{"id":14794,"date":"2024-03-12T18:26:58","date_gmt":"2024-03-12T18:26:58","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/questions\/is-the-pious-loved-by-the-gods-because-it-is-pious-or-is-it-pious-because-it-is-loved-by-the-gods\/"},"modified":"2024-03-12T18:26:58","modified_gmt":"2024-03-12T18:26:58","slug":"is-the-pious-loved-by-the-gods-because-it-is-pious-or-is-it-pious-because-it-is-loved-by-the-gods","status":"publish","type":"questions","link":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/questions\/is-the-pious-loved-by-the-gods-because-it-is-pious-or-is-it-pious-because-it-is-loved-by-the-gods\/","title":{"rendered":"Is the pious loved by the gods because it is pious, or is it pious because it is loved by the gods?"},"content":{"rendered":"

A Guide for Explicating a
\nPhilosophical Text<\/span><\/b> <\/span>Robert Burch \u00a9<\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Purpose of the exercise:<\/span><\/b> To encourage the student to read actively. In reading actively you
\nwill seek first of all to understand the text on its own terms and in its full
\nand proper context. (Since this first requirement might plausibly entail
\nreference to the whole history of philosophy in relation to history itself, you
\nwill have to make hard and careful decisions concerning what the terms, scope
\nand limits of the philosophically relevant context are, given the level of the
\ncourse, the length of the assignment, and the extent of the required readings.)
\nYou will also seek to interpret the text critically with a view to assessing
\nits truth or falsity. Active reading is a process of critical appropriation,
\nthat is, a process of “making” the text “properly one’s own”
\n(ap-propriatio<\/i>) by investigating its meaning and truth, ultimately with
\na view to how that accords with or differs from, challenges or confirms, the
\nconstellation of your own fundamental philosophical beliefs and assumptions. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

The task at hand: <\/span><\/b>To write an essay discussing the meaning of the assigned passage. To
\ndo this, you will need to form a judgement about what sort of passage it is —
\ndoes it state a supposedly self-evident truth? Is it a description? a
\ndefinition? Is it an argument, or at least part of an argument (a premise,
\nconclusion [here look for signal words, e.g., “thus,”
\n“therefore”], a corollary)? Is it meant at face value, or does it
\nhave an ironic purpose? Is it to be read in strictly philosophical terms, or
\ndoes it have an important extra-philosophical sense? Does it challenge the
\nphilosophical\/non-philosophical distinction? Accordingly, you will need also to
\nsituate the passage and so to decide for yourself in what respects it may be
\ncentral to the thought of the thinker you are reading, or at least to the
\noutlook of the assigned text. Is it central to a philosophical topic at issue
\nin the course? Does it establish a truth? Does it pose problems? Does it lead
\nto hesitations about the philosopher’s whole outlook, as you understand it so
\nfar? The success of your active reading will be judged on the basis of the
\naccuracy, organization and penetration of the essay that you write. To
\nfacilitate the fulfillment of these desiderata<\/i>, the following procedures
\nare offered for your consideration, keeping in mind that there is no sure-fire
\nrecipe for writing a successful explication, since what you write must in each
\ncase be geared to the passage, text, philosopher and issue(s) in question. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

General Preliminaries:<\/span><\/b> Read the entire assigned text first!<\/i> Then, before writing a
\nword, ask yourself these sorts of questions: (1) What are the guiding questions
\nto which this text is addressed, and how does this passage relate to them? How
\ndo these questions relate to those questions which you yourself had about the
\ntopic and which you first brought to your reading? (If you had no questions at
\nall, you might wonder why you were reading in the first place!) (2) Where does
\nthe passage in question fit into the structure of the work as a whole, into the
\norganization and development of its reasoning, explanations, descriptions,
\narguments. How does it stand with respect to the presuppositions and principles
\nthe author seems to bring to the exploration of the topic? In a mechanical way,
\nyou might ask yourself here, for example, in what relation does the passage
\nstand to the title of the work, to its various division, chapter, section
\nheadings, etc.? At a deeper level, you might ask yourself how the passage affects
\nthe discussion which follows? Does it redirect or focus the discussion in a
\nparticular way? (3) What precisely is the author trying to say in this passage?
\nDo you understand the technical sense of all the key terms used? What is your
\ninitial assessment of the plausibility of what is being said? <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Specific Preliminaries:<\/span><\/b> Often, much of the sense of a text lies hidden in the way that its
\nreasoning unfolds. Arguments are often imbedded in discourse that has a
\nmultiple purpose and theme, that unfolds dramatically and at different levels
\nat once, and in which the “logic” of the transitions from one
\nargument and one topic to the next is not always perfectly transparent. Part of
\nyour task will be to test the soundness of the reasoning that pertains to the
\npassage, and hence to examine the cogency of the relevant insights, proofs,
\narguments, explanations, descriptions, “self-evident” truths, etc.,
\nand the evidence that is offered or that might be offered for its claims and
\npresuppositions. To make a start with this task, you might want to consider the
\nfollowing two-part procedure: <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

(1) Select the words or phrases which you think
\nhold the key to the sense of the passage, using the following criteria: a) Is
\nthe word or phrase central simply to understanding in a preliminary way what is
\nbeing said in the passage? Though this step may seem vacuous, it is meant to
\nfocus your attention closely on the terms being used, after you have some
\ninitial, vague sense of what is being said; b) Are there words or phrases that
\nyou can identify as important to the author’s whole philosophy; c) Is a word or
\nphrase being used in a apparently technical sense, different from common
\nEnglish usage? (If called upon, you should be able to say briefly how each term
\nin the passage is being used. You might even wish to write out the meaning of
\nthe keys terms and phrases you have chosen, considering any explicit
\ndefinitions given by the author and how the terms in question relate to each
\nother. To check how terms are used, don’t be shy about consulting the index, if
\nthere is one). Keep in mind that it is often the case with philosophers that
\ntheir language is contextual and can properly be understood, justified and
\ncriticized only in terms of how meanings are constituted in the actual process
\nof the philosophical discourse. <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

(2) Give a single statement of what seems to be
\nthe main point of the passage. (If there are secondary points, state in single
\nsentences what these are.) Tell by what means the author arrives at the main
\npoint of the passage (e.g., Is it a premise or the conclusion of an argument? a
\nsupposedly self-evident truth? a definition? an explanation? a description?).
\nIn this way, you can also establish what sort of claim the main point amounts
\nto and then ask yourself what sort of validation would be sufficient to establish
\nthe truth of the claim (here, of course, one’s view might well differ from that
\nof the author). Decide on the issue of consistency. Does the claim enunciated
\nby the passage conflict with any other claim the author has made? If you
\ndiscover a conflict, double-check your own interpretation to ensure that the
\nconflict lies in the author’s thought and not in your reading. (In this regard,
\nyou might choose to follow a principle of interpretive charity, namely, to
\nassume that great philosophers typically don’t make elementary errors in logic
\nor fall stupidly into blatant inconsistencies. Instead, on this principle one
\nassumes that where fallacies or inconsistencies cannot be resolved, this may
\nreveal something important about the fundamental vision that guides the
\nthinker’s thought, and the paradoxes to which that vision and the manner of
\nquestioning that follows from it give rise. In this regard, to rejoice
\nstraightway in the discovery of a logical non sequitur<\/i> by which one
\npresumes to “refute” a thinker is usually the death-knell of a truly
\nactive reading). <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

Explication: <\/span><\/b>Read through the preliminary materials you have written, noting the
\npoints that you have made which you think hold the most potential<\/i> for
\nexplaining the full meaning of the passage. After collecting these points
\ntogether decide which is best seen as the main idea, i.e., that which
\ncontributes most to revealing the deeper sense of the passage. (It may well be
\nthat what you think reveals the deeper sense of the passage is not what the
\nauthor puts forth as the obvious main point!) Build your explicatory essay
\naround this main idea you have chosen. (Done well, this is an extremely<\/i>
\ndifficult procedure, since you will have to decide on a focus that inevitably
\nexcludes some things from consideration, yet ideally in such a way as to point
\nto what remains unsaid in the context of what is being said.) Thus, you will
\nalso have to decide how much of your preliminary notes will be included in the
\nfinal essay and what the structure of that essay ought to be. For this purpose it
\nis usually best to work from a close focus on the passage itself to the broader
\ncontext and issues rather than vice versa<\/i>. In the end, you should try to
\ncome to some overall conclusion or assessment of the passage being considered.
\nHowever, the conclusion or assessment should emerge from your explication and
\nfrom the way in which you have appropriated the passage in question. (Be wary
\nof simply tacking positive or negative pronouncements on to the end of your
\npaper in order to make it look more “philosophical” i.e., judgmental.
\nThese usually aren’t worth much.) <\/span><\/p>\n

 <\/span><\/p>\n

(<\/span><\/i>N.B.<\/span><\/b> The preceding instructions are
\noffered as a rough guide to assist you in the task of writing your explication.
\nThey are to be taken neither as a set of strict procedures to be followed
\nmechanically, nor as an hard and fast structure for your finished essay.
\nIndeed, part of the task of writing the explication will be for you to
\ndetermine for yourself in each case what is the most appropriate line of
\ninterpretation and presentation.)<\/span><\/i><\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

A Guide for Explicating a Philosophical Text Robert Burch \u00a9   Purpose of the exercise: To encourage the student to read actively. In reading actively you will seek first of all to understand the text on its own terms and in its full and proper context. (Since this first requirement might plausibly entail reference to […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":[],"disciplines":[56],"paper_types":[],"tagged":[],"aioseo_notices":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions\/14794"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/questions"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=14794"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/questions\/14794\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=14794"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"disciplines","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/disciplines?post=14794"},{"taxonomy":"paper_types","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/paper_types?post=14794"},{"taxonomy":"tagged","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.writemyessays.app\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tagged?post=14794"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}