PHL 110 Sample Short Assignment and Short Assignment Guide Loomis

I’ve written a sample short assignment using Plato’s Apology as the text. You will be
writing short assignments for subsequent texts starting next week.

Remember that these short assignments are to be typewritten and 1-2 pages single spaced
(or 2-4 pages double spaced, which I prefer). Use a normal font size (10-12 point) and
margins.

This sample assignment is under two pages. It looks longer because I’ve added, in
boldface, some extra comments describing what I’m doing. You won’t need to do this.

Plato’s Apology

The Apology was written by Plato, and relates Socrates’ defense at his trial on
charges of corrupting the youth and impiety. Socrates argues that he is innocent of both
charges.1 His defense is ultimately unsuccessful, and he is convicted and sentenced to
death. Socrates concludes the Apology by arguing that a just man should have no fear of
death.
[Note that this introductory paragraph concisely does two things: it sets up the issue
to be discussed, and it briefly presents the position of the Socrates on the main
topics (his innocence and his view of death). Long background histories and so on
are not needed in these papers – get straight to the point.]
Socrates defends himself against the charges brought against him by his
prosecutor Meletus in two ways. One way consists of a description of Socrates’
motivation and method, which he hopes will explain to the jury why some people,
including his prosecutors, dislike him. The second defense consists of Socrates
responding directly to the two charges brought against him: “corrupting the young” and
impiety, or more specifically, “not believing in the gods in whom the city believes” (p.
28). I’ll address these two lines of defense in turn.
[I wrote this second paragraph to clarify the argumentative structure of the paper. I
could have also combined this second paragraph with the first one, but it seemed
more natural to separate it in this case.
When I thought about Socrates’ defense, it seemed to me that it had two main parts:
the part where he explains why he has a bad reputation, and the part where he
responds directly to the charges against him.
The first paragraphs are usually the hardest ones to write. You have to stop and
think about what the main thesis or theses of the paper are, and also think about the
main argument(s) for them. Fortunately, once you’ve thought about these things,
the rest of the paper usually falls into place.]
Socrates begins his defense by acknowledging that many people have accused
him of “studying things in the sky and below the earth” and of “making the worse into
the stronger argument” and teaching these things to others (p. 26). He replies that such
accusations are “slanders”; the truth, he continues, is that he does not claim to have any
special knowledge of anything in the sky or elsewhere. In support of this, Socrates relates

1
Plato, Apology, translated by G.M.A. Grube. Reprinted in Philosophical Problems: An Annotated
Anthology. Laurence Bonjour and Ann Baker, eds. New York: Pearson Longman, 2005, pp. 24-35.

1
PHL 110 Sample Short Assignment and Short Assignment Guide Loomis

the story of the Oracle at Delphi. The Oracle, who was thought to give voice to the Greek
god Apollo, had told Socrates’ friend Chirephon that no man was wiser than Socrates.
Surprised by this, Socrates surmises that the only reason the god said this is that Socrates
seems to know only that he does not know very much. This, Socrates explains, makes
him unlike most other people he meets, who “think [they] know something when they do
not” (p. 27). Others frequently fail to know what they claim to know, at least when
questioned by Socrates. This leads other people to dislike him, Socrates claims, and is
behind his unpopularity. Nonetheless, he insists that questioning others is a part of his
“service to the god” (Apollo) (p. 27).
Later in his defense, Socrates makes repeated reference to the idea that he it is his
duty to the god Apollo to question peoples’ claims to knowledge. He points out that he
has never received pay for his services, and presents his poverty as proof of his service to
the god (p. 30). Finally, Socrates claims that the god has given him a “divine sign” which
warns him when he is about to do something wrong. It is this sign, he says, that has
prevented him from leading a “public” life of politics.
Socrates responds to the charge that he is guilty of corrupting the youth, in two
ways. The first way (p. 28) attempts to show that Meletus’ charge is “frivolous” on the
grounds that it does not conform to plausible examples of how creatures become
corrupted. Under questioning from Socrates, Meletus grants that all of the citizens of
Athens except Socrates benefit the youth of Athens; Socrates alone corrupts them. Yet
this is implausible, Socrates implies, for in other cases of corruption, such as the
corruption of horses by bad owners, the contrary is the case, with only one or a few
individuals benefiting them, and most people corrupting them.
Socrates’ second argument against the charge of corrupting the youth presents a
dilemma. Although Meletus asserts that Socrates corrupts the youth deliberately, Socrates
vehemently denies this (p. 29). Assuming that the alleged corruption is not deliberate,
Socrates then presents Meletus with two possibilities: “Either I do not corrupt the young
or, if I do, it is unwillingly, and you are lying in either case” (p. 29). If he doesn’t corrupt
the young, then he is innocent of the charge. But even if he corrupts the young
unwillingly, Socrates continues, he ought not to be brought to trial, for the proper
response to someone who is unwillingly doing harm is to instruct the wrongdoer, and not
to avoid them, as Meletus has done.
Socrates’ defense against the charge of impiety is more direct. He points out that
the entire defense he has given so far rests upon his belief in the Greek god Apollo, who
Socrates believes has given him a divine sign, and who he has spent his adult life serving.
“Clearly”, he says, “if I convinced you by my supplication [to the god] to do violence to
your oath of office, I would be teaching you not to believe that there are gods …. This is
far from being the case, gentlemen.” (p. 32)
[The five paragraphs above all develop the arguments outlined in paragraph two.]
Socrates is found guilty on both charges. During the sentencing phase he
proposes, outrageously, that his punishment be that he be awarded free meals in the
Prytaneum (the town hall of Athens) at the expense of the city. His actual punishment is
the death penalty. The Apology concludes with Socrates arguing that the just man should
not fear death.
[Notice that I say very little about the long sentencing phase of the Apology. This is
because, although it is amusing, there is not much argument given in this part. This

2
PHL 110 Sample Short Assignment and Short Assignment Guide Loomis

will happen in other essays too; there may be large parts of the text that you can
ignore or summarize very briefly since they don’t contain important arguments.]
Socrates begins this last argument by claiming that death is one of two things:
“either the dead are nothing and have no perception of anything, or it is, as we are told, a
change a relocation of the soul” (p. 34). If the dead have no perception, he says, this
would be an advantage, for he thinks that the “most pleasant night of sleep” is the one
that is sound and completely dreamless, as death would be. On the other hand, if death is
a change of place, then this too would be a blessing. After all, Socrates claims, if one
goes where the dead are, then one can, he assumes, speak with them. And what could be
more enjoyable than speaking with Hesiod, Homer, and other great Greek poets,
statesmen, and heroes? Socrates concludes his defense (p. 35) by remarking that his death
penalty may actually be a blessing for him, both for the reasons he has just given and
because his “divine sign” has not opposed him at any time during his defense, suggesting
to Socrates that he has done no wrong in his own defense.

Further Guidelines for the Short Assignments:

- These short essay assignments are not quite the same as book reports or article
summaries. The difference is this: the short essay assignments should focus on the
arguments presented in the paper, rather than trying to summarize everything that is said
(as an article summary would). Thus, as my example shows, there may be times when
you ignore or only briefly describe large parts of the text, and other times when you focus
very closely on just one or two paragraphs. If you just summarize the paper without
focusing on the arguments, expect to get a mediocre grade.

- In preparing these short assignments, you should start by asking yourself two questions:
i. What is the main claim (or claims, if there is more than one)?
ii. What are the main arguments for the claim (or claims)?
Most of the paper, and most of your grade, is determined by your answer to these
questions. Many of the papers we will read will have one or two major arguments, and
then several arguments for smaller points that are only indirectly related. The Apology is
like this: there are several short arguments (on page 33, e.g.) that aren’t really crucial to
the overall paper. I ignored them. Part of your job in writing these is to choose what is
really important and what is not.

- On the syllabus, I said that you should include a question about the reading. Since we
have over 40 students in our class, I won’t have time to answer them all. So I’ve decided
to make the question part optional.

3
PHL 110 Sample Short Assignment and Short Assignment Guide Loomis

- In the example above, I have a footnote at the end of the first sentence which gives the
full reference for the text I’m using. I’d like you to give a similar footnote or endnote in
each short assignment. You’ll probably just have to do this once in each paper, since
everything you’ll be citing will be from our book.
Since the other page references are from the same text, only a page reference is needed.
Give a page reference whenever you quote from or closely paraphrase an author.

- Get straight to the point. Don't bother with lengthy introductory or concluding
paragraphs. One or two sentences to introduce your topic is usually sufficient.

- Articulate the thesis or position clearly. You need to make clear what the author is
arguing for or against. Although this is not difficult to do, failure to clearly state a thesis
is probably the single most common problem with philosophy papers.

- Be concise. Most or all of what you say should be articulating or defending your thesis,
or illustrating the links in your reasoning. Avoid lengthy sentence constructions wherever
possible.

- Stay on track. It's easy and often tempting to wander into areas that don't directly relate
to the question. Don't.

Grading Criteria.
A number of factors are considered in determining your grade. Since these factors
interrelate in various ways, it is senseless to try to assign a percentage value to each. Let's
just say that an ‘A’ paper does well in every area, lower grades have trouble in one or
more areas.

1. Accuracy of content. Obviously, if you present another's position, you need to get it
right. This is especially important when you present the author’s arguments for his or her
position.
2. Thesis coherently stated (if applicable). The main position or positions of the author
you are discussing must be made clear.
3. Primary claims supported with evidence. You must back up your major claims (about
what the author is arguing for) with some evidence, be it textual, argumentative,
empirical, etc. I realize that the degree to which you are able to do this on short
assignments is limited, but some support is usually possible.
4. Paper coherently structured. It should be clear how each paragraph relates to the
overall paper, and how each sentence works within each paragraph.
5. Grammar and spelling correct. Be sure to proofread your papers.