Skip to main content

Students - make a 1 min film and win £9K

Just receievd this as an author of a OUP Very Short Introduction book (Humanism).

Dear All

As a Very Short Introductions author, I am writing to let you know of a large UK VSI competition in partnership with the Guardian newspaper.

As part of a wider campaign to promote the series to students, this ‘Very Short Film’ competition carries an eye-catching £9,000 first prize, which will pay the winning student’s tuition fees for a year. Students will be asked to produce a one-minute film about a subject close to their hearts. From 1st October through to Christmas, the Guardian will be showcasing the competition and video entries on its recently launched Guardian Students site. The closing date is 31st December, with a live final in March 2013 to be held in London.

More information can be found here:

As many of you are lecturers, teachers, and professors in your fields, we felt it would be a good idea to inform as many of our VSI authors as possible so we can spread the word. This is a brilliant opportunity to promote the series, and the publicity surrounding the competition will be a great platform for the books. If you would like to support this exciting campaign, please do get in touch for further information. We can send you a link to add to your email signature and we also have some leaflets and posters available.

Kind regards



This is a great project! When is the announcement of the winner?
Anonymous said…

we really enjoy your atheist forum

do a search on youtube for skepticality

a little souvenir

it is the video about the PIGS
Anonymous said…
sorry for the typos... hard to type when in RAGE


we really enjoy your atheist forum

do a search on youtube for skepticality

a little souvenir

it is the video about the PIGS
Glenn Russell said…
Hello Stephen,
I thought you might enjoy my commentary on the Principal Doctrines of Epicurus. Here are the first two:


I have fallen in love with Epicurus and the philosophy of Epicureanism. I say this after studying philosophy and practicing meditation for over forty years. There are a number of key ideas and insights making Epicurus something of a sagacious elder brother for me, albeit an elder brother from the ancient Greek world. One such insight is that anxiety, worry, nervousness, and fear poison our experience of life. No matter how beautiful or pleasant our surroundings, if we are anxious, on edge, dissatisfied with who we are or what we have, brooding about the past or fretting about the future, we are trapped in a kind of self-torture chamber. What is needed to release us from our torment? A philosophy giving us an appreciation and understanding of our life as embodied beings. There is no better foundation for living a free, pleasurable, and fruitful life than the Principal Doctrines of Epicurus. With this in mind, I offer my concise commentary as a guide and a friend to anybody wishing to live at ease and with Epicurean wisdom in the 21st century.

1. A blessed and indestructible being has no trouble himself and brings no trouble upon any other being; so he is free from anger and partiality, for all such things imply weakness.
According to Epicurus, any God (a blessed and indestructible being) is too pure, too blissful to feel in a limited human or earthly way. If you had the misfortune of being raised in a religion where children are told to fear an angry, jealous God, than this is something you must outgrow if you want to live at ease as an Epicurean. Perhaps a good first step is to simply realize such a religion is one of thousands of religions throughout human prehistory and history, and many religions view God in ways other than fear. Another suggestion would be to seek out likeminded friends where you can talk through emotional issues caused by religious teachings. Since emotions and memory are so much part of our physical body, start to exercise in ways that you enjoy and find relaxing – yoga, dance, jogging or walking. Appreciate the fact that you are a sensitive, aesthetic embodied being. Live in joy, joy as an ongoing experience. There is nothing more pleasurable than a life lived in joy.
2. Death is nothing to us; for that which has been dissolved into its elements experiences no sensations, and that which has no sensation is nothing to us.
Do you get the willies when something reminds you of death? When somebody talks about death, do you feel like jumping up and running out of the room in a panic? If so, then you don’t need a doctor, you need an Epicurean philosopher. Epicurus encourages us to realize death is a complete dissolution where you experience no sensation, not even the tiniest pressure on your skin. According to Epicurus, death is a complete blank – no forms, no awareness, no sensation. In a very real sense, we have this experience every night when we enter the deep sleep state. So, please see death as a close cousin to sleep. You don’t have anxiety or misgivings about entering a deep, dreamless sleep, so you shouldn’t be bothered by the idea of death. To put not only your mind, but also your body in harmony with this view of death, it would be wise to practice meditation and the practice of sleep done by the yogis of India, which is called yoga nidra -- very restful, very calming, giving you a deep acceptance of who you are and your own mortality. With even a small amount of practice, you will come to live in tranquility and death will be nothing to you.
Anonymous said…
thanks for sharing.

Popular posts from this blog

What is Humanism?

What is Humanism? “Humanism” is a word that has had and continues to have a number of meanings. The focus here is on kind of atheistic world-view espoused by those who organize and campaign under that banner in the UK and abroad. We should acknowledge that there remain other uses of term. In one of the loosest senses of the expression, a “Humanist” is someone whose world-view gives special importance to human concerns, values and dignity. If that is what a Humanist is, then of course most of us qualify as Humanists, including many religious theists. But the fact remains that, around the world, those who organize under the label “Humanism” tend to sign up to a narrower, atheistic view. What does Humanism, understood in this narrower way, involve? The boundaries of the concept remain somewhat vague and ambiguous. However, most of those who organize under the banner of Humanism would accept the following minimal seven-point characterization of their world-view.


(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

Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism refuted

Here's my central criticism of Plantinga's Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism (EAAN). It's novel and was published in Analysis last year. Here's the gist. Plantinga argues that if naturalism and evolution are true, then semantic epiphenomenalism is very probably true - that's to say, the content of our beliefs does not causally impinge on our behaviour. And if semantic properties such as having such-and-such content or being true cannot causally impinge on behaviour, then they cannot be selected for by unguided evolution. Plantinga's argument requires, crucially, that there be no conceptual links between belief content and behaviour of a sort that it's actually very plausible to suppose exist (note that to suppose there are such conceptual links is not necessarily to suppose that content can be exhaustively captured in terms of behaviour or functional role, etc. in the way logical behaviourists or functionalists suppose). It turns o