Philosophy, Social Theory and Human Geography.
Description
Examine the following statements and, drawing upon the work of Guattari, explain the extent to which you agree or disagree with it: “Friedrich Nietzsche’s call for the revaluation of the values by which we think and live represents the most urgent ethical challenge facing us in the twenty-first century” The comparative focus need not be equal (e.g. 80% on one theorist, 20% on the other). You can introduce other theorists/references, but the substantive focus must be on the two theorists selected Initial advice: • Break down the statement; consider it on its own terms. • Place emphasis on the clause, ‘the extent to which’. • Full agreement or disagreement is not the aim. • Do not attempt to ‘reconcile’ the theorists with one another. • Place emphasis on theorising and conceptualisation You might accentuate why one theorist is preferable in relation to a key aspect of your argument than another. • The choice of comparator theorist is critical. • Ask early on; is this comparison really working? • Contemporaneity is not necessarily relevant, nor is biographical similarity. • Consider, instead, ontological, epistemological and ethical affinities (and tensions). Research and Reading: Use unit handbook as point of departure for reading. • Compile further resources using Scopus and Google Scholar. • Read widely; narrow later. • Impose direction with questions, or through critique. Writing advice: 3 tasks:
• Outline key theme/argument of statement and its relation to theorists chosen – what are the main lies of argument, tension or comparison? • Attend to key texts, key concepts. • Examine implications of the key texts and concepts for the argument you are making. • Compose a zero-draft abstract. Writing Structure: Philosophising is iterative; the introduction must sketch the argument and its justification succinctly. • Signpost the essay-structure and rationale in the introduction. • Conclusion is the logical and reasonable summation of work undertaken, and the actualisation of the promise set out in the introduction. • First-Class: consistency in aims, argument, implication. Writing: Paragraphs: Paragraphs are quality-control devices. • Reiterates the function of an essay • Every paragraph should encapsulate an argument, or a stage of an argument. • Is it analytical, or descriptive? • How does it evidence or substantiate the point(s) made? • Establish links, hooks and relations between paragraphs. • How are you drawing the two theorists into conversation with one another? Writing: Philosophy: Encourages – demands – a tone different to that of other essays in human geography. Consider different expressionistic genres encountered in unit. • Be speculative in a scholarly fashion. • Be affirmative in your argument. • Critique is academic generosity, not outright negation. • Ontological or metaphysical composition and argument. Epistemological frameworks. Modes of expression and enunciation. • • Genealogical composition of thought and theorising. • Conceptual motifs such as ethics, subjectivity, aesthetics, politics, materiality. essays that were awarded high marks were those that combined assured conceptual sophistication, independent thought, wide reading and a structured, consistent approach to writing