Here are some potential arguments that could be used to further support premise 3-4: - The supernatural is defined as being outside the natural world and its laws, so by its nature it cannot be directly observed or tested using the methods of natural science which are limited to observing the natural world. - For something to be empirically observed or tested, it must interact with the natural world in ways that leave observable and measurable traces. But if a supernatural designer exists outside the natural world and its laws, it would not interact with or affect the natural world in ways science can detect. - Science relies on naturalistic explanations and empirical evidence. But the existence of a supernatural designer is by definition beyond naturalistic explanations and not open to

1. Term Paper Outline
Suggested Format

2. “Those who do not seriously
consider their outline risk losing
sight of the very clarity on
which the term paper
assignment will be judged.”

3. Outline Grading Criteria
 amount of detail
 amount of organization

4. This outline divides the paper by its
two objectives:
 the Philosophers’ position that you
must explain in detail
 your reasoned response to the
position within the context of the
Philosophers’ arguments.

5. I) Introduction
 a) Relevant internet quote
 b) Anecdote or other lead-in material
 c) Thesis Statement 1—Explanation of
the philosophical issue.
 d) Restatement of the issue.

6. II) Additional clarification of
terms, ideas, definitions, and
concepts (examples)
 If you use an example, analogy,
metaphor, etc., you must explain to
the reader what conclusion to draw
from it--do not leave it to the
reader's imagination!
 Beware of rhetorical devices!

7. III) Argument for first philosopher's
thesis (Statement 2)
 a) Statement and explanation of the
philosopher’s thesis
 b) First Reason for philosopher’s thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending first reason
 c) Second Reason for philosopher’s thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending second reason
 d) Continue with rest of reasons and
supporting arguments

8. IV) Argument for second
philosopher's thesis (Statement 3)
 a) Statement and explanation of
philosopher’s thesis
 b) First Reason for philosopher’s thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending first reason
 c) Second Reason for philosopher’s thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending second reason
 d) Continue with rest of reasons and
supporting arguments

9. V) Argument for third
philosopher's thesis (Statement 4)
 a) Statement and explanation of
philosopher’s thesis
 b) First Reason for philosopher’s thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending first reason
 c) Second Reason for philosopher’s thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending second reason
 d) Continue with rest of reasons and
supporting arguments

10. VI) Objections and Replies
 What do opponents say about these
arguments and how do the authors
reply?

11. VII) Student’s Thesis--
Explanation of your position on
this issue (Statement 5)
 a) Clear statement and explanation of
your view on the issue
 b) Clarification of your position
 c) No fence-sitting!!

12. VIII) Argument for your position on
the philosophical issue
 a) Brief restatement of your view
 b) First Reason for your thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending first reason
 B) Second Reason for your thesis
 1) Argument(s) defending second reason
 C) Continue with rest of your reasons
and supporting arguments

13. IX) Possible responses and
objections to your position and
your response
 Possible response from first philosopher
 Possible response from second philosopher
 Possible response from third philosopher
 Other possible responses or objections
 Your response to possible objection (if any)

14. X) Concluding Summary of the
issue and your position.

15. An Example of Argument
Analysis
Distinguishing between main and
supporting arguments!

16. Thesis Statement:
 “’Intelligent Design’ is not Science.”
 Clarification: The creationist-based
theory known as “Intelligent Design”
cannot meet basic empirical
standards of science and so cannot be
a basis for criticism of Evolutionary
Theory.

17. Main Argument
 Premise 1) All scientific theories must
be based on empirical observation.
 Premise 2) All scientific theories must
provide clearly testable conclusions and
results.
 Premise 3) “Intelligent Design” cannot
be based on empirical observation nor
provide clearly testable results.

18. Supporting Argument for Premise 1
 1-1) “Science studies natural
phenomena by formulating
explanations that can be tested
against the natural world.”—KSES
 1-2) Natural phenomena can only be
studied by empirical observation.
 1-3) Therefore, all scientific theories
must be based on empirical
observation.

19. Supporting Argument for Premise 2
 2-1) “Science studies natural
phenomena by formulating explanations
that can be tested against the natural
world.”—KSES
 2-2) Testing against the natural world
must provide clear, testable results.
 2-3) Therefore, all scientific theories
must provide clearly testable conclusions
and results.

20. Supporting Argument for Premise 3
 3-1) “Intelligent Design” cites a cosmic
designer as responsible for the Universe.
 3-2) A cosmic designer cannot be part of
that Universe.
 3-3) So the cosmic designer must be
super-natural.
 3-4) The super-natural cannot be
empirically observed or tested.
 3-5) Hence “Intelligent Design” cannot
be based on empirical observation nor
provide clearly testable results.

21. Continuing Support in the
Argument:
 Can you think of an argument for
premise 3-4) “The super-natural
cannot be empirically observed or
tested”?