For this paper, you must expand upon your 4-sentence paper. That is, you must write on the same prompt you chose for the 4-sentence paper. However, you are allowed to change your position, if you have changed your mind. Your final paper must be much more detailed than your 4-sentence paper, but it should follow the same general structure (i.e., explain your target first, then present your argument, then anticipate an objection, and then give your reply).
Tips:
The format will be the same as the 4-Sentence paper, but you should leave no stone unturned. Be very clear and precise about everything, argue as clearly and persuasively as you can for every premise, etc. I’ll paste the tips for longer form writing here:
You should write this like your very intelligent but philosophically naive grandmother were going to read it and your life depended on her being able to clearly state what you are trying to argue for and what your argument for it is. If you take this seriously, you will write a really great paper.
Everything should be painfully obvious. We tend to think connections or assumptions are obvious because they are in our head, but it rarely is so obvious to others.
You should explain any complicated notion.
Each paragraph should have a clear purpose you are careful to state. E.g., “In this paragraph I will explain why Plato thinks that the principle ‘nothing can be in opposite states in the same part in the same way’ is true.” You should somewhere make it absolutely clear what role Plato sees this principle as playing, and (if it is the focus of your paper) what presenting it has to do with your thesis.
Cite if you are using anything other than the text that the prompt is about.
DO NOT PLAGIARIZE – that means: do not ‘rephrase’ the claims presented in someone else’s work (e.g., Sparknotes on the Republic, which is abysmal); do not watch a YouTube video on the topic and then try to write out what they said in different words – it is the claims and intellectual work that should be your own, not only the words; do not fail to cite anything other than the text the prompt is about. This is not an exhaustive list, but it is the stuff that I most often see.
My 4 sentence paper to write this essay off of.
Author
Plato states to abolish traditional family values and structure because it
breads nepotism and a stronger unified guardian class.
But
I say that traditional family structure is crucial for the development of a
society because it creates deep bonds, creates a sense of loyalty, and is a
direct contradiction to the freedom of choices, private affairs, and property.
Someone
might object that disrupting societal norms and traditional values will shift
the loyalty of the people from their own family, to protecting the common
family.
However
I respond that traditional values bolsters community cohesion and dedication
because everyone aims to protect their family and their fellow guardians family
to promote a societal norm that has been visible since the beginning of man.
