Undergraduate Essay Prize: Gold Medal
Clair Baleshta, “Clarifying the Civil Rights and Liberties Conflict through an Appeal to Relational Autonomy” for PHIL 327 Philosophy of Law
Clair argues that civil liberties rest on a traditional view of autonomy, whereas civil rights are predicated upon a more relational understanding of autonomy. Drawing on work in legal philosophy by Richard Delgado and the recent relational autonomy literature in ethics and political philosophy, Clair deftly argues that conflicts between civil liberties and civil rights are inevitable because of these differing conceptions of autonomy; but knowing this fact helps us diagnose and mediate such conflicts, as opposed to ignoring or downplaying their significance. (Nick Ray)
Undergraduate Essay Prize: Silver Medal
Hai-Dao Le-Nguyen, “Reframing ‘functioning’: the neurodiversity paradigm and doulia” for PHIL 422 Justice and Disability
Hai-Dao's paper exhibits her everpresent concern with social justice and her skill at bringing several lines of thought into productive conversation. She makes use of ideas about neurodiversity and epistemic authority in order to provide a sympathetic critique of Kittay's modifications of Rawls's account of justice, in support of Autistic persons' autonomy and self-advocacy. (Chris Lowry)
Undergraduate Essay Prize: Bronze Medal
Benjamin Ang, “Modal representationalism as an integration of traditional representationalism and new theories of embodied cognition” for PHIL 256 Intro to Cognitive Science
This paper offers an excellent and concise overview of the schism between the dominant and traditional computational-representational theory of mind (CRTM), and embodied theories of cognition that have placed pressure on the CRTM over the past 20 or 30 years. Ben couples an impressive understanding of the theoretical terrain with recent empirical work in order to find a mid-way position (“modal representationalism”) that seeks to blend the best of traditional and embodied theories of cognition, while nicely avoiding the pitfalls of other attempts to synthesize the two frameworks. (Nick Ray)
Graduate Essay Prize: Gold Medal
Jay Solanki, Chapter 1 of “Harm Reduction is a Social Movement”
The thesis offers an assiduously researched history of harm reduction and a sophisticated argument for understanding harm reduction as a critical, peer-based, grassroots social movement rather than a mechanism of public health policy and practice. The winning chapter surveys the history of harm reduction and scans the philosophical literature on harm reduction in order to map the very different extant characterizations of just what harm reduction is. This chapter, like the thesis as a whole, is a remarkable piece of scholarship -- sophisticated, nuanced, challenging, and rich. (Shannon Dea)
Graduate Essay Prize: Silver Medal
Ashley Raspopovic, “Dogwhistles and figleaves: The function of high-BMI terms”
This is a really wonderful original paper that carefully develops the ways in which terms like 'overweight' and 'obese' serve to dogwhistle stigmatizing attitudes. It then goes even further, looking at ways that medical contexts provide fig leaves that obscure the way that these terms stigmatize. It is very much a publishable piece of work. (Jenny Saul)
Graduate Essay Prize: Bronze Medal
Scott Metzger, “Overcoming The Normative Divide In Constructionist Critique: Description, Amelioration, and Pragmatism”
In his lively and stimulating paper, Scott argues that the pragmatism of Peirce, Putnam, and Pihlström get us past the normative divide by collapsing the dichotomy between fact and value. The paper is beautifully organized and deftly argued. Scott weaves such disparate figures as Haslanger, Hume, and Pihlström together amazingly well. (Shannon Dea)
Angus Kerr-Lawson Essay Prize: Awarded in honour of former faculty member Angus Kerr-Lawson for the best undergraduate or graduate paper in American or naturalistic philosophy
Angella Yamamoto, “Eliminativist Ontic Relevant Relationalism”
This highly original paper evaluates the prospects of structural realism as an account of representation in biology. This is novel because structural realism has primarily been applied to scientific theories in which mathematical structures play a central role in representing the world. Angella’s paper offers a careful and compelling analysis that attends to different versions of structural realism and arguments raised by critics, as well as the messy details of biological processes. (Doreen Fraser)