Philosophy writing challenge June 2025 announcement

4) Must fall under the broad category of a philosophical essay. The Essay's Title and Topic are chosen by the author. The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal. It should be systematic with an Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion. This is non-fiction. Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration.

Is it indeed 'non-fiction'?

With the guidelines I am wondering how the entries are going to be different from thread topics. It may simply be that many are longer and less of raising a question

The difference being between a post and this is an essay, so I'd expect some kind of complete thought or argument. Whereas with a post I only expect enough of a topic to get a conversation going, I'd think that an essay actually completes a thought or presents a whole argument or tells a story or is in some sense a self-contained peice of writing meant to be presented as a whole for a reader.

Whereas a thread can do that, it's really just about having a conversation at all and needn't conclude or be self-contained and can wander more.

A typical discussion thread involves the author right from the get go.
This can affect the responses. The author also has to maintain the thread, responding directly, sometime immediately to other participants.

Here, the anonymous essay, article or philosophy writing is read and evaluated without bias. The focus is on the ideas and how well they are expressed. How they are understood or interpreted.

Feedback is given by readers and other authors.
A conversation takes place without input/interference by the author.
Until...The Reveal!

Also, the creative aspects may get lost if it becomes too academic.

The guidelines specify poetry only being used as illustration, but it is unclear if the use of fiction can be used at all and to what extent.

Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration.

That is because the division between fiction and non fiction is far from absolute.

His disposition,” Bertrand Russell wrote of the young Wittgenstein in 1912 , “is that of an artist, intuitive and moody” (cited in Monk 1990 , 43 ). A similar judgment was made some fifteen years later by Rudolf Carnap in Vienna:

His point of view and his attitude toward people and problems . . . were much more similar to those of a creative artist than to those of a scientist; one might almost say similar to those of a religious prophet or a seer. When he started to formulate his view on some specific philosophical problem, we often felt the internal struggle that occurred in him at that very moment, a struggle by which he tried to penetrate from darkness to light under an intense and painful strain…. When finally, sometimes after a prolonged and arduous effort, his answer came forth, his statement stood before us like a newly created piece of art or a divine revelation. (Monk 1990 , 244)

And Wittgenstein himself, hoping, in 1919, to persuade Ludwig von Ficker, the editor of the literary journal Der Brenner, to publish his controversial Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus , remarked, “The work is strictly philosophical and at the same time literary” ( Monk 1990 , 177 ).

It should be an exciting interaction, weaving questions, responses and trying to understand the meaning of the text. Of mutual benefit in a positive engagement.

Poetry and philosophy overlap in many areas. Poetry is concerned with the exploration of human experience: the physical and metaphysical world, issues of ethics and morality, universal questions about existence, knowledge and meaning; reaching for transcendental or universal truths; and so does philosophy.

Poetry and philosophy both place a high value on the precise use of language: philosophers strive for clarity and rigour in their arguments, while poets often seek to evoke emotions and imagery. Both use metaphor, ambiguity and symbolism to convey meanings and appreciate the power of form to convey complex ideas, emotions and aesthetics. [...]

Several philosophers have also been poets, contributing significantly to both fields. Notable examples include Plato (c. 427–347 BCE), Rumi (1207–1273), the Indian polymath, Rabindranath Tagore (1861–1941), Fernando Pessoa (1888–1935), the Portuguese poet whose work blends poetry with existential and metaphysical themes, T.S. Eliot (1888–1965), and Kahlil Gibran (1883–1931) the Lebanese writer, poet and philosopher best known for The Prophet.

The Manifestation

Through endless transmutation’s flowing dance,
The Eternal dons ten thousand changing forms,
Like one great ocean lifting countless waves,
Or single sky spawning infinite storms.

Each temporal thing that rises from its depths
Bears witness to that which forever stays,
A momentary expression of the whole,
A fleeting actor in eternal plays.

A Conversation with the Great Lama
(Who lives near me)
On Reality and Illusion

“Lama, I’ve heard that this world isn’t real,
That all we perceive is mere illusion’s deal—
That rain isn’t wet, and pain doesn’t hurt,
And nothing that seems to exist is quite real.”

“Indeed, that’s the teaching passed down through time,
That reality’s nature is more sublime
Than what our senses tell us is true.
Tell me, does this help when your problems climb?”

“Well, Lama, I’ve tried to see through the veil,
To treat life’s hard knocks as just details that fail
To pierce the true nature of ultimate truth—
But hunger still hungers, and storms still assail.

“The sunrise still wakes me, the night makes me sleep,
My heart still can love, and my eyes still can weep,
Each moment feels solid, each pain cuts as sharp
As if this illusion weren’t merely skin-deep.”

“You speak what you find with admirable sight.
The world does persist, through both day and night,
Appearing exactly, in every small way,
As if the illusion were really quite right.”

Space-time energy is doomed to entropic anihilation ; so where did our limited supply come from?
— Gnomon

Heck if I know; I'm on vacation…

To the Ends of the Universe: A Cosmic Road Trip

The Departure

I took a road trip through the universe recently,
Rolled down the windows of my consciousness,
Cranked up some space-time tunes real loud—
The cosmic background radiation was a bit repetitive.

Holy-moly, what an inhospitable joint!
Forget about finding a decent truck stop
Or even a patch of habitable space.
I’d rather be stuck in rush hour in Melbourne.

Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration.

I would hope this kind of imaginative response to questions in a philosophy thread could have its place in the 'Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025'.

The guideline is there to help differentiate what makes this different more than provide a set of rules by which something will or will not be accepted. Someone could even make a point in the threads, for instance, if they feel a particular entry is too poetic/fiction based or something -- I see more value in reflecting on that on the boards than defining it ahead of time.

the idea is to explore ideas together for fun and exercise

The possible forms of non fiction, as distinct from fiction, may include letters and autobiographical, or life writing, and some other forms.

Philosophy Writing includes:
Essays, Articles, Philosophical texts, Meditations, Personal narratives, Diaries, Memoirs, Correspondence, Letters, Lectures, and Contemporary criticism.

... literary forms are legitimate forms of exposition in philosophy. Such works, in addition to reflectively valuable content, possess artistic value, as well. The works of the most eminent philosophers, such as Parmenides, Plato, Pascal, Nietzsche, Sartre, and others, bear witness to that.

2.5.1. On Existentialism

A philosophical treatise is often not an adequate form of expression to critically examine the situation of an individual and offer an answer to life's questions, crises, and quandaries. It turns out that a purely literary expression is particularly suitable for considering problems of an individual's life, which is evident precisely in existentialist philosophy. This is the reason for the frequent use of the novel form in existential philosophy. The very fact that certain philosophers of existence were also important authors affected the diffusion and popularity of this movement. In the process of its expansion and development, the philosophy of existence, having gathered a greater momentum and elan, is called existentialism. Major representatives of existentialism in philosophy are Søren Kierkegaard, Karl Jaspers, Martin Heidegger, Jean-Paul Sartre, and Albert Camus.

For his literary production inspired by the issues of human conscience, in 1957, as the second youngest laureate, he received the Nobel Prize for literature. Although many theoreticians place him among the existentialists, he refused to accept that he belongs to this orientation, as well as to any ideology and trend in thinking. Camus’ most well-known works are novels The Stranger/L'Étranger, The Plague/La Peste and essays The Myth of Sisyphus/Le Mythe de Sisyphe and The Rebel/L'Homme révolté.
Given the topics that his works deal with, as well as the need to speak about the topical
issues of human existence and the absurdity of life using widely accepted forms of narration, a philosopher and a writer Albert Camus opted for expounding his philosophical ideas entirely through literary prose.

I've got an idea for a short article. I'll probably participate.

It won him the 2023 Irish Young Philosopher Awards Grand Prize and Philosopher of Our Time Award. He is now studying Mathematics and Economics at Trinity College, Dublin, where is he also an active member of the University Philosophical Society.

Plato’s Cave & Social Media
Seán Radcliffe asks, has Plato’s Allegory of the Cave been warning us of social media for 2,400 years?

The ‘Allegory of the Cave’ is a Socratic argument recorded by the Greek philosopher Plato, a student of Socrates, and the writer of The Republic (c.375 BCE), which contains a dialogue between Socrates and Plato’s brother Glaucon. [...]

In many ways, social media can be seen as a modern day version of the cave. We are bombarded with information, opinions, and images that are carefully curated by algorithms and presented to us on a screen. Like the prisoners in the cave, we can become trapped in the limited perspective this engenders, mistaking the shadows presented to us for the real thing. These shadows thus represent the fake news, conspiracy theories, and propaganda that is spread by social media.
[...]

However, the question remains: Will we ever know what is real in the age of social media? [...]

At the heart of this inquiry lies the paradox of perception and knowledge: How can we know what is real when our perceptions are inherently subjective and fallible? Most philosophers think that reality exists independently of our perceptions, and that we can come to know it through reason and empirical investigation. Others contend that reality is nothing more than our subjective experiences, and still others, that we can never truly know what is real. I believe that we need to recognise the interdependence of perception and knowledge. [...]

The creators of social media apps have essentially built a cave for us, and we seem to have submitted to its chains. We often rely on what we see on social media or news outlets without investigating the truth behind it. The Allegory thus points out the importance of having a critical approach to the information we receive, in order to have a more accurate understanding of reality.

In conclusion, Plato’s Allegory of the Cave provides a compelling analogy, and warning, for the dangers of social media. It highlights how social media can create a distorted sense of reality, reinforce existing biases, influence us through external forces, lead to addiction, and disconnect individuals from reality. So while social media can be a powerful tool for communication and connection, it is important to be aware of its limitations and the potential for it to distort our perceptions. By looking at the whole picture, and by drawing on the lessons of the Allegory of the Cave’s reverse form of ontology, we can begin to navigate the complexities, even jeopardies, of social media, and work towards a more informed and enlightened understanding of the world.

Note the importance of a Title:

It is the reader's first impression. It captures attention.
It communicates the main idea. It condenses and relates to the content.
It is an intriguing guide, leading to what...?
It shows the care and creativity of the author.

https://www.oxbridgeessays.com/blog/how-to-title-an-essay/

The Cave, the narrative that occurs in the Republic (514a–517a), is a fantastical story, but it does not deal explicitly with the beyond (the distant past, life after death etc.), and is thus different from the traditional myths Plato uses and the myths he invents. Strictly speaking, the Cave is an analogy, not a myth. Also in the Republic, Socrates says that until philosophers take control of a city “the politeia whose story we are telling in words (muthologein) will not achieve its fulfillment in practice” (501e2–5; translated by Rowe (1999, 268)).

The construction of the ideal city may be called a “myth” in the sense that it depicts an imaginary polis (cf. 420c2: “We imagine the happy state”). In the Phaedrus (237a9, 241e8) the word muthos is used to name “the rhetorical exercise which Socrates carries out” (Brisson 1998, 144), but this seems to be a loose usage of the word.

Plato criticized both the epic poetry of Homer and Hesiod, and the tragic and comic poets. Yet he invented myths of his own. So what was his attitude towards literature and myth? Peter tackles this question in a final episode on Plato.

I can see the point about the difference between a thread and an essay. The author would probably need to be putting across a thought or view. There probably needs to be a certain amount of openness to varying forms of expression in the spirit of creativity. As Amity says Iris Murdoch distinguishes between her fiction and non fiction. The possible forms of non fiction, as distinct from fiction, may include letters and autobiographical, or life writing, and some other forms.

I'm certainly of the opinion that openness is the selling point for participation. I have no intent on refusing any submissions, for instance. I'm trying to give just enough structure to guide creative thought without hemming people in too much.

10) Members please carefully read the essays before offering thoughtful feedback. A more open-ended conversation will take place in the 'Meet the Authors' thread that will be created on June 15th.

And my intent is to respond to every submission in a non-critical style -- i.e. I'll read the essay and try to take its own terms without importing my own thoughts, and try to offer pointers to clean up the essay.

For thems who already write philosophy essays or have submitted them to journals I'd say that this offers an opportunity for your more experimental side to receive feedback -- things you know just won't publish but that you're interested in.

While usage of linked sources and images may be an expansion of creativity, there is the question of how far this could go. If linked information is overused the essay could end up constituting a book and be time consuming if readers were expected to read too many links.

Also, regarding images, it is possible that it could turn the essay more into an art competition. It is also does depend on software for all of this. I am certainly not wishing to be negative and say that links and art should be avoided. However, if there is an expectation to include these, it could make it complicated.

People have varying amounts of time to commit to the activity, even though it several months away. Of course, all sources, even quotes, would need to be acknowledged in order to avoid plagiarism. There is also the question as to whether a bibliography is or not included and this may depend on the form which the author chooses. There is also the question whether links and images would be an aspect of appreciation of the 'essays' or detract from the writing itself. It may be that each person has to navigate this and make choices rather than guidelines being too prescriptive.

And I think such would not be included in the word count Moliere but in-text would?

I don't want people to worry about the rules too, too much. I'm mostly hoping to hear from many contributors who are stretching their creative sides and trying out something new, insofar that they are enjoying themselves [...]

if anyone who is lukewarm on participation because they want more guidelines then please say something.
We can come up with more guidelines together if that's necessary for participation.

I probably wouldn't write one, my essay skills have yet to evolve from early grade school (Paragraph 1: Introduction; Paragraphs 2 - 4: Three supporting reasons, Paragraph 5: Conclusion). Former English teacher once said to me: "Everything to write about has already been written, there is nothing new, only clever rehashing." He teaches philosophy at a major-ish university, last I was aware. I'm sure a few people here more intrepid than I could give him a run for his money, however. It'd be nice to see what gets submitted, that's for sure.

I think it would be good for both beginners and the more experienced.
To be challenged in ways other than writing in a thread. This would give people a chance to be creative and test themselves against others. Or simply for own enjoyment. That I would love to read :sparkle:

For revision, if needed! Or if other ways are better, suggestions welcome :up:

How to Read Philosophy
https://philosophy.tamucc.edu/texts/pryor-guidelines-on-reading-philosophy

How to Write Philosophy
Includes 7 links - one pdf by the highly recommended Pryor.
https://philosophy.tamucc.edu/resources/writing

The experienced, here, all know that. And I hope they will submit.

One of the reasons I thought this a fun activity is I like to read other people's thoughts, no matter what they are thinking.

Hello and welcome to the Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025.

Really great to see this challenge up and running.

I appreciate your initiative and the opportunity to take part.

5) Submissions are to be anonymous. Don't advertise what you've written.

....but...do you have something in mind already?

My advice would be to start with a concise paragraph expressing the point of the essay.

Somethimg which you alone can provide, hence the point of the exercise!

Is there any way to avoid writing on something too similar to someone else given the anonymity? Or do we not care?

Is there any way to avoid writing on something too similar to someone else given the anonymity? Or do we not care?

Since many aren't academics in philosophy and we've not had any rules of essay formatting for this forum, are there any good sources of inspiration for how to structure an essay in more detail?

How to Read Philosophy
https://philosophy.tamucc.edu/texts/pryor-guidelines-on-reading-philosophy

How to Write Philosophy
Includes 7 links - one pdf by the highly recommended Pryor.
https://philosophy.tamucc.edu/resources/writing

You needn't follow all this advice, of course. Yet some of it is likely to help. For more advice, see the following guides to writing philosophy. To be sure, there is a lot available here: Start with Lenman's "How to Write a Crap Philosophy Essay" to quickly learn what not to do; follow up with Pryor's superb "Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper".

"A Brief Guide to Writing the Philosophy Paper" Harvard College Writing Center (pdf)
Peter Horban, "Writing A Philosophy Paper"
Michael Huemer, "A Guide to Writing"
James Lenman, "How to Write a Crap Philosophy Essay" (pdf, highly recommended)
Peter Lipton, "Writing Philosophy"
Adrian M.S. Piper, "Ten Commandments of Philosophical Writing" (pdf)
James Pryor, "Guidelines on Writing a Philosophy Paper" (pdf, highly recommended)

I'd say this would be more interesting as we would get two perspectives on a similar topic.

My advice would be to start with a concise paragraph expressing the point of the essay. Then sketch out headings and sub-headings, representing the progressive stages of building the argument and the steps required to establish each step. That step of building level 1, 2 and 3 headings is often helpful in structuring your content.

Also consider likely objections and your counter to them.

End with a conclusion which should state the paragraph you started with but now as a conclusion based on the preceding paragraphs.

Are they sufficient for you Christoffer?

...are there any good sources of inspiration for how to structure an essay in more detail?

Since many aren't academics in philosophy and we've not had any rules of essay formatting for this forum,

A philosophy essay outline typically includes an introduction with a clear thesis statement, a body with well-structured arguments supporting the thesis, and a conclusion that summarizes the main points and reiterates the argument; here are a few examples of philosophy essay outlines covering different topics:

[b]Example 1: "Is there a moral obligation to help the poor?" (Utilitarian perspective)
Introduction:[/b]
Define key terms: morality, obligation, poverty, utilitarianism.
Thesis statement: "Utilitarianism provides a strong moral argument for helping the poor, as maximizing overall happiness requires addressing systemic inequalities."

[b]Body:
Argument 1: Principle of Utility:[/b]
Explain the core concept of maximizing happiness in utilitarianism.
Illustrate how poverty significantly reduces happiness for many individuals.
Provide examples of how helping the poor can lead to greater overall happiness.

Argument 2: Addressing Objections:
Counterargument: "Helping the poor can incentivize dependency."
Rebuttal: Discuss potential solutions to address dependency while still providing necessary aid.
Counterargument: "Focus on individual responsibility, not systemic issues."
Rebuttal: Explain how systemic factors often contribute to poverty, requiring collective action.

Conclusion:
Summarize the main points, emphasizing the moral imperative to help the poor based on a utilitarian framework.
Acknowledge limitations or complexities of the argument, if applicable.
Conclude by reiterating the thesis statement.

***

[b]Example 2: "Can artificial intelligence achieve consciousness?" (Philosophy of Mind)
Introduction:[/b]
Define "consciousness" and key aspects of the concept.
Thesis statement: "While AI can mimic certain aspects of consciousness, it is unlikely to achieve true consciousness due to the lack of subjective experience and qualia."

[b]Body:
Argument 1: The "Hard Problem" of Consciousness:[/b]
Explain the challenge of explaining the subjective "what it is like" quality of experience.
Discuss how current AI models primarily focus on computational processes, not subjective experience.

Argument 2: The Turing Test and its Limitations:
Explain the Turing Test as a criterion for AI intelligence.
Argue that passing the Turing Test does not necessarily indicate consciousness.
Discuss limitations of the Turing Test in assessing subjective experience.

Conclusion:
Summarize the main arguments against AI consciousness, highlighting the lack of a clear understanding of the nature of consciousness itself.
Discuss potential future directions in AI research related to consciousness.

Key points to remember when creating a philosophy essay outline:
Clearly state your thesis:
Your thesis should be a focused argument that you will defend throughout the essay.

Logical structure:
Organize your arguments in a coherent manner, addressing potential counterarguments and objections.

Support with evidence:
Use relevant philosophical concepts, examples, and scholarly citations to strengthen your claims.

Precise language:
Employ clear and concise terminology when discussing philosophical ideas.

Generative AI is experimental.

We owe so much to Baden and the Literary Activity team. They provided the basic core which evolved over the years to showcase and encourage the imagination and creativity of members. Fantastic job, well done! :fire:

I would encourage people to participate, especially if they enjoy philosophy.

I have gone from one probable topic to four possibles. I've done a little bit of research on all of them. ATM, I'm leaning toward the last. *sigh* More reading.

But the very idea is a great motivator to learn, and I'm sure there will be a heap more learning when the essays are in.

As having difficulty choosing a topic, I do wonder if having a theme (or several) would have made the activity seem less daunting. At one point, I remember that I'magination' was suggested but I think it was dismissed. Anyone could choose to use it as a prompt although

it may be seen as animaginive to do so.
Do you think that some prompt topics or questions would help? When I go to a creative writing group some prompts are given and everyone finds it helpful in getting started. I am not suggesting that the use of the prompts should be obligatory, but just wonder if it would help rather than being in front of a blank page, with the whole field of philosophy for choice.

It is so hard because so many philosophy issues are or have been tackled in threads.

with an essay it seems that there is a need to come up with an independent view. I had one idea but have since decided it is a bit sensitive to tackle on a public forum. If I do write it I would have to write it with care, which would be more important than using artificial intelligence to edit it.

my thinking is that it ought be a celebration of the philosophical creative mind, and not necessarily the "greatest" paper ever or whatever that might mean. I promise to give constructive feedback to any entrant, as in I'll try to improve the essay from the perspective of the writer writing it, as the "hook".

But I say that because I look forward to reading lots of brave and original philosophy essays from our people.

Also, with an essay it seems that there is a need to come up with an independent view.

The topic of 'All You Need is Love' may be a good one

I have noticed in the last year, that the forum has become more academic...............................The only danger is that it may become elitist.

it may be hard to defend the view that ' All you need is Love' in 2000 words.

Actually, it may be hard to defend the view that ' All you need is Love' in 2000 words

the Seán Radcliffe essay that won him the 2023 Irish Young Philosopher Awards Grand Prize and Philosopher of Our Time Award was only about 1,500 words.

As having difficulty choosing a topic, I do wonder if having a theme (or several) would have made the activity seem less daunting. At one point, I remember that I'magination' was suggested but I think it was dismissed. Anyone could choose to use it as a prompt although it may be seen as unimaginive to do so.

"Why are we tempted to say that mathematics are universal?"

Boris Johnson, who campaigned prominently for Britain to leave the European Union ahead of a June referendum, argued in favour of remaining in the bloc in an unpublished newspaper column two days before backing Brexit, according to a newspaper report.

If you know the enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the result of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but not the enemy, for every victory gained you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither the enemy nor yourself, you will succumb in every battle.

And 500 words is a small ask.

Why not do a Boris Johnson and write 500 words defending one's claim that "I argue that mathematics is not universal" and then another 500 words defending one's claim that "I argue that mathematics is universal".

I like the idea of an essay in two halves. or even 4 quarters and a bit. Is it true that 'All you need is love'?

I personally don't agree that all you need is love, so I would be interested in being persuaded otherwise.

(This post was excerpted, with Audi’s permission, from his Epistemology: A Contemporary Introduction to the Theory of Knowledge. It’s an excellent example of how it is possible to make an interesting and even important philosophical point in very few words.)

I think it is a silly claim and not one I will be making!

Until today, I had no idea that 'flash philosophy' was a thing.

Dr Matt Williams of Jesus College Oxford made the point that he felt he always achieved high marks because he sometimes started with an outlandish claim which he argued well.

When writing a philosophy essay, it is perhaps not essential to believe in your claim, only to logically argue for your claim.

I agree that several words in the questions are ambiguous. But the ones that I highlighted were the focus of each debate.

In the analogy I gave to a court trial, the words guilty/not guilty would focus debate there. Similarly, the words highlighted by bunny ears were the main focus of what everyone is and should be arguing about when responding to that question. It is absolutely fine to pick on other ambiguous terms in the question, provided that you are focused on the core debate.

Thanks for the link. I had never come across the concept before.

I think can be harder to be concise. As well as knowing what you want to write, it requires skill and discipline to keep things simple, creative and enjoyable.

I'm thinking particularly of the aphorisms of Nietzsche and Cioran here. I like that approach, but it doesn't quite fit with the idea of a philosophical essay.

Aphorisms make up a large portion of Cioran's bibliography, and some of his books, such as The Trouble with Being Born, are composed entirely of aphorisms. Speaking about this decision, Cioran said:

I only write this kind of stuff, because explaining bores me terribly. That's why I say when I've written aphorisms it's that I've sunk back into fatigue, why bother. And so, the aphorism is scorned by "serious" people, the professors look down upon it. When they read a book of aphorisms, they say, "Oh, look what this fellow said ten pages back, now he's saying the contrary. He's not serious."

Me, I can put two aphorisms that are contradictory right next to each other. Aphorisms are also momentary truths. They're not decrees. And I could tell you in nearly every case why I wrote this or that phrase, and when. It's always set in motion by an encounter, an incident, a fit of temper, but they all have a cause. It's not at all gratuitous.

I'm thinking particularly of the aphorisms of Nietzsche and Cioran here. I like that approach, but it doesn't quite fit with the idea of a philosophical essay.

Must all philosophy essays be about the metaphysical search for the fundamental nature of reality? Discuss.

Until today, I had no idea that 'flash philosophy' was a thing.
I found this: 'Cutting-edge philosophy in bite-sized pieces':

https://flashphilosophy.com/
Essays range from a 1min to a 5min read:

You keep coming up with ideas for an essay. How are you getting on with yours?

At the moment an actual essay is taking second place to trying to understand what a "Philosophy Essay" actually is.

4) Must fall under the broad category of a philosophical essay. The Essay's Title and Topic are chosen by the author. The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal. It should be systematic with an Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion. This is non-fiction. Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration.

Every so often I make a post including my understanding of what a "Philosophy Essay" is in the expectation of being shot down.

It is not necessary, or even desired, to write the perfect, academic essay! Unless that is what your aim is.

Because this is an open, free and easy environment

I have the essay's title and am aiming at 2,000 words. For the rest of this month probably tabulating what should be included in a good philosophy essay and will start researching next month.

Are you up for it Baden?

I'm up for burying you in a mountain of aphorisms if you so desire.

I'm still trying to figure out the where the line is between philosophy and psychology.
Ice cream sounds better than either.

Ice cream sounds better than either.

Philosophy writing, then. I think it must start with a philosophical idea or concept to be explored, discussed or analysed. And/or a particular philosopher's view and arguments. Compared to your own.

What inspires you to write?

8) Deadline for submissions is May 31st 23:59 GMT
9) All entries will be posted on June 1st.

Thanks for the advice. It does help.

The fascinating, complicated, up-and-down craziness of humanity. Religion, art, science, and philosophy are all products of that curly ball of gray fluff in our heads. And they're all connected by skinny electric wires covered in myelin, as well as by evolutionary and cultural roots and words, so many ambiguous words! Dividing them into clearly distinct categories is a Solomonian task.

In order to help you develop your critical thinking, you can use the critical thinking model, developed by Plymouth University (2006).
The model is does not need to be used in a linear way, or as a prescriptive set of instructions.
It should be used to trigger and encourage a questioning approach to your studies.
It can be applied to many different academic scenarios, such as interpreting assignment briefs, reading sources, developing arguments and problem solving.

(Socrates was dead wrong, btw: a miserable life is worth examining for possible improvement; a happy one doesn't require analysis. If it ain't broke, keep your mitts off of it!)

I come alive on European beer.

I hope your essay is progressing well. Update?

Have managed to reduce my "how to write a philosophy essay" down to eight pages. Have starting researching, which gave me my plan. A bit more research then starting to write. Am learning, which is the main thing (using ??? for anonymity)

European beer, huh? Tariffs, tariffs, tariffs...

So far, I've referenced only one philosopher on the subject, which has not been of general interest to philosophers, and I'm hard put to find a rebuttal.

I don't think I can write an academic essay.

I've referenced only one philosopher on the subject, which has not been of general interest to philosophers, and I'm hard put to find a rebuttal.

I'm hard put to find a rebuttal.

...here I will focus on how to find your way with a new research question, and in particular, how to find sources.

First Steps
The first step in doing philosophical research is to hone your question and research terms. This is important because databases can only search the terms that you provide, they cannot search based on what you really meant to search for. You’ll want to know the terms that philosophers working on that question use, so that can more easily find some initial sources. A few ways you can get started:...
[...]
Once you’ve got your sense of the debate, and you know some keywords, it is time to look for articles. There are two basic strategies for finding articles.

Following the Conversation
The first is to look to the bibliographies of the sources you’ve found (including the secondary literature). Philosophy is a conversation - philosophers are typically writing in response to the ideas and arguments of other philosophers. This means that following the references can help you find work by other philosophers on the same questions you are interested in.

Heading into the databases
Your other option is to search the databases using your keywords. The primary databases for Philosophy are Philosopher’s Index, and PhilPapers...
Philosopher’s Index is an EBSCO database, which means that you search not only philosophy articles, but articles in other disciplines at the same time

Remember, it's all a story...with or without a definite conclusion. Open ended...for further exploration.
Philosophy is a Conversation. Here, writers and readers can be in close dialogue or a wild dance!

Remember, it's all a story...with or without a definite conclusion. Open ended...for further exploration. Philosophy is a Conversation. Here, writers and readers can be in close dialogue or a wild dance

Yes, but I am not sure about "with or without a definite conclusion".

A philosophy essay is about making a claim and then defending it.

There must be a conclusion, such as "I have argued that J.J.C. Smart’s criticisms of rule utilitarianism are correct"

However, this June event is wider. It is about philosophy writing.

4) Must fall under the broad category of a philosophical essay. The Essay's Title and Topic are chosen by the author. The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal. It should be systematic with an Introduction, Main Body and Conclusion. This is non-fiction. Poetic expression is allowed if it completes or supports the philosophical exploration.

All this suggests that this writing challenge is looking for a philosophy essay rather than philosophy writing.

Philosophy Writing Challenge - June 2025.

Moliere does conclude by saying "Resources were requested for help on what exactly an academic philosophy essay should look like, and provided by Amity so I've appended them here:

Must fall under the broad category of a philosophical essay.

The word essay derives from the French infinitive essayer, "to try" or "to attempt". In English essay first meant "a trial" or "an attempt", and this is still an alternative meaning. The Frenchman Michel de Montaigne (1533–1592) was the first author to describe his work as essays; he used the term to characterize these as "attempts" to put his thoughts into writing.

The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal.

However, perhaps the OP could be improved to lessen confusion.

II. What is a philosophy paper?

Philosophical essays prove some point through the use of rational argument. A philosophical essay is not about flowery language, story-telling techniques, or surprising the reader. The beauty of a philosophical essay is found in your ideas; the language that you use is only a tool for conveying these ideas to the reader. The art is in proving one’s point clearly.

The philosophical essay generally follows a very simple structure:

1. State the proposition to be proved.
2. Give the argument for that proposition.
3. Show that the argument is valid.
4. Show that the premises are true.
5. Consider an objection to your argument and respond to that objection.
6. State the upshot of what has been proven. (Martinich, A.P. (1996) Philosophical
Writing. Oxford: Blackwell Publishing. p. 53.)

...philosophy teachers sometimes present too narrow a picture of what counts as philosophical writing. We teach our students to write short response papers and longer philosophical essays, all through the lens of argument analysis. But philosophical writing can be much richer than argument analysis and essays, much more than a well-structured argument and a thesis statement.

Even a cursory look at the history of philosophy will reveal a wide variety of philosophical forms and approaches to writing philosophy, only some of which fall into the paradigm of philosophical essays that most students are commonly taught to pursue in their own philosophical writing. Think of the philosophers in the history of philosophy, for example, who have written in the following styles and forms:

Essays
Journal articles
Books
Treatises
Diaries / personal journals
Letters
Aphorisms
Poetry
Dialogues
Blog posts

Although students may be exposed to these alternative forms of philosophical writing in the materials they are required to read in a typical Introduction to Philosophy class, very seldom are they encouraged to experiment with these alternative forms in their own writing. When, for example, was the last time, if you are a philosophy teacher, that you required your students to write a philosophical poem or to keep a daily journal? If you are or were a philosophy student, have you been asked to write your own philosophical dialogue or a series of aphorisms to capture the essence of your thoughts on a particular topic or philosophical issue?
[...]
Naturally we want to help train our students to do the type of writing that they will be expected to do throughout the rest of their academic and professional careers, boring as that writing may be. It’s worth noting, however, that the philosophers who made the biggest impact on the history of philosophy were often those philosophers who broke with traditional forms (especially those of their teachers) and developed their own styles of writing.

Think, for example, of the stylistic differences between the following philosophers, each of which I consider to be a linchpin or a turning point in the history of philosophy, or at least a philosopher with a radically unique style:...

[ inserts of photos and names]

What a philosophical and literary tragedy it would have been if each of these philosophers had been constrained to writing only the kind of uninspired, hegemonic philosophy essays we require of our students!

For me, part of the joy of reading the great philosophers is immersing myself in their literary style and gestalt, not merely in their premises and conclusions—seeing the world and all of reality through their own unique eyes, following the free-flowing nature of their thoughts like water running downstream to its inevitable conclusion based not just no differing conclusions but on differing personalities, styles, linguistic quirks, and individual perspectives—all while bucking the trend of philosophical writing.

I want students to immerse themselves not only in philosophical argumentation but in the drama of philosophy and in its many beautiful forms of writing for their own sake, all in the interest of helping students experiment with their own writing and acquire their own voice that they will carry with them and keep developing over the course of their entire lives.g as it had been previously known.

To clarify, this event is about 'Philosophy Writing'. So, that is the 'broad category'.

You are saying that rule 4 should have read "must fall under the broad category of philosophy writing"?

4) Must fall under the broad category of philosophy writing. The title and topic are chosen by the author. The philosophical viewpoint can be academic or less formal. Even if philosophical argumentation and logical soundness lie at the core of philosophy, this is a chance to widen the creative scope. See Resources, Learning Centre for helpful information.

Yes, a critique of academic elitism may be worth exploring. I am not sure whether I feel up to it, but you never know and, maybe, someone will.

Jack, you know you are one of my favorite people, but civilization as we know it may collapse

If I do write an essay for this, I think, it may be hard to formulate this topic into a clear philosophy argument,

Part of the difficulty is translating experience, the anecdotal and intuition into the formula of philosophy arguments.

The good thing about a philosophical essay is that the author needs to defend their thesis using a clear and well structured argument, critically analyse the evidence and show that their premises are true and that their argument is valid.

Hello, I am extremely worried about human civilisation collapsing, with the current world leaders we have. I have been depressed about it since November and December. At first, I was it was affecting my mental health and I dreamt of the end of civilisation a couple of months ago. Then, I got ill physically and have ended up in hospital with a chest infection, on oxygen. I also still feel worried about civilisation collapsing, while lying in hospital.

If I do write an essay for this, I think, it may be hard to formulate this topic into a clear philosophy argument, as I saw by the response by RussellA. Part of the difficulty is translating experience, the anecdotal and intuition into the formula of philosophy arguments. This may be the biggest challenge of the competition, as opposed to literary writing in creative writing activities.

I don't think that is a discussion for this thread.

I hope that you do not get pneumonia. What governments don't seem to be paying attention to is the way that social conditions affect mental and physical health. In England, there is a drive to get people back to work but without attention to why they are getting sick. But, I won't say too much in this specific thread other than to say that the role of the philosopher may be to look in a more analytical way, drawing together ideas from various disciplines, with clear arguments.

It's probably not a topic that I would pursue for this particular activity in though, as I think that it watching too much news which contributed to me getting unwell recently. Not that I wish to side-step politics. I nearly started a thread on it while in hospital but decided it would probably make me deteriorate if I did it at this moment. All in good time and right place. If anything, I see the question of so much trouble as raising the issue of collapse or potential transformation. But I am sure that I have said this many times in various threads. Of course, it is an area which you, or someone else could tackle for this activity in a unique way.

Of course, it is an area which you, or someone else could tackle for this activity in a unique way.

Are you sure? The subject of this thread is the writing of philosophical essay.
Maybe you can write one on what the problem with philosophy is.

How long do we have to submit a paper?

8)Deadline for submissions is May 31st 23:59 GMT
9) All entries will be posted on June 1st.

I think some essays have been removed from my PM

I am hoping to submit still but fearful of the essay getting lost because I have to type it onto the pms directly, due to software problems. Actually, what I am writing is far from finished as I have been struggling with a lot of stress since coming out of hospital. I am hoping that what I am writing will come together sufficiently for me to submit. It is over 500 words but I don't wish it to be too long and get lost. I will give myself time until the closing date. If it gets lost on the system I will use my handwritten draft as a potential thread instead.

What I am listening to at the moment is 'Songs of Surrender' by U2, which is a compilation of reworking of many of their songs.

Thanks for sharing that. I didn't know of it. You are right. Music does help. Topic for an essay?

I will submit something. I suggest we post them to the main forum, maybe with a prefix like [PF Essay]. They are topical, after all!

I'm good with adding a PF Essay tag in addition to the title of the paper so that it's easily discernable without clicking on the sub-forum, though clicking on the sub-forum ought to filter out for the essays alone if that's what someone wants to focus on.

It sounds a bit cumbersome to me.

maybe with a prefix like [PF Essay].

I'm good with adding a PF Essay tag in addition to the title of the paper so that it's easily discernable without clicking on the sub-forum

There is no need.

If I remember correctly, there is a way for us to turn off these essays so that we don’t see them on our front page. Can you remind me how that works please.

I'm good with adding a PF Essay tag in addition to the title of the paper so that it's easily discernable without clicking on the sub-forum

As it is, I just wish to focus on the essays and appreciate them for what they are.

I think those essays will produce some of the best discussions we've had for a long time,

They cover a wide range of philosophical areas so you could just pretend lots of high quality OPs suddenly appeared at the same time. The idea that they might overwhelm the front page only applies if they're on the same topic (or if they're not philosophy, like the fiction competitions).

Moliere:A separate discussion thread will be posted 'Meet the Authors'. A list of authors will be provided for the 'guessing game'.

After the authors are revealed on June 16th the authors can:
1. Respond to the comments and feedback.
2. Join in the general discussion, compare and contrast other essays. Note: authors, as readers, can comment on specific essays before this

From the Guidance:
10) Members please carefully read the essays before offering thoughtful feedback. A more open-ended conversation will take place in the 'Meet the Authors' thread that will be created on June 15th.

I'm reserving my comments for after June, but will still follow through with my promise to give every submission a proper response.

to give me time, and just because it feels right.

I don't even know if I'll finish in the month

The whole event vanished as I was posting a reply.

Yes. But I want to know why they went AWOL.

If any participants want to keep their essays off the internet, I can once again restrict them to members-only, which is the default for the Symposium.

Why couldn't hypericin simply take his essay along to his group?

If any participants want to keep their essays off the internet, I can once again restrict them to members-only, which is the default for the Symposium.

Please discuss the issue amongst yourselves and come to a democratic decision, then let me know.

what's wrong with making them publicly available?

Authors are supposed to be kept anonymous until 16th June.

what is unfair about making the essays public?

We just don't know if that's the case, right?

I have made the essays public, as promised.

The short stories were once public too, and nobody complained. I made them private because I, and I think hypericin, were trying to get our stories published in magazines.

Authors are supposed to be kept anonymous until 16th June.
— Amity
Nothing to do with author anonymity. The only difference is that non-members of TPF can view the essays

Although Baden and @Amity were against it, they did not give any reasons beyond speculation that some participants might be relying on the fact that the category is members-only. But I don't think this is a realistic possibility, and nobody with such a concern has spoken up.

the event can move on

My quote is taken out of context. It was in reply to Jamal:
https://thephilosophyforum.com/discussion/comment/991864

If someone submitted under the expectation that they would be private and therefore publishable, that strikes me as a better reason than anything to the contrary.

I complained of the change to 'private' and the need to sign in to read them. I remember well your reasons and wonder if /why this is no longer a concern.

What has changed regarding keeping essays or stories private for the sake of publication?

Feedspot

I don't know if the potential publishers of philosophical essays apply the same exclusivity criteria as many of the fiction magazines do. From my very cursory research, they seem to be more permissive, meaning that if someone wanted to get their essay published, for example on Aeon, it might still be possible.

If anyone is thinking of doing that they should speak up and I'll do what needs to be done

As it is, most if not all participants would have assumed the essays were going to be viewable to non-members, since that is always the default on TPF and discussion forums generally.

Thank you. I think it would be good to clarify for future events.

EDIT: On the other hand, only two participants have ever shown any concern about getting their work published (me and hyper) and it is otherwise assumed that posts on TPF will be public.

So that it jumps back to the point in the essay...

Yes, that is true. But that only happens when the blue link (name) is activated, no? When you leave it simply as a nameless quote that doesn't happen, does it?

That’s right, the numeric code after the semicolon points back to the post.

So, there ya go. 'Moliere' can now be replaced by 'Author'. I like it!

Really?! Och, Jings Almighty. Whatever can be done...

After the authors are revealed on June 16th the authors can:
1. Respond to the comments and feedback.
2. Join in the general discussion, compare and contrast other essays. Note: authors, as readers, can comment on specific essays before this

I'm really impressed with everyone's work -- I felt a lot of different thoughts going in various ways I wouldn't have without having read them all.

There's two essays I've yet to respond to, and so will do that by the end of day today.

But they all have a lot of richness and capability to continue spurring on discussion. Unlike an OP, though, I've had to put more effort into even a first response in order to respect the time and care that all of the authors put into their works.

What I felt may have 'gone wrong' a little was a lack of 'fun' element, which was present in the short story competitions. I wonder if it was because there was not a competition, or whether the word 'essay' makes the writing seem too serious and reminiscent of school essays.

I'd like to participate next time!

It is interesting that both these sources restrict their philosophical entry to philosophical essays, where philosophical essays have specific requirements.

I could have done a better job here. And truthfully my hope is someone else takes the spot of coordinator for next year -- I'd like to participate next time!

The problem seems to lie with the word 'essay' or perhaps in 'philosophy'.
Some take a narrow view of both. Some further clarification required.

Resources were requested for help on what exactly an academic philosophy essay should look like, and provided by @Amity so I've appended them here:

https://philosophy.tamucc.edu/graphics/berkich/texts/james-lenman-how-to-write-a-crap-philosophy-essay.pdf

https://philosophy.tamucc.edu/graphics/berkich/texts/james-pryor-guidelines-on-writing-a-philosophy-paper.pdf

https://www.southampton.ac.uk/~assets/doc/University_life/learning_teaching/posing_the_question.pdf

From page 1 of this Thread: