As outlined on the syllabus, each student will complete four (4) written papers during the course of the term, due on dates to be for each individual at the start of the term:

• one analytical paper focusing on primary sources and

• one analytical paper focusing on secondary sources, both of which are to be submitted electronically (via the Blackboard course site) as well as in hard copy (outside of Olin 149) by Friday noon immediately preceding the Monday class for which the texts  in question are assigned;

• one critical response to the analytical papers posted on the Blackboard course site the previous Friday (also posted outside of Olin 149 as a backup), to be brought to the following Monday’s class in multiple copies; and finally

• one synopsis & interpretation of the previous Monday’s class, to be typed out, brought to the following Wednesday’s meeting in multiple copies, and read to the group.

In addition, the final paper will require you to work with one or two related primary texts that are somehow linked to a topic or theme explored in one of the above written contributions, making some reference to the way religious context informs the philosophical claims of its author(s).

The guidelines below clarify the purpose and exact content of each of these assignments.

Analytical Papers (2 x %15 of your grade for each)

Purpose: These assignments are designed to get you to

(3) locate in the assigned readings themes and/or issues that are key for understanding Indian philosophy and its relationship to Hindu & Buddhist religious contexts, and discuss the significance of those themes/issues;

(1) represent accurately and precisely the relevant claims of the assigned readings with respect to your chosen themes/issues, situating specific statements of those assigned readings clearly within the text(s) from which they are drawn; and

(2) briefly give your own assessment of the claims you have located in the readings, as distinct from your representation of those claims.

[NOTE: these are listed in order of importance, but the numbers correspond to the three elements described below.]

Exact Content: The two analytical papers should be identical in the points covered (see (1)-(3) below); as noted above, however, they will differ in their focus on either the primary or the secondary sources that are part of the week’s assigned readings.  In this class, these two types of sources are defined as follows:

• Primary sources are those written by Indian thinkers themselves, in contrast to analyses written by contemporary scholars.  These sources may be set apart from the rest of the reading (for example, the description of the Vedic agnihotra ritual, or the excerpts from upanishadic texts); but more often they will be integrated with the scholarly analyses (the secondary sources) that we read.   Thus for these papers you will often have to consider citations and excerpts within the secondary sources on their own terms, clearly distinguishing these from the surrounding commentary.  Admittedly the translation of primary sources by a contemporary writer of English is itself a form of commentary (see HLB 32-44); but you will nevertheless gain important insight by separating translated quotations and paraphrases from later author’s distinct comments.

• As already mentioned in passing above, secondary sources are the texts written by contemporary commentators trying to make sense of the much older works of Indian philosophers.  All of these include extensive paraphrase, quotation, and citation of primary sources translated into English.  When writing your analysis of your chosen secondary source(s), however, you should focus as much as possible on the contemporary scholar’s claims about the older sources, apart from the claims of the sources themselves.

With regards to the primary sources assigned for the week of your paper, you should select two or three important themes and/or issues on which to focus your writing.  Your paper should then include the following elements:

(1) Present and illustrate clearly and concisely, with reference to the specific statements of your source(s), the key claim(s) of the author(s) in question with respect to each of your chosen themes and/or issues.  For this class, a claim should be phrased according to the following formula: "[author X] claims/argues/emphasizes/suggests/etc. that..." [footnote 1]   You should also test to see if there is at least one viable counter-argument to each of the claims you articulate; if not, it is probably too general.  In presenting and illustrating key claims, you should make sure to:

•  represent your source(s) in a balanced way, noting (even if only briefly) the variety of statements that are made about your chosen themes/issues.  Avoid focusing on one or two of a text’s statements—especially its general introductory or concluding remarks—while ignoring others that may significantly change the text’s overall point.

•  include an appropriate blend of paraphrase and quotation.  Whenever you quote a word, phrase, sentence, or set of sentences, you should (briefly!) provide the essential details of that which precedes the quotation--either in the immediately preceding sentence, paragraphs and pages, or else much earlier.  You should also (equally briefly) note the way that the content of your quotation is resolved in the subsequent parts of your source; and, if several quotations follow one another, the essential details that fall between those quotations.  By all means, avoid citing words without giving any sense of the surrounding context in which they occur.

• consistently restate each claim after illustrating it with specific statements and relate it to those statements, in order to remind the reader of your overall focus.

See the “Sample Representation” handoutfor an example of how you might balance all these requirements.

(2) Next, set out your own critical assessment of the claim(s) you have represented as per point (1) above, making reference to specific statements of your source(s).  As part of this assessment you should consider two of the following four types of subtext, comparing the author's statements to those of other related readings:

• the degree to which (s)he emphasizes particular perspectives, arguments, and/or approaches over others;

• the underlying emotional tone (e.g., zeal, enthusiasm, passion, disgust, anger, etc; note that disinterest, detachment, etc. are also emotional tones) with which (s)he seems to emphasize her/his particular points;

• the extent to which (s)he seems to approve/disapprove (often not stated explicitly) of the perspectives, arguments, and/or approaches considered; or

• the unstated assumptions which (s)he seems to make about those perspectives, arguments, and/or approaches.

Again, whichever issues you should chose to address should be related to specific statements found in your source(s).  Please at all costs avoid general value labels such as “true/false,” "biased/unbiased," “right/wrong,” etc.; these are superficial assessments, that do little to further conversation about the exact nature of truth, bias, reality, etc.

(3) Finally, explain how you think the themes/issues you have highlighted are relevant to understanding the interrelationship between Indian philosophy and its religious context.  Here once again you must make reference to specific claims and statements from your source(s).

Most writers will find it easiest to follow the order of the steps given above; but if you are so inspired please feel free to employ a more creative combination of elements.  In either case, the representation of your sources should take up roughly half of the volume of your writing; and should be clearly distinct from your assessment and reflection.

Reminders about length: 1000-1500 words (4-5 pages in most fonts); deadlines: Friday noon immediately preceding the Monday class for which the texts in question are assigned; and media: to be submitted both electronically (via the Blackboard course site) and in a (stapled or paper-clipped) hard copy (outside of Olin 149).  Also make sure to review the “Notes on Written Work," especially regarding parenthetical references, formatting, academic style, loose pages, and late work for these papers. Finally, note my comments on and links related to "Evaluation" at the bottom of this page.

[TOP]

Critical Response (15% of your grade)

Purpose: This assignment is designed to get you to

(3) read carefully the two student analyses of assigned sources posted on the Blackboard course site the previous Friday (also posted outside of Olin 149 as a backup)—in light of your own careful reading of the assigned texts discussed in those analyses—and then to add your own reflections;

(1) represent accurately and precisely the two students’ primary claims, situating specific statements of each student clearly within the overall context of his or her paper; and

(2) briefly give your own assessment of the two students’ claims--again in light of you own consideration of the assigned reading--as distinct from your representation of those claims.

[NOTE: as above these are listed in order of importance, but the numbers correspond to the three elements described above under “Analytical Papers.”]

Exact Content: For this paper you will include the same elements (1)-(3) described above under “Analytical Papers.”  In this case, however, you will take into account a broader range of material, spanning several different layers of commentary.  The response paper needs to consider not only both the primary and secondary assigned readings, but also the two student analyses of those readings.  Thus you will actually be dealing with three nesting layers: original texts, scholarly assessment of those texts, and student commentary of both!

All this means that you will have to make some hard choices about what is essential to include in your written response, and what would best be to saved for class conversation.  You may want to sketch broad areas of interest to be expanded on by others during the class meeting.  Still, you should distinguish clearly between:

(1)  representing--still in a balanced way and with attention to blending paraphrase and quotations—the key claims of the two student papers (NOT the claims of the primary and secondary assigned readings represented by those authors!) with respect to the themes/issues that those student authors have chosen;

(2) providing your own critical assessment of the claim(s) you have represented as per point (1), including for each author one of the four types of subtext listed above under point (2) of “Analytical Papers” above; and

(3) explaining the relevance of the themes/issues highlighted by the two student papers for understanding the interrelationship between Indian philosophy and its religious context.

As with the Analytical Papers, remember that you must make reference to the specific statements of your source(s), which in this case will be primarily the two student papers.  Also your representation of sources should take up roughly half of the paper, and should be clearly distinguished from assessment and reflection, even if you don’t follow the exact order suggested above.

Reminders about length: roughly 5-8 minutes to present (800-1200 words for most people); deadline: beginning of the Monday class for which the texts in question are assigned; and medium: to be typed out, copied, stapled and distributed to the class in multiple copies.  Again please review the “Notes on Written Work,” especially if this is your first paper or you haven’t completed one for several weeks; and note my comments on and links related to "Evaluation" at the bottom of this page.

[TOP]

Synopsis & Interpretation (10% of grade)

Purpose: This assignment is designed to get you to

(3) read and listen carefully--in light of your own carefully reading of all of these—to the two student analyses of the assigned texts, the student response to those analyses, the assigned readings on which the papers are based, and the ensuing class conversation; and then add your own concluding reflections to all of these;

(1)  represent accurately and precisely the key issues, themes, and/or claims around which class conversation principally revolved, situating specific statements of particular group members within the overall context of the group’s conversation; and

(2) briefly give your own assessment of those key issues, themes, and/or claims, as distinct from your representation of them.

[NOTE: as above these are listed in order of importance, but the numbers correspond to the three elements described above under “Analytical Papers.”]

Exact Content: While this paper is significantly shorter than the others, it requires no less work.  As described most simply above, you must pull together and briefly reflect on the main themes, issues, and/or claims around which the class conversation principally revolved.  Yet just as the “Critical Response” takes into account a broader range of materials than either of the student analyses on which it is based, so too by including the ensuing class conversation this one page summary & comment focuses even more broadly.  Now there are five layers of commentary: original texts, scholarly commentary, written student commentary, ensuing student discussion, and finally student summary (yours) of all that has gone before!

Here, then, you must chose even more carefully what to include.  As noted in the syllabus, you should by all means NOT submit detailed minutes of the class conversation, although taking careful notes will greatly assist in composing the synopsis.  Instead you should focus broadly on the themes, issues, and/or claims addressed by a range of student voices, at least some of which should reflect the concerns of the assigned readings.  The standard elements (1)-(3) applied to the two student analyses and the response still serves as a useful framework:

(1)  representation of main themes/issues/claims still needs to be balanced and sensitive to the larger context of the conversation;

(2) your critical assessment of those themes/issues/claims will be much briefer and more general, and need not make any reference to subtext; and

(3) your thoughts on the relevance of the themes/issues/claims for understanding the interrelationship between Indian philosophy and its religious context should draw together, in a carefully crafted concluding statement, what we have all learned from the previous week’s materials and our conversations about them.

As with both types of papers already described, remember that you must once again make reference to the specific statements of your source(s), which in this case will be primarily paraphrasing other students in the class.  Try to capture the exact wording used in the conversation where possible; but even where you are unsure your can still sketch the general outlines of what was said.  Finally, even in this much shorter piece, your representation should still take up roughly half of your paper and be clearly distinguished from assessment and reflection, though once again you may wish to vary the order of points listed above.

Reminders about length: one page (if you want to use minute fonts and tiny margins, that’s up to you; it’s also OK to overflow a bit onto another page, but make sure to use back-to-back copying for distribution); deadline: beginning of the Wednesday class immediately following the Monday class meeting described in the synopsis; and medium: to be typed out, copied and distributed to the class (no more than one page, so you won’t need a staple or paper clip!) in multiple copies.  Oh, and did I mention you need to review the “Notes on Written Work”? Please don’t forget; and if you haven't done so by now, note my comments on and links related to "Evaluation" at the bottom of this page.

IMPORTANT NOTE about the Critical Response and the Synopsis & Interpretation: you must do all the relevant assigned readings in order to respond properly to other students' assessments of that reading, and to summarize and interpret the focus of a class conversation!  By all means do not base your writing simply on the student commentary.

[TOP]

Final Paper (25% of grade)

Purpose: This assignment is designed to get you to

(3) select, in consultation with the instructor, one or two related primary texts linked to themes or issues explored previously in one of the above written contributions; and discuss the significance of that text (or those texts) for understanding Indian philosophy and its relationship to Hindu & Buddhist religious contexts;

(1)  represent accurately and precisely the relevant claim(s) and statements of your chosen text(s), situating the specific statements of those texts clearly within each work as a whole; and

(2) briefly give your own assessment of your chosen text(s), as distinct from your representation of that text (or those texts).

[NOTE: surely you’re used to this by now!  The points are listed in order of importance, with the numbers corresponding to the three elements described above under “Analytical Papers.”]

Exact Content: This last writing assignment is essentially an expanded version of the Analytical Paper dealing with primary source(s).  In this case, however, you are free to chose your own primary source(s) and pursue the themes/issues of particular interest to you based on your work earlier in the term.  You are also free to be more creative in combining the three elements (1)-(3) that have been emphasized for all the previous papers, though the same general proportions apply: representation of source(s) should take up roughly half of what you write, and be clearly distinguishable from assessment and reflection. 

In the last few weeks of the course I will ask you to submit a strategic plan setting forth:

(a) a brief overview of the source(s) you have chosen, and what attracted you to it/them;

(b) a clear and concise statement of the primary claim(s) that you propose to emphasize--either your own or those of your chosen text(s)—followed by a brief description of how you will proceed to illustrate that claim (or those claims);

(c)-(e) presentation of two or three sets of specific statements from your source(s), each set illustrating your chosen claim(s) in a different way; and finally

(f) a brief reflection on the overall limitations and difficulties you think you may face in writing the paper: possible opposing claims; your own unstated presuppositions about your topic; related questions and issues that are outside the scope of your paper; and issues or questions that remain difficult to address.  (Address at least three of these.)

This strategic plan will serve as the basis for a one-on-one conference in which you and I review the proposed elements of the paper and discuss its viability.  The plan will not itself be graded; but its full completion is required and will be taken into account in evaluating the final paper.

Reminders about length: 2500-3000 words, or 10-12 pages with most fonts and margins; deadline: by by 9 am on December 21st (the day after final exams end--if you want to work on it that late, I’ll accept it!); and medium: stapled or paper-clipped and submitted with a self-addressed envelope (either campus mail or with the required US mail postage affixed).  NOTE: I will not read the paper and submit your grade until I receive an envelope with which to return it, since I don’t believe in commenting even minimally on work that won’t be returned.  By now you will surely have memorized the “Notes on Written Work,” and also learned from your previous mistakes; but who knows?  It might just be worth one last look.

[TOP]

Evaluation

Since the analytical papers, critical response, synopsis/interpretation, and final paper all cover the same three basic points (1)-(3) applied in slightly different ways, I will use the same basic criteria in evaluating each.  For my own ease of grading I have found it useful to summarize and illustrate the interrelationship of these three points on a one-page “Assignment Checklist.”  You may find it helpful to use this checklist in reviewing your own work before submission.