Skip to main content

I win the Mindelheim Philosophy Prize


The Bavarian town of Mindelheim has devised a new literary prize (E5,000) for books that encourage young adults to think and question. The prize is awarded by a jury made up of seven 17-18 year olds from the local school, plus a teacher and advisor. They selected from a list of about 100 books.

And, amazingly, I won – for the German version of The Philosophy Gym.

So I am off to Bavaria in May for 3 days, with my wife, as the guests of Mindelheim and to collect my prize. It’s going to be a very surreal experience, as I am told there will be an evening in my honour with a laudatory speech by a former Bavarian arts and education Minister, plus champagne, a band, and “fire show” in the town square.

I also asked if I could arrange to see the amazing Neuschwanstein castle, which I’ve always wanted to see since watching Chitty Chitty Bang Bang as a kid – and they’re pleased to take us.

Obviously I’m pretty thrilled to receive any sort of prize, but I should add it’s actually a really good idea of Mindelheim’s to come up with this award –I wish it great future success. There’s nothing remotely like it.

Comments

Paul P. Mealing said…
I just happened to be on my blog when I saw this. So let me be the first to congratulate you on your own blog.

I think it's a great idea for a prize, and, having read The Philosophy Gym (5 years ago now, while I was recovering from a major operation) I think it's a worthy winner.

You're a credit to your profession in more ways than one.

Best regards, Paul.
March 2, 2009 at 11:17 AM
The Atheist Missionary said…
Congratulations from Canada!

Will you have to give your acceptance speech in German?
March 2, 2009 at 11:45 AM
anticant said…
Warm congratulations, Stephen. It's a well-deserved tribute to a lively thinker.

Enjoy your visit, and I hope you forge some lastingly useful new links there.
March 2, 2009 at 11:53 AM
Anonymous said…
Congratulations Stephen. It's a great book , I still use it with my groups.
Enjoy Germany.
March 2, 2009 at 12:45 PM
Anonymous said…
Well done! :D
March 2, 2009 at 3:05 PM
Timmo said…
Congrats, Stephen! I'm sure you'll enjoy the Neuschwanstein castle. That's sort of a prize in itself.
March 2, 2009 at 6:31 PM
Anonymous said…
Congratulations Stephen. I've not read Philosophy Gym but have read a couple more of your books (Xmas Files & The War for Children's Minds). If these are indicative then I'd say very much deserved.
March 2, 2009 at 7:34 PM
Anonymous said…
The Philosophy Gym got me interested in taking up philosophy as a part time student with the OU and Oxford online about 5 years ago. I'm now working towards an MA in Philosophy. All for a little conspicuous pink book that jumped out at me in a book shop. Thanks!

A well deserved prize. Congrats!
March 2, 2009 at 8:25 PM
Unknown said…
Well done; well deserved. The Philosophy Gym has been a good pressy for young relatives; and The War For Childrens' Minds gets dished out to teachers and young parents I know.
March 2, 2009 at 8:44 PM
Kosh3 said…
Congrats Stephen, that is excellent news.

On a minor sceptical note: 17-18 students read 100 books?
March 3, 2009 at 4:23 AM
Anonymous said…
Congratulations, Stephen - very well-deserved.

I can't help but echo Kosh3's scepticism, all the more so because it looks as though all the 100 books are on philosophy, inculding the intriguingly titled "Pippi und Sokrates".

Still, I'm sure you're pleased, all the more so because you've beaten Julian with his "Das Schwein, das unbedingt gegessen werden möchte: 100 philosophische Gedankenspiele"...
March 3, 2009 at 8:17 AM
Anonymous said…
Congratulations! What a brilliant prize to win.

I think you thoroughly deserve it. Reading The Philosophy Files a few years back lead me into your other introductory books, which lead me into engaging much more widely with philosophy, changing a lot of my core beliefs and ambitions, and going to study PPE at it's home in Oxford in October. It's hard to say how things would have worked out without reading your book, but it definitely lit a wonderful fuse for me :-D
March 3, 2009 at 1:25 PM
Nutcasenightmare said…
Oh, the Philosophy Gym was a GREAT book! I'm glad you won an award for it! (Not to mention glad that there's actually such an award)
March 7, 2009 at 11:36 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS

(Published in Faith and Philosophy 2011. Volume 28, Issue 2, April 2011. Stephen Law. Pages 129-151) EVIDENCE, MIRACLES AND THE EXISTENCE OF JESUS Stephen Law Abstract The vast majority of Biblical historians believe there is evidence sufficient to place Jesus’ existence beyond reasonable doubt. Many believe the New Testament documents alone suffice firmly to establish Jesus as an actual, historical figure. I question these views. In particular, I argue (i) that the three most popular criteria by which various non-miraculous New Testament claims made about Jesus are supposedly corroborated are not sufficient, either singly or jointly, to place his existence beyond reasonable doubt, and (ii) that a prima facie plausible principle concerning how evidence should be assessed – a principle I call the contamination principle – entails that, given the large proportion of uncorroborated miracle claims made about Jesus in the New Testament documents, we should, in the absence of indepen
159 comments
Read more

Aquinas on homosexuality

Thought I would try a bit of a draft out on the blog, for feedback. All comments gratefully received. No doubt I've got at least some details wrong re the Catholic Church's position... AQUINAS AND SEXUAL ETHICS Aquinas’s thinking remains hugely influential within the Catholic Church. In particular, his ideas concerning sexual ethics still heavily shape Church teaching. It is on these ideas that we focus here. In particular, I will look at Aquinas’s justification for morally condemning homosexual acts. When homosexuality is judged to be morally wrong, the justification offered is often that homosexuality is, in some sense, “unnatural”. Aquinas develops a sophisticated version of this sort of argument. The roots of the argument lie in thinking of Aristotle, whom Aquinas believes to be scientifically authoritative. Indeed, one of Aquinas’s over-arching aims was to show how Aristotle’s philosophical system is broadly compatible with Christian thought. I begin with a sketch of Arist
49 comments
Read more

The Evil God Challenge and the "classical" theist's response

On another blog, FideCogitActio, some theists of a "classical" stripe (that's to say, like Brian Davies, Edward Feser) are criticisng the Evil God Challenge (or I suppose, trying to show how it can be met, or sidestepped). The main post includes this: In book I, chapter 39 , Aquinas argues that “there cannot be evil in God” (in Deo non potest esse malum). Atheists like Law must face the fact that, if the words are to retain any sense, “God” simply cannot be “evil”. As my comments in the thread at Feser’s blog aimed to show, despite how much he mocks “the privation theory of evil,” Law himself cannot escape its logic: his entire argument requires that the world ought to appear less evil if it is to be taken as evidence of a good God. Even though he spurns the idea that evil is a privation of good, his account of an evil world is parasitic on a good ideal; this is no surprise, though, since all evil is parasitic on good ( SCG I, 11 ). Based on the conclusions of se
446 comments
Read more