“I know nothing” — Socrates

“I make it my business to know everything. And if I don’t know something, I find out” — Irena Spalko

Professors generally remember to tell you what font to use, what spacing to apply, and how long to make the paper. But there are three things that they sometimes, once in a while, forget. Be sure to figure out the answers to these three questions.

1. Does the prof want a title page? And if the answer is affirmative, what format should you use?

2. Does the prof want page numbers? This is something that they almost never remember to mention. Usually, unless you’re a philosophy or sociology or history or English major, your papers won’t be long enough to justify page numbers. However, I have had the experience, a few times, of having a professor who wanted page numbers but forgot to say so. If in doubt, just ask.

3. What footnote/endnote format does the prof want? Usually professors remember to say what they want. But sometimes they don’t. It is essential to know the correct answer to this question and to do it right. This can be the difference between a B and an A.

In the United States, there are three main styles: MLA, APA, and Chicago. APA is the rarest. MLA is the darling of the English department, while Chicago is the style of choice for historians. Yet even within these styles there can be subtle differences. For example, the Chicago Style can involve either footnotes or endnotes. Be sure you know which one your professor wants.

For help on citation styles, check out the Owl at Perdue, an excellent guide that will give you the lowdown on all three styles. For a more detailed explanation of the Chicago Style, you might check out the Chicago Manual of Style itself from your school library. Or you could get the abbreviated 101 from any one of innumerable websites dedicated to explaining the Chicago style.

“There’s a mighty big difference between good, sound reason and reasons that sound good” — Burton Hillis

In academia, not everything that’s wrong is bad. Case in point: there are some logical fallacies that professors really don’t mind. In fact, there are some fallacies that you simply can’t avoid using at the university (unless you’re a mathematician). Here are a few.

Proof by example(s). This fallacy involves giving one or more examples of something and then inferring a principal from it. For example, “I have seen twelve apples in my life; all of them were red; therefore all apples are red.” Of course, when using this fallacy you have to be subtle; you have to give multiple examples before inferring the principal. But as long as you have multiple examples you’ll be fine: apart from mathematics and deductive philosophy, all of academia is built upon this fallacy.

Fallacy of the Single Cause. When you attribute a single cause to something, you have used this fallacy. This one is generally fine if you are an undergraduate, especially in the social sciences. Marx said that economic advantage makes the world go round. Freud said the id drives all human behavior. And Postmodern philosophers say that the desire for social power causes everything. So if you use this fallacy you’ll have very famous company.

Retrospective Determinism. This involves looking back down a chain of events and concluding that the outcome was inevitable. For example, Raphael was hungry; someone puts a piece of cheesecake in front of him; but he doesn’t want to clog his arteries or become overweight; nevertheless, he gives in and eats it because he was hungry; the academic concludes that his eating cheesecake was inevitable because it was caused by the biological phenomenon of hunger. If Raphael rejected the cheesecake the academic would still say the outcome was inevitable because Raphael’s choice was caused by his knowledge of heart disease and his societal values regarding obesity. The academic fails to realize that there was a real choice.

Argumentum ad Populum. This means, “Appeal to the people” or “appeal to the majority.” This is a wonderful fallacy if and only if the populum is the academic community.

Appeal to Authority. This is the crown prince and emperor of logical fallacies in academia. It is the darling of academics everywhere. In runs as follows: “Professors Bigshot, Bigwig, and Bigcheese said that the sky is green; therefore the sky is green.” In the 1700s philosophers held that human beings should use their rationality to arrive at conclusions and should not listen to someone merely because that person is an “authority.” But that was the 1700s. Today you keep your mouth shut, keep your head down, give the authorities a smart salute, and say what they tell you to say when it comes to the big issues.

“How do you know you’re mad?”

“To begin with,” said the cat, “A dog’s not mad. You’ll grant that?”

“I suppose so,” said Alice.

“Well then,” the cat went on, “You see a dog growls when it’s angry and wags its tail when it is pleased. Now I growl when I am pleased and wag my tail when I’m angry. Therefore, I’m mad.” — Lewis Carrol, The Adventures of Alice in Wonderland

When writing theses, papers, or lab reports, you have to avoid logical mistakes. Of course, in academia not all logical fallacies are considered bad; there are some that academics love and use all the time (more on this phenomenon and how to use it to your advantage in a later post). But here are the logical mistakes that they don’t like and that you should stay away from.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc. This Latin phrase means “after the fact, therefore because of the fact.” This form of fallacy would run as follows: “After I sneezed there was a nuclear blast; therefore my sneeze caused the nuclear blast.”

Non sequitor. This means, “It doesn’t follow.” This fallacy occurs when there is a disconnect in your logic, for example: “My house is bright yellow; therefore Napoleon is risen from the dead.” Of course, that is an extreme example. Non Sequitors are generally much subtler than that.

Correlation does not mean causation. This one is particularly important for all you science majors out there. It means that two events seeming to be related does not mean one event caused the other. For example, suppose you forced a group of ten rats to drink Coke Zero and then eight of them came down with cancer. The Coke Zero did not necessarily cause the cancer; it could have been some other variable.

Begging the question. This occurs when your question contains the answer. For example, “The documentary Waiting for Superman is inaccurate because many of its facts were not true.” This is a statement of opinion masquerading as a logical train of thought.

Red Herring. This fallacy involves avoiding the main argument by introducing an argument which is irrelevant but easy to win. This is a sort of logical sleight of hand. Please note, however, that academics are actually fond of certain kinds of red herrings (more on this later).

Hasty Generalization. Example: Jack is Cretan; Jack is a liar; therefore all Cretans are liars. Academics hate this fallacy more than all the others. There is a special rung in hell for the student foolish enough to commit this cardinal sin.

Straw Man. Straw men occur when you misrepresent the opposing side, creating an incorrect version of their side that is easier to debate and overcome. This is straw man construction.

“PERSONS attempting to find a motive in this narrative will be prosecuted; persons attempting to find a moral in it will be banished; persons attempting to find a plot in it will be shot” — Mark Twain

Thou shalt answer the question… completely. Many times professors, being professors, will create an essay question that has lots of sub-questions. Yes, it’s annoying. Yes, you wish the professor would condense it all into one question. But thou must answer the whole thing.

Thou shalt write your thesis in one sentence. Some times professors allow you to write multiple-sentence theses. But usually this is not the case. A thesis should be a single [brilliant] thought. Therefore it should fit into one sentence.

Thou shalt be specific. Please don’t write the following thesis: “World War I began due to various causes; the Germans had certain interests, the Austrians had other interests, and the British and French had contrary interests.” Scratch that. Be concrete.

Thou shalt be clear. Theses should be elegant and clear. This will please the professor. I don’t suggest that you write the following: “Being the general which France newly elected upon the eve of the French Revolution, Napoleon sought ways of unifying france and/or disunifying Europe according to nationalistic principals….” You get the idea.

Thou shalt make a thesis that is debatable. It is not advisable for earth science majors to argue, for example, that the sky is blue. Neither is it advisable for history majors to create a thesis saying that Hitler was bad. Your thesis must embody a thought that is not common knowledge and is debatable. Just ask yourself whether there could be another side to this issue.

Thou shalt make a thesis that embodies a unique thought. Your thesis must be a new idea, something that you thought up all by yourself. It should be not a rehashing of the material, but an interpretation of it. This is the sort of thing that professors love; when they read your opening paragraph and see an interesting new interpretation they will be predisposed to grade you kindly.

Thou shalt put your thesis in the correct location. For short papers and essays (that is, 1-10 pages) it’s best to locate the thesis in the first paragraph. For longer papers the thesis should find itself somewhere in the introductory section.

Thou shalt argue a thesis that you have plenty of evidence for. When choosing a thesis, there are two considerations. First, is it a unique and interesting thought? Second, do you have, or can you get, enough evidence to support the argument. If, for example, you had a burning desire to argue that the earth is flat, you’d have a bit of difficulty finding journal articles to support you.

Thou shalt not go into too much detail. One the one hand you can’t be vague. But on the other hand, a thesis is a simple thought. It is generally better not to mention readings or books in your thesis, unless the essay question is specifically about an interpretation of books or readings. The thesis should be powerful, rich, unique, and yet elegantly simple.

Thou shalt not use logical fallacies. More on this in an upcoming post.