Your paper needs to have an introduction, body, and conclusion.
Introduction
Briefly introduce the topic, say why it matters, and include a thesis statement. Your thesis should summarize in one or two sentences the main points you will argue for in the body of your paper. For example, one possible thesis statement could be, “I will argue that John Hick’s soul-making theodicy fails as a response to the problem of evil.” (See section #3 below.) It’s also a good idea to provide a brief roadmap of the rest of your paper.
Body
In the body of your paper, you need to do three things. You should organize them into three sections, with section headings. Use as many paragraphs within each section as you need.
- Explain the problem of evil.
Explain the problem of evil as clearly and powerfully as you can. Make sure you clearly explain each step of the argument, and that you support key steps with your own vivid examples.
Do not allow your own opinions to shine through. You’ll be able to share your views later. In this section, just lay out each step of an argument from evil in detail. You are welcome to explain William Rowe’s version, but there are other versions, and you are welcome to explain any version you want. If you’re unsure how to explain an argument, read my advice on explaining and evaluating arguments.
- Explain a philosophical response to the problem of evil.
Explain in detail the response to the problem of evil you read in the previous unit.
-
If you choose to explain John Hick’s soul-making theodicy response, you must explain Irenaeus’s two-stage conception of the creation of humans, Hick’s explanation for moral evil, and his explanation for natural evil.
-
If you choose to explain Howard-Snyder and Bergmann’s skeptical theist response, you must explain what a noseeum inference is, how arguments from evil rely on it, and what these authors think about the validity of noseeum inferences in arguments from evil.
Challenge yourself to be detailed and precise in explaining each step of the arguments. Again, don’t let your opinion come through. Explain the arguments fairly and as accurately as you can.
- Evaluate the philosophical response to the problem of evil.
Evaluating something means stating your opinion about it, and then supporting your opinion with reasons and evidence. Suppose the philosophical response you explained was John Hick’s soul-making theodicy. In this section, you should ask: Do I think John Hick’s theodicy is a good response to the problem of evil or not? Does it completely resolve the problem of evil? Does it go some way toward resolving some aspects of the problem, but not all aspects? Is it so unrealistic that it entirely fails to resolve the problem of evil?
Whatever position you take, you need to explain why you take that position rather than another. If you find yourself without any opinion on the topic, then you still need to give reasons for why you have no opinion on the topic, given that you have now read a variety of perspectives. If you’re unsure how to evaluate an argument, read my advice on explaining and evaluating arguments.
Note: Your opinion about the philosophical response to the problem of evil is the main conclusion of your paper, so that should be reflected in your thesis statement in your paper’s introduction.
Conclusion
Briefly summarize your paper. Focus especially on clearly restating your main claims and your main reasons for holding those claims. This can sometimes be a good place to briefly clarify your view by contrast it against possible misunderstandings.
Research & Length Requirements
|
Grade Level |
Research Requirements |
Length Requirements |
|---|---|---|
|
Advanced |
Read and substantively engage with at least 4 different sources from the required course materials. One of these can be a lecture video, but 3 of them must be scholarly papers on the problem of evil. Only one of your sources can be a lecture video. If you want to research other scholarly sources, start with the Optional Resources: God and Evil page. |
800 words minimum Longer is just fine, but make sure all your words count. Again, don’t “pad” your essay! More words should reflect more thinking. |
Formatting Requirements
- Format:
- Please use 12pt font and 1-inch margins.
- Citations:
- Include a citation anytime you reference someone else’s words or ideas (this includes paraphrasing someone else). Also include a corresponding bibliography or “Works Cited” list. I don’t care which citation style you use. Just make sure your citation style is clear and consistent, and provides enough detail so I can find the exact quote or passage. For example, citations to a text should always include a page number, and citations to a video should always include a timestamp. And the full reference information in the Works Cited list should include the author name, title, publication info, and a link if it’s an online source.
- Audience:
- Imagine you are writing your essay for one of your friends who has not taken a philosophy class. Define all technical terms and use plenty of examples. Try to be so clear that your writing is impossible to misunderstand.
- Style:
- Much academic writing is written impersonally–like it was produced by a machine rather than a person. Don’t write like that. Instead, write in your own voice. Feel free to refer to yourself with the word “I”. Keep your words and sentences simple and clear. But remember that simple does not mean vague; aim for simplicity and precise detail. Use examples to illustrate and support your claims.
Process Letter Instructions
After you finish your draft, write a letter to your readers about the writing process so far. Include this letter in the same file as your draft. Your process letter should be the first page(s), and then start your draft on a new page. Write this as a letter to an individual, as opposed to a journal entry to no one in particular. For example, begin with “Dear Reader.” If you are aiming for an advanced grade, indicate this at the beginning of your letter.
You should respond to some or all of these questions: What do you see as your main points? Tell me the story of how you went about writing and what it was like for you in process? How did you get your ideas? What were some of the choices you made? Which parts went well or badly? Were there any surprises? And importantly: What questions do you have for me as a reader? Are there specific parts of your paper you’d like me to give special attention, or do you want specific kinds of feedback?