Transform the theme (or thematic) into a question (a problem) to which you seek an answer. This will be done gradually as you read and reflect.

 

This dissertation is a written presentation that argues a controversial issue (the answer is problematic, not self-evident, not obvious, raises debate)

 

The structure of this dissertation must include the following 4 parts:

1. The Introduction: An introduction that briefly outlines the theme, more precisely a problematic (as formulated by you), indicating the meaning of the question and how the answer is not self-evident (or the issues and difficulties)

Length: maximum 0.5 page (on 6 pages)

 

2. Development: Analysis of various aspects of the problematic, by identifying and structuring the premises (presuppositions including implicit, unformulated or unspoken), the relevant theses and arguments (etc.) of each author

Length: about 4-5 pages (on 6 pages)

 

3. Taking a personal position that is justified also in a reasoned way: it is not a question of simply saying what one thinks, but more importantly why one thinks it (= arguments), and that in direct relation to the premises, theses and arguments analyzed in the section ”development”

Length: about 1-2 pages (on 6 pages)

 

4. A brief conclusion that balances and indicates what you get from this analysis and the possible continuation of the debate

Length: maximum 0.5 page (on 6 pages)

 

This paper is corrected on:

(1) Formulation of the problem (introduction to the question)

(2) Presentation of the ideas and arguments of the texts (quality, relevance)

(3) Personal position (quality of arguments, originality, critical sense)

(4) Consistency of the whole (sequence of ideas), clarity, precision of the subject

(5) French (I got to a french university so when I get this paper I will translate it)

(6) Quality of the presentation (respect for the rules, general appearance)

(7) Use of material (citations, references to concrete data)

 

Tips to respect by the prof:

1. Always address yourself to a “universal reader”, who you must assume does not know at all the problem you are dealing with, to whom you must explain the issues of the debate and, in the “personal statement” section That you are trying to convince yourself of the validity of your position, without assuming that it is immediately sympathetic to your cause. (In other words, the reader is not a good friend who already shares the same values, the same common vocabulary (spoken language) or the same ways of seeing things as you do.)

 

2. Always promote as much clarity as possible and accuracy in the use of the terms you use. It is often useful to quickly define for the reader the precise meaning of the concepts you use (or used by the thinkers you present), since it is not uncommon for there to be more than one possible definition for a single term or concept.

 

3. It is important, while writing, to put your ideas in schematic form (“in point form”) to see more easily if they are consistent (non-contradictory) with each other, and if they are follow in a good logical order. The coherence, the unity of a text is essential to its quality, that is to say to its rigor and its power of persuasion.

 

4. Do not abuse quotes, and prefer short quotes to long ones. Always ask yourself if this quote brings something new to what you say (relevance to the subject), or if it serves to support the arguments. In all cases, clearly indicate that it is a quotation and always give the reference to the author, the book and the page quoted in the footnote. Any quotation not identified by quotation marks is tantamount to plagiarism, which is a serious misconduct

 

5. A good job is a job that demonstrates the ability to make connections between various ideas (be it links of resemblance or opposition). Most important, in fact, is to demonstrate to me (a) that you read the relevant texts and (b) that you have thought about them. As Montesquieu wrote (1689-1755) with a point of exaggeration: “It is not a question of making read, but of thinking.” I would say, more exactly, more soberly: “It is a question of making read to make think”.

 

6. So be sure to avoid vague, irrelevant comments, commonplaces, abusive generalizations and other forms of sophistry (appeal to authority, feelings, clan, etc.), which denotes the absence of personal reflection