Méthode de l'explication de texte en philosophie

In this video, I present the methodological advice that I consider most important for writing a good philosophical text analysis. a) In the introduction, you must go straight to what makes the text unique and original. Clearly state the theme(s) (generally, one or more concepts from the curriculum). Then formulate the question the text answers. Try to find a fairly broad question, like an essay topic (not a question where you can already guess the author's answer). Next, state the thesis, that is, the answer to the question, the main argument. Rephrase this thesis in different ways ("In other words…"). Then, you can contrast this thesis with other possible theses on the same subject. You can also briefly indicate the author's main argument (or an important argument from the opposing side). You can also discuss the issue or issues raised by the text, in the sense of other ideas that can be supported once the text's thesis is accepted, as they follow from it more or less directly. Finally, announce the outline of the text (not the essay outline), the "argumentative structure": that is, the parts of the text, specifying the argumentative function of each part as well as its content. You must thus indicate fairly briefly the progression of the argument, without separating the logical function from the content of each part. b) The development: this is a linear explanation by parts. Each part of the development takes up a section of the text. For each part, you can begin by recalling its argumentative function and its main idea. It is absolutely essential not to simply paraphrase; therefore, add to the text and explain everything precisely and in detail. Rephrase the main statements using synonyms. Explain "by contrast," that is, mention other possible ideas on the same subject and show that the author rejects them for certain reasons. Systematically define and analyze the important concepts (see the video on the 5 methods of analysis). Explain allusions or implicit meanings. If a passage is difficult to understand, do not avoid it, but rather focus on it. It is perfectly acceptable to mention several possible interpretations, perhaps even ranking them. Try to explain the entire text. Find examples (from your general, historical, literary, etc. knowledge). If necessary, identify the presuppositions of the arguments presented, that is, principles used without being justified in the text. Try to justify the text's statements, to legitimize them by presenting arguments and reasoning that support them. - Engage in a discussion with the text. Discussion allows you to raise objections to the text, but it's advisable to try to address these objections. In this case, it allows you to further justify the text's argument by introducing new points. It's often beneficial to refer to other authors, provided these references are relevant to the topic. Avoid "reduction" (ultimately, what one author says is the same as what another says...), but pay attention to both the similarities and the differences. You can conclude each section by explaining why you're moving on to the next. Ideally, these transitions should be more than purely formal ("after discussing X, we'll discuss Y"). A transition explains why you need to move on to another idea. Sometimes these transitions are very implicit, so you'll need to reconstruct them. c) The Conclusion This is a brief summary. Don't include an "opening" section, as you risk only posing in the last line the question that should have been asked in the introduction, or another question that should have been addressed earlier in the essay. Tip for draft work: practice four types of reading the text. 1. A global reading to grasp the overall meaning of the text (identify the theme, the question, the thesis). 2. Circle the terms to be defined and/or analyzed. 3. Underline the main statements that will need to be explained. 4. Divide the text into sections and identify the argumentative functions. 00:00 The introduction: theme, question, thesis, outline of the text 07:45 The development: neither paraphrase nor digression 09:03 Reformulation 10:23 Explanation by contrast 11:03 Analysis of philosophical concepts 11:42 Clarifying allusive or obscure statements 13:43 Examples 15:01 Justifying or legitimizing the text 15:33 Critical discussion 18:13 Comparisons with other philosophers 19:32 Identifying the text's presuppositions 20:08 Restoring transitions 21:20 The conclusion 22:50 4 types of rough draft reading 24:42 The writing