Prompt: Reconstruct Haslanger’s argument for gender eliminativism. Is this convincing? Should we opt instead for gender reformism?
Reconstruct Haslanger’s argument for gender eliminativism. Prove that it is not convincing and that we shouldn’t opt to it and have gender reform.
*You can change the argument and write to whatever you can best argue
Introduction
Be as straightforward as possible in your introduction
Jump straight into the point
Tell me outright “In this paper I will argue…” (otherwise known as a thesis statement)
Give a “roadmap” of your paper in the intro paragraph showing how your paper will unfold
Make humble claims
Focus deeply on a single small point
Do not attempt to solve major issues of philosophy in a few pages
If you find yourself running out of things to say, address some objections some people might have to your viewpoint (in other words, respond to counterclaims)
Avoid vague language
When you say “strengthen the community” or “reinforce solidarity”
All I hear is “synergy” and other contrivances
Say what you mean!
Don’t worry about the method of citation (MLA vs APA or whatever), just be consistent
I do expect a bibliography, even if there’s only one work cited
Refer to the multitude of online resources for help when it comes to citations
I highly recommend citationmachine.net and owl.purdue.edu
In-text citations are important, you should at least tell me author name and year of publication, for example “(Kant 1785).”
In the bibliography should at least tell me (1) author name (2) title of the selection (3) title of the work (4) publication year (5) publisher information
Every quotation should be followed by your own take on the quotation
Don’t just dump someone else’s words in and move on
Explain their relevance to your point and justify their inclusion
Easy way to do this is to follow up quotes with “In other words…” and your own explanation of the quote
