The Royal Institute of Philosophy has introduced the winners of essay prizes for its publications Philosophy and Think.
The theme of the 2023 Philosophy Essay Prize was “methodology”.
The winners and their essays are Thomas Raleigh (Luxembourg) for his “The Vacancy of Naturalism” and Stefan Rinner (LMU Munich) for his “Scorekeeping in a Therapeutic Language Recreation”. Suilin Lavelle (Edinburgh) was named runner-up for her “Much less Principle, Extra Statement.”
Listed below are abstracts of the papers:
The Vacancy of Naturalism
by Thomas Raleigh
I argue that the time period ‘naturalism’ is so empty of which means that it’s not appropriate for severe theorizing in philosophy. Particularly, I argue that the query of whether or not or not some concept or thesis ought to depend as naturalistic is an empty verbal dispute with no additional theoretical significance. I additionally talk about naturalism construed as a methodological thesis and argue that any believable model will collapse into triviality. Lastly, I briefly talk about the concept that naturalism just isn’t a thesis in any respect however fairly a ‘stance’ and recommend that this too succumbs to the cost of vacancy. I conclude that we must always cease speaking about naturalism altogether.
Scorekeeping in a Therapeutic Language Recreation
by Stefan Rinner
In ‘Scorekeeping in a Language Recreation’, David Lewis famously compares conversations to taking part in baseball. Identical to baseball, conversations have a rating which, along with guidelines for proper play, determines which utterances are acceptable and even true in the midst of a dialog. For all similarities, nonetheless, there’s a essential distinction between conversations and baseball video games. Not like the rating of a baseball sport, conversational rating adjusts in such a means that the utterances made in the midst of a dialog depend as appropriate play. That is often known as lodging. Ranging from this scorekeeping method to language use, the general goal of the current paper is to supply a greater understanding of how the strategies and interventions of speaking therapies work from a linguistic standpoint. In response to the scorekeeping mannequin, the strategies and interventions of speaking therapies are efficient by altering the rating of the therapeutic dialog, particularly within the type of lodging. This has vital implications for the therapeutic observe, because it highlights the significance of coaching therapists within the linguistic elements of therapeutic strategies, particularly in the usage of lodging.
Much less Principle, Extra Statement
by Suilin Lavelle
There’s a fear inside psychology that its researchers expertise too many levels of freedom in formulating their hypotheses, leading to experiments being designed to check implausible hypotheses which then don’t efficiently replicate. A well-liked prognosis of this downside is that psychological theories are too vaguely specified, and that formalising them will add the constraints vital to resolve the issue. This paper argues for a special technique, specifically, for extra theory-lite observational analysis to be carried out. This seems antithetical to the restraint urged by others, however I argue that it’s a vital precursor to forming well-established foundational theories. I talk about two case research to help my arguments.
The prize is £2,500, which might be cut up between the 2 winners, and all three papers might be revealed within the October 2024 challenge of Philosophy.
The winner of the 2024 Suppose Essay Prize is Claudia Wong (Cheltenham Girls’ School) for her essay titled, “Is It Morally Unsuitable to Eat Meat?”
Stephen Regulation, Editor of Suppose and Chair of the Judging Panel, writes:
The essay was exceptionally clear, well-structured, and to the purpose. It defended the view that killing animals for meals is morally objectionable, and addressed two fundamental objections to that view: that animals needn’t be harmed (and in reality could profit from being introduced into existence for meat manufacturing), and that animal welfare is unimportant (as a result of, for instance, we don’t have any duties in the direction of animals per se, however solely oblique duties in the direction of people (which requires e.g. that we not be merciless to animals as a result of this would possibly lead us to be merciless to people). Claudia Wong’s essay made some very incisive factors alongside the best way, and was a mannequin of fine, clear philosophical writing.
The essay might be revealed within the subsequent challenge of Suppose.
