1) Choose a topic or question. If you're an undergraduate, you may find that the question will be set, or you may have to pick from a set of questions. If you're doing higher level work, you'll need to pick a topic which may then be formed into a question. * Writing about a subject you're passionate about always proves easiest. What subject speaks out to you? (Beware of not having an open mind or not enough distance when choosing a subject you care about.)
If you're having difficulty choosing which questions to answer in an exam or homework situation, for each question, ask yourself the question "how difficult would it be for me to answer this question?", and choose a number between zero and five. Put the number next to the questions on the exam paper or homework sheet and then choose the highest ranked questions.

2) Work out how to answer the actual question. Too many people fail in academic situations because they don't answer the question on the page. The question is set specifically to get you to think in a certain way, not so you can spot a name or theory you know and just write out everything you know about that person or idea. In an exam or homework type situation, you need to answer the question that has actually been set, not the question you wish had been set - the two are often quite different. * Many questions will start with a quote followed simply by the word "Discuss." There are two possible things you need to do here: firstly, it may be asking you to discuss the quote because it explains a vague idea that needs explicating. In this case, your first task is interpretative. Work out what the quote is trying to say. It may not require any explication though – often such questions are just a way of prompting you into having to make reference to the person who made the quote, in which case you should discuss what the philosopher means by the quote. Regardless, you should then go onto discuss whether the sentiment expressed is something the reader should agree to, and provide reasons why you should and should not agree with the idea expressed.
Understand that question setters will sometimes use indirect language. This is a way to see if you've understood the subject matter as a whole. In the 2009 undergraduate final paper for Logic and Metaphysics from the University of London, one of the questions was "Could there be unicorns?". This is not a question about unicorns. It is a question about the metaphysics of necessity and possibility, of possible worlds and so on. If you start talking about unicorns in depth, you're on the wrong track. These aren't so much trick questions as they are questions designed to test whether you're knowledgeable about a range of different issues in the subject.

3) Argue coherently. A philosophy paper requires careful argument. Don't commit logical fallacies, and don't just state your opinion. Your opinion, if provided, needs to be carefully argued. * The position you take in your paper need not be your opinion in the sense that it is the sort of thing you might say if someone said "well, what do you think about x?" But you do need to show that you've thought about the various theories that have been proposed. You may not come to a solid conclusion. Take the existence of God: you may be agnostic, or you may be an atheist or a theist. Your overall opinion is generally not what is being asked for in a paper – your professor shouldn't care what position you take overall – but you will be asked to say whether some particular argument holds up. Whether you believe God exists or not (or if you are agnostic), if you are asked whether the ontological argument for the existence of God works or not, you should ideally be able to answer that question separately from your personal beliefs. It is perfectly possible to believe in God but to think the arguments put forward by philosophers fail. It is also perfectly possible to be an atheist or an agnostic and to see merit in arguments for God's existence, or to see problems in arguments for God's nonexistence. * Know where philosophy ends. You are writing a philosophy paper, not a scientific paper or a theological paper. It isn't the right place to question the empirical findings of science or the understanding of the Bible by religious believers or whatnot. Try to ensure your paper is consistent with the best evidence we have from empirical science. Your philosophy of science paper is not the appropriate place to Try to show why Einstein was wrong. On the other hand, you can use a philosophy paper to Try to imagine other scenarios – if the universe were different, if human beings had a different nature. In fact, imagining what things would be like if things were a little bit different than they currently are is an important part of philosophy: thought experiments and counterfactuals. Also, sometimes even very well-known philosophers can get the science wrong. There is nothing at all wrong with pointing this out! * Spot what crank writing looks like. These are easy to find on the Internet, for example, look up 'Time Cube'. Don't be that guy!
When forming your argument, realize that sometimes a weaker conclusion means a stronger paper. Stated differently, make your conclusion as strong as your argument/evidence. If all you can conclude based on your argument/evidence is that there is a potential problem for your opponent or that your position is slightly more probable than not, use that as your conclusion. It is better to have a weak conclusion and have it match your argument/evidence than to claim to be able to prove something and fall short.

4) Structure your arguments. The standard advice given to people writing essays is to "make sure it has a beginning, a middle and an end". This is not the most helpful of advice: your essay will have a beginning and an end by default as it is of finite length. Rather, it is more important that the work is easy to read, coherent and well-structured. * Know why everything you put into an essay is there. Quotes, footnotes, structuring of paragraphs and so on: for every thing you put into your writing, it should be there to serve the purpose of explaining your thoughts. Don't just include a quote to show off or to 'seem clever': the professor the examiner will see through this. * In some fields, use of jargon is encouraged. Philosophy is not one of these fields. Jargon needs to be carefully managed and used with caution. It is easy to spot the difference between an essay that has thrown in jargon to make up for a lack of content and a good essay. If you don't understand some technical term, don't use it. Complicated arguments are much easier to follow if they use plain language. It will be other philosophers who read and mark your work, and philosophers much prefer well-explained arguments to obscurantism and jargon. Try to write with clarity: read the many guides to writing well, whether that is Strunk and White's "The Elements of Style" or George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language".
If your argument is sufficiently complex, consider reformulating it in mathematical notation. Note the first word of that sentence: if. Chances are, at an undergraduate level, you will probably not be constructing arguments that are complex enough to benefit from using such a syntax. As with jargon, use only when necessary. Restating a bad argument in mathematical symbols does not magically make it a good argument.

5) Reference properly. Try to back up every non-trivial assertion with reference to the relevant literature. * In an exam situation, this isn't easy to do. You can't give exact quotes and page numbers and the rest. But if you can remember which book it comes from, it will do you no harm to add something like "as Gadamer said in Truth and Method" or "Such a doctrine was expressed in the Summa Theologica", either parenthetically, as a separate sentence or as an extra clause in a (hopefully relatively simple) sentence. * In a non-exam situation, be sure to reference every direct quote, every non-trivial paraphrase and any attribution of a position. Some Ph.D supervisors have been known to give a trial by fire to new candidates by requiring them to find twenty or more references to back up assertions of the sort "many philosophers have held the position X". * Use whatever attribution system is specified by your university or lecturer. If you're unsure, ask. The two main ones in use are numerical footnote references and Harvard-style references. Numerical footnotes simply add a footnote with a citation while Harvard references are done inline using the name and year of the author like (Smith, 1992), which can then be looked up in a bibliography at the end of the article or book. * Don't reference secondary material when you could reference primary. If you're writing an essay on John Stuart Mill, quote Mill, not a modern day commentator. By all means read the secondary material, and use the secondary material if you need to adjudicate on some matter of interpretation – namely, "Mill says X, but scholars have differed on what he means. Smith has said X implies Y and Z, but Jones has said X implies A and B. Here's why I agree with Smith:", etc. * Be sure to check up on translations. Some translations are out-of-date, especially free translations that are available on the Internet. If you're unsure what to use, ask your professor, check academic reading lists or ask a specialist librarian. * Don't cite Wikipedia or other general encyclopedias. If you're writing at university level, you shouldn't be relying on what either Wikipedia says or what other general encyclopedias say, whether printed or online. Wikipedia and other encyclopedias are good places to start reading, but you shouldn't be quoting or citing them in essays: you should be quoting the original sources, books and journal articles on the topic. The only appropriate place to cite Wikipedia in a university essay is an essay on Wikipedia, wikis, online culture or other such topics. Not philosophy.
Consider using software to keep track of your sources, footnotes and references. Applications like EndNote, Zotero, and Mendeley are popular ways of keeping track of references and producing scholarly work with less hassle. Many in philosophy – especially the more logical end of philosophy – also use LaTeX, BibTeX and/or LyX. It is quite complicated and requires some study, but is a powerful way to produce academic work. If you're considering studying beyond undergraduate, it may be worth using LaTeX or LyX to format your work.