はてなブックマーク

Here are the winning papers, followed by a list of the editors and the nominating editors.  I've inserted institutional affiliations.  As usual, I worry that history of philospohy and value theory continue to be under-represented, and more formal and technical work overrepresented in the final choices (as they are on the nominating board), though all of these (or at least all of those I'm familiar

They are: Selim Berker (Harvard), "The Normative Insignificance of Neuroscience", Philosophy & Public Affairs 37:4, 293-329 Rachael Briggs (Sydney), "Distorted Reflection", Philosophical Review 118:1, 59-85 James Dreier (Brown), "Relativism (and Expressivism) and the Problem of Disagreement", Philosophical Perspectives 23:1, 79-110 Marc Lange (North Carolina), "A Tale of Two Vectors", Dialectica 6

I am prompted to ask this momentous question by an item in The New York Times pronouncing Wittgenstein to be the one.  In order to bring this matter to a close, please vote only once in the following poll; I have listed all reasonable candidates (excluding Frege and Husserl, who are very much products of 19th-century philosophical culture--perhaps the same could be said for Bergson, but...). ADDEN