We’re Number Three


PhilPrizeSemiLooks like Perverse Egalitarianism is a semifinalist and placed third in the “competition.” Here’s the results:

Carla Goller, a South Tyrolean graphic artist, has designed a “trophy” logo that our top twenty vote-getters may choose to display on their own blogs. So here they are, in descending order from the most voted-for:

  1. Der Wille Zur Macht und Sprachspiele: Nietzsche’s Causal Essentialism
  2. The Space of Reasons: A Counterexample to Setiya
  3. Perverse Egalitarianism: Early Heidegger: Fundamental Ontology
  4. Edge of the American West: All noble things are as difficult as they are rare
  5. Larval Subjects: Object-Oriented Ontology and Scientific Naturalism
  6. Specter of Reason: Wise on Intelligent Design in the Classroom
  7. Another Heidegger Blog: Interview with Jeffery Malpas
  8. The Immanent Frame: Immanent Spirituality
  9. Blog & ~Blog: Graham Priest’s Theory of Change
  10. 3 Quarks Daily: The Temporal Prospects of Humanity
  11. Larval Subjects: Speculative Realism and the Unheimlich
  12. Cognition & Culture: Descarte’s Skull
  13. 3 Quarks Daily: Penne For Your Thought
  14. Underverse: Refuting “It,” Thus
  15. The Garden of Forking Paths: Defining Determinism and Such
  16. Tomkow: Blackburn, Truth and other Hot Topics
  17. Brain Hammer: Bandwidth and Storage in the Human Biocomputer
  18. PEA Soup: Scanlon on Moral Responsibility and Blame
  19. Philosophy, et cetera: Reflecting on Relativism
  20. Strange Doctrines: Third-World Zombies and (Ana) Qualiac Reference

The daily editors of 3 Quarks Daily will now pick the top six entries from these, and after possibly adding up to three “wildcard” entries, will send that list of finalists to Professor Dan Dennett on September 11. We will also post the list of finalists here on that date.

Wish us luck in the quest to be vetted by Daniel Dennett. Thanks to those who voted for us.

6 thoughts on “We’re Number Three

  1. Doesn’t sound as good as “We’re Number One” but still as long as we beat that certain someone – let’s face it, this is as far as the great name like “Perverse Egalitarianism” would ever take us, now it’s all up to Jon Cogburn’s infamous street cred with the analytics and his aforementioned nihil…

  2. I think if anything hurts us its going to be that the post mentions parts of Braver’s realism matrix without explaining them. If the judges look at the reading group as a whole and see that the theses were explained and thoroughly discussed in earlier posts, then we’re good. If not, not.

    When I realized that I thought about adding links, but I decided that improving the post for the contest was a violation of the spirit of the rules at least.

    As far as “analytic street cred,” that’s mostly from the rumors that I had a bit part in Bruce Lee’s “Enter the Dragon.” Unfortunately, my pathological fantasies were widely exposed as such when it came out that I was not yet three years old when the movie was released (though my expertise in martial arts films leads me to think it should be perfectly plausible that a two and a half year old could have attained a black belt in Jeet Kun Do). In any case, over here at Perverse Egalitarianism we can all just hope that the 3quarksdaily folks and Dennett are so high up in their ivory towers that he doesn’t follow the shifting fortunes of mixed philosophical arts.

  3. congratulations guys!

    I have to agree with ME on this one: ‘We’re number three’ sounds ways too much like that terrible series of commercials for Snapple.

    This said, I think you guys have an awesome shot, at least based on the other posts I flipped through.

  4. Just as long as all of this newly discovered glory and fame does not go into your head and you start reveling in your newly acquired status and disrespect your readers by calling them all sorts of names and such – keep it anti-real!

  5. My favorite part here is that the fearless leader of the new philosophical movement that is sweeping the philosophical world, who is, in fact, so popular and increasingly influential that one can only compare him to other important “great thinkers” – Graham Harman – who constantly boasts of having more readers than the best philosophical journals, failed to get even a dozen of votes in this competish.

    I mean where are the crowds of speculative realists? People actually read 3QD and this was SR’s real chance to show themselves as an influential online fad – such a great opportunity is wasted. Is it possible that there are indeed a dozen of self-important and obsessed bloggers out there who claim to represent a movement that actually exists only in their heads?

    Not that you guys have a chance to win anyway, let’s face it, you’re not serious enough to qualify for any prize and will probably mock it to death if you get it – but congratulations anyway!

  6. James, you’re not paying attention – Harman sent his younger apprentice to participate in this competition, he’s too busy nurturing his project to be distracted with such trivialities.

    Thanks for kind words anyway, I would certainly hope that mocking awards is the least one can expect from us after these glorious two years in the blogosphere. As for existence/non-existence of SR, I can only cite an ancient mystical poet: “If it makes a difference, it can’t be that bad” or something like that…

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s