Title

The title of a book will give you a first, general impression of its contents. The title of a book is often created to draw attention and make people interested in it.

Examples of book titles and subtitles:

• On Liberty & Utilitarianism by John Stuart Mill
• Reasons and Persons by Derek Parfit
• Less than Human: why we demean, enslave, and exterminate others by David Livingstone Smith
• The Rise of Modern Philosophy by Anthony Kenny
• Orientalism by Edward Said

Some titles give us more information than others. Some simply state the topic of the book (Mill, Kenny, Said) while the book by Smith also tells us what he will argue for. Parfit’s Reasons and Persons remains pretty vague, but with some philosophical background knowledge, one could infer that he will say something about reasons for action and personal identity theory.

Table of contents

If you read a text assigned by a lecturer, you will be told which chapters or sections to read. If you are selecting literature for a paper or thesis, however, you will need to decide not only what books to use, but also what parts of those books to focus on. It is not always necessary to read the whole book. Often you will only need one chapter or even a subsection of a book, where one argument or novel concept gets introduced. It is therefore a major time-  and energy save to know what sections of a book you need to focus on. Sometimes, however, one has to read the full book and trace an author’s complete line of thought to understand and appreciate a chapter. In those cases, a full read is unavoidable.

The table of contents tells us what the book’s subtopics are. Kenny’s The Rise of Modern Philosophy, for instance, contains ten main chapters – some of which cover a period in time (‘Sixteenth-Century philosophy’) while others cover a topic (‘Political Philosophy’) – each subdivided into paragraphs. For instance, the chapter on ‘Physics’ is subdivided into:

• Natural Philosophy
• Cartesian Physics
• The Atomism of Gassendi
• Newton
• The Labyrinth of the Continuum
• Kant’s Antinomies

If you are writing a paper and need to familiarize yourself with early modern conceptions of physics, you may want to read this chapter whole. If you are merely interested in Descartes’ take, the paragraph on Cartesian Physics will most likely suffice.

The writer’s presence

There are broadly two types of books: those that present and argue for new ideas, and those that aim to provide an overview of ideas. Introductory textbooks, like Kenny’s The Rise of Modern Philosophy, aim to give an overview of a certain time period.  In these cases, the writer often isn’t all that present in the book. Smith’s Less than Human, by contrast, is an argumentative book. Here, the writer is very much present in the book

While its title often reveals what sort of book it is, the back cover can be instructive as well.  With Said’s Orientalism, we find the following text on the back of the 2019 Penguin Modern Classics edition:

“In this highly acclaimed work, Edward Said surveys the history and nature of Western attitudes towards the East, considering Orientalism as a powerful European ideological creation – a way for writers, philosophers and colonial administrators to deal with the ‘otherness’ of Eastern culture, customs and beliefs. He traces this view through the writings of Homer, Nerval, Flaubert, Disraeli and Kipling, whose imaginative depictions have greatly contributed to the West’s romantic and exotic picture of the Orient. Drawing on his own experience as an Arab Palestinian living in the West, Said examines how these ideas can be a reflection of European imperialism and racism.”

Consulting this back cover one can note that this is most likely an argumentative book, in which Edward Said as the author is very much present. Do note that the blurb, as this bit of text is called, is not always representative of the contents of the book. It mainly has a marketing purpose and can be misleading. Take any bold or sensational claims on the back cover with a grain of salt. If you want to get a longer, more nuanced summary of the book in question, have a look at the introduction. This will more often than not be written by the author, rather than the publisher.

Title

The titles of articles are usually more specific than book titles. Some examples of article titles:

• “Ethical Perspectives in Sharing Digital Data for Public Health Surveillance Before and Shortly After the Onset of the Covid-19 Pandemic”, by Romina A. Romero & Sean D. Young (fairly specific)
• “Women Are the Better Halves: Gender-Based Variations in Virtues and Character Strengths,” by Waqar Husain (title: subtitle)
• Watson, G., 1975, “Free Agency”, Journal of Philosophy, 72(8): 205–20 (more general)

Keywords

Many articles will include a short list of keywords (5-10) that specify the topics, terms, and names that play a role in the paper. Consult these to find out if the article in question is relevant to you.

Abstract

An abstract is a summary of an article, usually very similar – only shorter – to the one given at the end of an introduction. The purpose of an abstract is to give a brief overview of the topic and main arguments of the text. Before reading the text in full, always first read the abstract, so that you know what to expect. When locating literature yourself, abstracts will already tell whether the article will be of relevance to you or not.

Introduction

The introduction usually gives background on the topic and specifies the article’s contribution to the existing literature. It often includes a “narrative table of contents”  that explains each section of the article. It will most likely have a structure like this: “First, I will […]. Then, I will […]. In the conclusion, I will […].” Or: “Section one will sketch out the problem at hand, namely […]. The following two sections will go further into […]. In the conclusion, [this will happen].”

Conclusion

Reading the conclusion can be a great way to find out the key point of the article. The function of a conclusion is to…

• Summarize a paper in a way that its logical structure is clear
• Offer a concise answer to the research question or main thesis of the text
• Put this answer/thesis in a broader perspective (sometimes)

Tip: if you are unsure of which parts of a text are most relevant to you, read the introduction and conclusion before you read (through) the body of the text.

These are purely for your use, and to aid you in your understanding of the text. They only aid the reading process and will be of limited use afterwards. Think of:

• Definitions of terms used
• Translation or definitions of words you did not know the meaning of
• Key elements of a text
• Associations you have
• Your thoughts and/or reflections on the text
• Parts or elements of the text you do not understand (yet)

These are meant to be of later use. Think of:

• An overview of a text’s argumentative structure (premises, conclusions, assumptions)
• Citations of important definitions or conclusions
• Questions and objections you have

You may be able to answer this only after a full read of the text. And some canonical texts don’t just have one message but contain a series of conceptual developments. Still, try to read the text with the question in mind about which message or argument the author is developing.

One way to get clear on what the author is after is to see what is being denied, or opposed. It may not be easy or clear to immediately grasp what the central message is, but an understanding of what is opposed can mean a big step forward. Immanuel Kant opposes empiricism and rationalism in his First Critique and forms a synthesis of both traditions; in his moral philosophy, he opposes the effort to define morality based on what brings happiness. We may not fully understand the positive view he develops, but these insights help in honing in. Similarly, Spinoza’s holism is hard to grasp, but it helps to notice that he denies Cartesian mind-body dualism or the possibility of interaction between mind and body.

Sometimes an author makes a case for how things are, about what is the case. For instance, that evolutionary forces have shaped our ideas about what is morally right. Authors may also make normative and prescriptive claims, about what ought to be the case. For instance, that we should act in ways that evolutionary forces have favored. Often a text contains descriptive and prescriptive elements, try to keep these apart

To see what an author claims, or argues for, it is important to know what debate the author is engaged in and what question the author is trying to answer. Without this background, it is hard to see why an author makes specific decisions and turns to specific sub-questions and concerns.

Before getting into the details of specific observations and arguments, try to get clear what position the author takes. Usually, this is revealed at the start, but sometimes it takes scanning or skimming to get an idea about the position the author takes. Only with this in mind, you can discern the arguments in favour of the position, and arguments that are supposed to criticize alternative views.

Usually, an author does not just put forward the preferred view but does so by opposing alternative and existing claims. Which are these? Who has formulated those? Is this the standard, accepted way of thinking about a topic, or are these more specific philosophical views?

When you are aware that an author is offering support of evidence for/against a claim, try to identify what sort of evidence this is. This can be hard, as authors are rarely explicit about the nature of their arguments. Authors can appeal to empirical evidence: the evidence we get through sensory perception or from the sciences. Authors may also appeal to intuitions, by offering thought experiments, offering analogies, or asking rhetorical questions. Authors may also present logical arguments, pointing to necessary relations between ideas, or pointing out problems in the logic of the arguments of their opponents. What sort of argument is the author presenting?

If in disagreement, don’t move the text aside but try to see what the author does to address your concerns. Which of those ideas and arguments do you find compelling, and why? Which ones do you find unpersuasive, and why? If in agreement, try to stay sharp on what arguments the author uses in support and ask yourself whether an opponent would find these persuasive. This way, your own ideas can help to deepen the understanding of a text or topic, even if it doesn’t change your mind.

When you have located the arguments in a text, you can begin to evaluate them. Do the conclusions follow logically from the premises? Does the author commit any informal fallacies? (see ‘How (Not) To Argue’ in this reader for further details).

If you don’t see the relevance of a certain section, try to ask: why does the author consider it important that we understand or appreciate it? What’s at stake in this passage?

• Your summary shouldn’t contain any other information that is not vital for understanding the text. Usually, this means examples will not be included (though there are exceptions; i.e. when the argument heavily relies on them).
• If someone who has not read the text reads your summary of it, they should be able to understand the text’s main message (main thesis, main arguments, dismissed alternatives).
• Include key citations into your summary and refer to the page number(s).
• Your summary of a text should be a good foundation for formulating discussion questions.