form out of fist letters of main words in title
Should not contain usual abbreviations
Only put those of your own creation
Indicate according to the alphabetical order of the abbreviation
When the abbreviated title appears for the first time, you have to do it in full form
Second Group of Elements: Introduction, Chapters and Conclusion

Intro:
Essential part of the essay
Constitutes first approach to the reader of the theme
Aim to make reader enter into the topic of the writing- passage from outside to inside
Content of Intro:
All possible elements necessary for the intelligibility of the reader
Introduce topic of which you are aiming to write
Make justification of limits of my work
Define topic-indicate its limits
Indicate relationship of my writing to previous research already done in the field
Indicate the development of the problem of which you are writing and its actual state- evolution of
proceeding studies
Problemization of topic- set problem- show “problemicity” of problem- problem and possible consequences
Can be done by formulating a set of questions
Will help reader proceed throughout argumentation
You don’t answer the questions in the intro
Clarification/ Indication of purpose of my work – explain what it is about
Practicality of the paper/problem – Point to indicate
Presentation / Justification of methodology used
Tools/ Sources in which you are basing yourself on

11
Introduction linked with objectives – structure – how my work will be divided/main arguments of my work
Avoid making the introduction a page of universal statements of the topic – it must develop concrete points
Intro has to be interesting/ attractive but don’t sacrifice content of paper
How long should the intro be?
Depends on the paper
Has to be proportioned to limits of paper
As short as possible containing all essential elements proper to the text
(For a 10 page paper- ¾ to a full page is good)
When to write Intro?: After the work is completed, It has to introduce the totality of the paper

Placed after table of contents

Intro will be a separate page from content

Parts of text itself

Chapters of the essay
Whole work has to be divided into parts/chapters/subchapters
Cannot be one continuous development of a topic
(For term paper, continue chapters on same page, in bigger works, start a new page)
Never place chapter/subchapter titles at the bottom of the page and two lines must follow the title

Eighth Lesson:

Direct quote and paraphrasing:

Quotations = Exact passages/words of someone else, direct quotations have to be transcribed with total
fidelity
Paraphrasing = Thought of somebody else, expressed in your own linguistic way. Always indicate
paraphrases, although they may not be direct quotes. Reasons are ethical (not your thoughts) and practical
(reader might want to check out).

Conclusion of paper: Put an end to an essay and complete it. What should be contained? Results from the
research. What did you achieve with your work, consequences, what have you proved. Indicate merits and
limits of your work. Show questions that are still left unanswered and problems that are left open. Don’t use
general universal phrases. Conclusion has to correspond with the introduction.

Appendix: Part of the work where you can put the things not essential for the originality of the work but still
useful/helpful for the reader, i.e. an original and hard to find text by an author to whom you make a

12
reference. Different appendices are possible.

Bibliography: Constitutes the formal statement of the credentials of the paper, indicates the sources on
which I based my paper. Criteria for bibliography: Exact, up to date and honest. Only show the works you
actually used (not necessarily quoted) for the paper. Divide between primary and secondary sources and
general works like dictionaries. Put things in order (alphabetically or chronologically). Secondary sources
are easier ordered alphabetically.

Indexes (authors, subjects) are also useful.

This all is for papers with a freely chosen topic.

There also are analysis/explanation and commentary of texts that you will have to write.
Analysis/Explanation is not just one more exercise, it is the best way to approach the thinking of the author.
It is a direct work on the author without making comments or being a secondary source. In order to know
what others said you cannot rely on the comments. You have to read directly and in depth, think by yourself.

Analysis/Explanation is not
- a pre-text to make a paper (your own) on a certain topic (instead of an analysis). This is
free reflection, not analysis.
- a comment either.
- a paraphrase. Paraphrase is anti-philosophical, because it consists in repetition of what
the author said in different words and often in bigger quantity.
- a word-by-word division. This is mechanical and results in destruction of the meaning.
Plato calls this a foolish slaughter. Avoid mechanical division and cut text according to
natural articulations not piece by piece.

Analysis/Explanation is
the simplest procedure that can exist in the approach to a text. It exists in announcing what is there in the
text, what we find in it, what is pre-supposed, what is exposed (and what is not), what is implied by the
author. Emphasize the meaning of the text. Clarify the importance of the development of the text. Expose
the articulation of the arguments. In writing an explanation be careful to respect certain principles:
a) Indicate theme (what the author is speaking about), thesis (what the author affirms
about the topic, what is his position in regard to the topic) and problem list (what
problems result from such position, where do you have questions).

13
b) Recognition of the general development of the text. How does the author argue to arrive
at his position?
c) Discover, analyze, make operative notions/contents pre-supposed in the text. What is
written between the lines?
d) Express yourself on the exposed discourse. Make an evaluation of the authors
arguments from the point of view of the correctness of the argument, not so much its
truth.

How do we behave in front of the text? Be receptive. Eliminate all you have in your memory about a given
topic. Don’t be prejudiced. Don’t look at the text as a confirmation of what you already know. Try to be
satisfied with what you read. Do not look for comments by others on the text. This only creates bars between
you and the text. Solutions for all difficulties are in the text itself. Don’t be afraid of your own incapacities.
If there is a meaning in the text and you have some brains, you’ll find it.

How to proceed in analyzing? You need lots of attention to what you read. Make a photocopy of the text and
work with a pen. Underline terms, notions, different arguments. This will make the text look familiar and
closer to you. Re-re-re-re-re-re-re-read the text. And try to approach it with a pure sight, try to forget what
you think you understood in the previous reading. Everything has to be examined, down to the construction
of the sentences. Be aware, that if certain answers jump at you immediately they might be wrong and block
your view. Read the text so often, until you actually get a plan of it. Individualize the development,
articulation of the text. Find out the form of the text. See, which articulations are more important, which are
less important.

What elements do you need in the introduction, the explanation itself and the conclusion of the
Analysis/explanation (Table of cont, intro, main part, conclusion, bibliography)

Ninth Lesson:

Virtue text analysis:

Main words: Virtue, mean, state of character, choice
Theme of the text is the essence of moral virtue.
Thesis that Aristotle tries to prove is in the last line: According to its essence the virtue is a mean and - with
regard to what is best and right - an extreme.
The thesis gives a good point to examine: How can something be a mean and an extreme at the same time.
The word “then” in the first line indicates that Aristotle is making reference to a previous discussion, recalls
results from previous chapters.

14
In the 1st sentence he gives the definition of virtue (a mean).
Then we learn what the virtue of a mean is, namely lying between two things (excess and defect) that are
always wrong.
“Hence” indicates that everything proceeding this word allows us to draw the following conclusion.
Look for different meanings:
Virtue = state of character concerned with choice AND mean relative to us.
Mean = rational principle AND middle way between two vices/evils. It is what is right.
Last sentence: He speaks about virtue at two different levels. At the level of the essence (something which is
determined by reason) virtue is defined simply as a mean, because its in an intermediate between two
opposite vices. There is a second element at the level of perfection/excellence: Virtue is an extreme in
regard to what is best and right.

URL for cool book about the right style in writing papers:
http://www.mhra.org.uk/Publications/Books/StyleGuide/StyleGuideV1.pdf

Back to Analysis/Explanation:
Main problems/themes/thesis; for what to look when to analyze a text.
Concrete realization of analysis:
Introduction (first part): It is a real test for the paper, because a good intro always prepares the reader in a
good way. You write the introduction last and you make it brief and concise. It has to contain four elements:
First: Indicate the theme and the object of the text, what the author speaks of. Careful: Find an authentic
theme that corresponds to the totality of the text. It is enough to write one good phrase here.
Second: Indicate the author’s thesis exposed in the text. What the author is affirming in regard to his thesis.
It is a philosophical position assumed by the author in regard to the topic given. Thesis is main core of the
text. Careful: Find the real thesis. Again: Few words will suffice.
Third: Problematization of the text (Virtue being middle way and extreme in our text).
Fourth: Indicate the development of the text: Different moments of the authors thought. What are the main
arguments/points of his argumentation. Again: Do it briefly.

Explanation (main part): Detailed examination of the text step by step. Five important points:
First: Indicate and underline the important terms (virtue, mean, state of character in our text). Also find out
the implicit notions the author has in mind when he writes. Something is not clicking sometimes, you might
miss something in the text. Something might be incomprehensible, because it is clearer in the original
(Greek). Harharhar. Indicate main notions, key terms.
Second: Accentuate problems and questions you meet in the text. Each text is an answer to a question the

15
author has. Pose the questions to help yourself to get from one argument to another. Paper: dialogue between
questions and answers.
Third: Individualize articulations of text and develop them. The author does not indicate the main steps in
order to arrive at the conclusion. You have to do it in an explicit way. Show the main points/steps he went
through.
Fourth: Pay attention to the examples. Examples are significant. They explain/illustrate and give
information. If there are examples in the philosophical test, the author thought they were important. Find out
why?
Fifth: Be attentive to the moments which might be lacking argumentation or where arguments change and
something seems to be missing. Pay attention to what is not in the text.

Separate main parts into chapters/titles. Should be possible. Let arguments represent different problems.
Plus: She wants it!

Conclusion (last part): Two things:

First: Quick essential of the text, short critical examination
Second: Give an evaluation of the text/debate, guided by the text. Indicate how accurate the authors
arguments were, how well the argumentation was developed, how clear it was. Again: short and remain
within the text. Don’t let the conclusion turn into commentary. Don’t go to the truth of the authors thesis,
because then you will be commenting.

The writing itself of the analysis/explanation: Write without a draft. Write directly as if it was the final
version (after re-re-re-re-re-reading of the text, of course). A draft might just be a loss of time. It justifies
negligence (“it’s just a draft”). If the text has been analyzed correctly, there is no reason why you should
write it twice. Always have the text before your eyes while you are writing! If you quote the text, be brief.

Tenth Lesson:

Comment (different from explanation):

You don’t only try to see what the author is saying, but you have to evaluate the philosophical thought you
find. Enter in a broader dialogue with the author. It also involves making a reference to other
authors/commentators. Consider if what the author says is true/valid or not. Commentary in general is
broader and more ambitious than analysis. Commentary already shows how much knowledge and
intelligence you have. To make a good commentary you have to have broad and precise knowledge in a
given field. It also presupposes a detailed work on the text of the commentators of the given author. Exercise

16
on the history of the philosophy is required as well as speculative skills. It is essential not to mix explanation
and comment, because they fulfill different functions. So always ask the prof what you are supposed to
write, when you are given a text to write on. Explanation of the text is always at the service of the text. You
don’t go out of the frame of the text itself, while the commentary questions the author. Explanation only
speaks about what the author said, commentary can question the validity and truth of what the author says.
Explanation starts with the text and stops within the text, commentary goes beyond.

How to write a good comment?

The substance of the comment depends on the philosophical knowledge you already have. You can have
different comments on the same text, as far as content and quality are concerned. It is a personal exercise, so
it depends on your abilities to link the historical facts. A comment is an exercise that shows the personal
philosophical culture and level of the student. It involves a lot of personal qualities.

First: You have to know what the text says before you comment on it. So the first thing you want to do
when encountering the text is, to suspend your philosophical knowledge in order to make a good explanation
of the text. That is a presupposition for a comment.

Second: Be careful to maintain the order of the operations in such a way that you do not become disoriented
during analysis and commentary. Write in such a way that you do not write two successive exposures, where
you have an explanation first and then the comment

Therefore work in a defined way (horizontally and vertically at the same time). Work in three columns:
The first one will be used for an explanation/analysis.
The second one will be dedicated to the comments you can make because of your philosophical knowledge
and/or comments of other authors on the text. It contains what you know from history of philosophy and
belongs to the points you find when analyzing.
The third one will be reserved for personal observations. It can contain more personal reflections, things
that come to your mind, possible links with other problems and so on.
The second and third column will prepare the actual comment. Keep this way of proceeding up until you
reach the end of the text. Respect the order of the text you get from the analysis.

Third: If the analytical work and historical and personal reflection are completed, formulate a plan of a
unified work based on the results of step two. Again: Do not write a commentary with two separate parts
(explanation and then commentary), because you are forced to make a summary explanation/a paraphrase
followed by a comment without a proper structure but with many repetitions instead. So prepare the material

17
in columns, as step two says, because it makes the totality of the material obvious and shows you empty
boxes. This shows what information and material you have to gather. Try to fill the empty boxes. Once the
table is full, look for main themes and problems, find your focal points. These might come from the thesis of
the author, but also from somewhere else (within the text). Your topic might correspond with the one of the
author or not. To write an outline, follow the order of the text, unless you find very good reasons not to do
so. Try to write a plan of the text that follows the first column and look for the equivalents in the other
columns. Try to keep an equilibrium between the parts of the comment. Introduction and conclusion do not
have to be long and follow the rules of the ones in explanation. The contents though is different, because the
work is not only on the text but also about what others and you are thinking about it, the intro will not only
speak about the author and the text. You will have to raise to the level of the problem and present the
contents of the work of the author and introduce its place the general philosophical debate. Refer to the plan
of the work. Explain the arguments to which you go. This might also be accompanied by a set of problems
or questions you will present. Indicate objectives of your commentary, what you want to prove. Explain
your position/thesis in regard to what the author says. In the conclusion you have to make a critical appraisal
of your work and make some kind of speculative reflection in order to situation your work in the field of
philosophy.

Two main difficulties arise in both writing an analysis or a comment on a text. You might be confronted
with a text that seems so difficult and obscure that you seem to be unable to cope with it. The language
might have a high degree of technicality, presupposing a lot of knowledge. On the other hand there are texts
that seem so transparent and simple that they are almost empty. It seems to be so easy, that you cannot say
anything about it. The second problem is the bigger one, because, in the case of the first problem, if you
have to analyze a very dense and difficult text, once you become familiar with the terms and the language,
the text itself falls into place. In the second case though you might not find anything you can write about.

Eleventh Lesson

Reading skills:
Can you read? Valid question, because there is reading and reading!
Philosophy is a complicated subject. In order to read efficiently you need philosophical preparation. In order
to have that you have to read: Learning through reading and reading to learn.
Different types of reading:
For enjoyment
For information
For formation: Supposed to cultivate personal dimensions as a person. Moral, cultural, intellectual

18
development.
In-depth-reading: Combines reading for information and for formation. This involves remembering the
information and understanding the text. Reflective, critical reading, stimulating your development. Reading
is thinking, hence the aspect of understanding: Think about what you are reading, try to understand it.

Reading philosophical texts is not always easy or pleasant. An obstacle in the beginning is a lack of
adequate knowledge. Also, the philosophical styles might be difficult in the beginning. There are lots of
philosophical terms, which you have to understand, which you have to get used to. There are also texts
written in literary form. In the first approach it seems to have an immediate accessibility. But when you
think about it, it seems that you cannot draw anything from it, because it seems so easy and banal. But be
patient!

Five important moments in reading:

First: Survey
Take a general look at the book. The aim is to help you to find your personal way through the text easily. It
is important to have an insight into the book’s content in a short time. It is easier to read a philosophical
book if you know what it is about. How do you get an accurate overview of a book: Find: 1) Purpose of the
book, 2) content of the book, 3) level of the book, 4) structure of the book. How do you find these? Look at
title, name of the author, publishing house. Look at the table of contents. It shows you which way the author
is taking, what he is aiming at. Look at the analytical index. It shows you which themes are important in the
book. Flip through the pages, read some passages, in order to get familiar with the book. Read preface,
introduction and conclusion of the book. Preface tells you something about why the book was written, about
its objectives and for whom the book was written. The introduction and conclusion will give you an
overview of the book. Look at footnotes, appendices etc, too. After the survey you will be able to evaluate
the book and see how interesting and difficult it is.
Second: Questions
Whoever reads something in order to answer personal questions understands the material much better, is
motivated to think critically about what is presented. If, for example, there is an important event in your
country and you take up a newspaper, you will read it with interest, looking for answers to the questions
about the event.
How to ask questions? Two important points to underline: 1) The amount of questions, 2) the origin of
questions. 1) Be careful in regard to how many questions you ask. Do not ask too many questions, do not
ask questions that are irrelevant. Two or three good questions per chapter should be enough. 2)
Justification/origin of the questions. This means it has to be clear why you are asking the particular question
at that particular moment. The questions should be in place. Justify to yourself why you are asking
questions. Be clear from where the question comes.

19
What kinds of questions do we have to ask?
First two questions: Why am I reading this book? What do I expect from this book?
Title of the book: This can turn into a question, can make you ask, what you already know about the topic.
Titles of the chapters: Statements of these titles can be converted into questions, too.
There are hidden questions in the text, because the whole book is an answer to the question the author asked.
Six traditional kinds of questions: Who, when, where, what, why, how. Two groups: Short concrete
answers, “closed” questions (who, when ,where). “Open” questions (what, why, how).
Ten philosophical groups/models of questions: Definition (What is it?, how is it defined?, what is its
nature?), Distinction (In what is A different from B?, what is the difference in nature between A and B?),
Place (Place of the problem. Where does the problem find its place in the general dimension of science,
philosophy, knowledge?), Principle of reason (What is the reason to be/exist of a particular reality?),
Conditions of possibility (What are the conditions which make a particular thing possible/enable the
existence of a particular reality?), Origin (Who invented something? From where originates a particular
event or phenomenon?), Process of formation (How can it happen? What is the way in which it was
produced? How does it come to be? In what way does the problem reach this formulation?), Finality (Why?
For what purpose/end is it happening?), Effects (What are the possible consequences? What are the
implications of a certain phenomenon/reality?), Capacity to instruct (What is it teaching me? What does it
allow to understand?)
Two more important and useful questions: About the truth of the statements and the relevance of the
statements. Is what the author writes relevant? Is it a necessary part of the discussion?

Twelfth Lesson:

Third: Reading itself.

Reading is an activity combining three elements: Analyzing sentences in order to find answers, having a
critical approach, taking notes.
Analyzing: Be able to focus on the main elements. A paragraph always concentrates on one element. Find
this main ides of the paragraph. The same goes for sections or chapters. Generally an idea is indicated at the
beginning of a paragraph. Sometimes it is at the end, when the author likes to lead the reader to the
conclusion.
Several sentences might appear to be important. Yet they might not contain the main idea of the author. Do
not make the mistake of misplacing an accent.
To make sure you found the correct idea of the paragraph, look whether it corresponds to the whole
paragraph.
A correct analysis enables you to recall details as well. These are important elements because they are

20
supporting the main idea. What are the details? Those elements and arguments on which the main idea is
based on.
Focus on the search for the main idea. You can already make notes of important details. Reviewing the
passage you should pay more attention to the detail. During the second division, concentrate on main idea
and details and see if they correspond.
Criticism: We have sentences of different validity. To be more critical, examine the statements you are
reading. Set up comparisons. Look for a variety of views and compare them with what you are reading
about. The author might assume a position “a” in regard to a particular problem. Assume that the opposite is
true, see if the position can be maintained. Or you read something and think “Crap!” Why do I have this
reaction? Often it is in conflict with your own opinion. Compare, see what is more reasonable or acceptable.
Reactions to the author’s statement wont always be there. So we have to establish a method of comparing
automatically, habitually. How does an opposite point of view change the situation? What similarities will
remain?
Question the truth of prepositions. Author affirms something and leaves it to our consideration. Why would
we want to question the truth of prepositions? Because it helps to identify simple assumptions, statements,
which have no critical background and are not challenged from the point of view of truth. Take up extreme
positions and try to argue against the truth of the preposition. = Is it true/self evident/evident enough? This is
important, because if the preposition is not true, the argument might be valid, but the conclusion will be
false. If the preposition is true, where is the evidence?
Question the validity of an argument. Is the argument done correctly from the logical point of view? Is it
constructed correctly according to the rules of logic? It might be, but this does not mean that the conclusion
is true or corresponding with reality, which again makes the evaluation of the validity of prepositions
important.
Prepositions can be true or false, arguments can be valid or invalid from the logical point of view.
Is the totality of the argumentation of the book correct from the logical point of view?
Be alert to generalizations or assumptions. In the philosophical text there is no place for generalizations and
assumptions (“All people know that…; all people agree on…”).
Notes: Why should I take notes? Lasting ink is better than memory. Memory pays tricks on us sometimes.
Taking notes helps us to learn. Taking notes helps us to be mentally alert. Reading without taking notes
sometimes leads your mind to other places and after four pages you realize that you didn’t get anything at
all. Taking notes helps you memorizing the text.
Develop a system of abbreviations. Make your notes in a clear way. Quote in a correct way.
How to make notes? Read first, write later. You have to understand what you want to write down. Do some
underlining/marking, but only do it in your books. And do not underline too much. Use pencils, so you can
erase what you underlined, if you need to.
Taking notes during classes: Listening is an active and composed and critical process. Listening is difficult

21
because you have to listen analyze, select and record. Good listening is difficult. Speakers’ velocity might
not be your own. You have to be on the same mental speed as the speaker. Also: You can’t choose place and
time for listening. You have to adjust your mood and energy. You have to be there. We might be distracted
by events in the classroom. It is difficult to be critical when you are listening. It is hard to evaluate speaker’s
ideas and validity. Sometimes it is difficult to listen and take notes, when the speaker’s personality does not
“click” with yours. Even worse, when the subject is boring. Cope with it.
Becoming a better listener: Get ready to listen mentally as soon as the bell rings. Direct your attention to the
speaker, not to the sounds and events around. Prepare for the lecture. Revise your notes. Know what went on
before. Do more listening than writing. Take up the main points. At home revise and complete the notes.
Fourth: Recalling. This means that at the end of the chapter or a section it is good to recall what you read,
make a synthesis of it. This will help you to fix the more important ideas and will be a necessary base for
reviewing.
Fifth: Reviewing. This is a final look at your notes, do a final check of the validity of what you have done.

22