Junior Scholar essay prize: metaphysics (w/ test)

Oxford Studies in Metaphysics

 In keeping with our mission to encourage research and publishing on topics of traditional metaphysics, The Ammonius Foundation acknowledges the importance of ongoing support for the work of younger scholars.  As part of this commitment, The Foundation has dedicated resources to a competition award program, designed to recognize and promote excellent research and writing in metaphysics by younger scholars.

Sponsored by The Ammonius Foundation and administered by the editorial board of Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, this essay competition is open to scholars who are within ten (10) years of receiving a Ph.D. or students who are currently enrolled in a graduate program.  (Independent scholars should inquire with the Editor to determine eligibility.)  Awarded annually, the prize amount has been recently raised to $8,000. Winning essays will also appear in Oxford Studies in Metaphysics.

For a further glimpse into this unique Program, now entering its sixth year, please visit our listing of past winners of the Younger Scholars Prize, which is accompanied by titles and hosted links to the texts of winning essays. 

Younger scholars working in metaphysics who are interested in this Program should familiarize themselves with the current competition details, and address further inquiries to the Editor of Oxford Studies in Metaphysics, Dean Zimmerman, at dwzimmer@rci.rutgers.edu, or by regular mail at the postal address provided on the competition-details page.

And now the really hard test question:  Have the prize winners so far been (a) all male or (b) all female or (c) some admixture?  (Don’t just go look; present your best guess plus your reasons, if any.)

“The Psychology of Beauty”

It is hard to say what is more to dislike about some evolutionary psychologists’ declarations about beauty:  their stark simplicity or their ignoring the possibilities of cultural influence.  One result of these factors is that the connection between their dictates and one’s own experience can be slight.  One is left with the uneasy feeling that philosophy professors just aren’t the sort of being anyone would have thought worth studying.  Nor are their friends.  All with some notable exceptions, of course.

The blog named in the  title of this post is an antidote to the simplifying confidence one too often finds.  The poster, Wayne Hooke,  picks up on topics that do show the issues to be more complicated.  For example, are judgments of attractiveness really just based on facial symmetry?  Isn’t smell suppose to be important?  He also seems to have a good eye for the latest research:  for example, hip to waiste ratio  has a competitor: adominal depth.

The research discussed is also assessed in terms of  its internal integrity, and so on.

There’s lots more; see what you think!