Methods Conference Paper Abstracts

Meaning is in the Head (Bonny Bruzos)

Hilary Putnam’s argument in “Meaning and Reference” is captured by his famous line: “‘meanings’ just ain’t in the head!” (Putnam, 704). In this paper, I argue that the two conditions of internalist theories of meaning can be jointly satisfied despite what Putnam says. I will begin by presenting Putnam’s argument against semantic internalism and his Twin Earth thought experiment. I will then show how Putnam conflates extension and referent, and when this distinction is made, the Twin Earth thought experiment does not disprove the joint satisfaction of the two internalist conditions. As I demonstrate, Putnam does not adequately support how meaning is not in the head.

An Analysis and Defense of Anne Conway’s Theodicy (Greta Weinsheimer)

This paper offers a critical analysis and defense of Anne Conway’s metaphysical theodicy in The Principles of the Most Ancient and Modern Philosophy. It reconstructs Conway’s system from a stipulative definition of God to demonstrate how this foundation generates her account of an infinity of created beings unified through a single spiritual substance. The essay examines her rejection of Cartesian dualism in favor of vitalistic monism, in which all reality is made up of spirit structured along a continuum of refinement. It then seeks to more fully articulate transmutability, before responding to objections about the coherence of her continuum ontology. Finally, it explains how this framework resolves key philosophical problems of the early modern period, the fragmentation of nature, specifically the mind-body interaction, and the problem of divine justice.

No Moral Worth in Monetized Good: A Kantian Critique of Mr. Beast (Sasha Levine)

I offer a Kantian evaluation of the moral status of Mr. Beast’s content. While such content is often regarded as altruistic because it provides significant financial benefits to participants, I argue that Mr. Beast’s actions lack moral worth and are, further, morally blameworthy. Drawing on Immanuel Kant’s distinction between actions performed in accordance with duty and those performed from duty, I conclude that Mr. Beast’s actions, though beneficial in outcome, are primarily motivated by profit and audience engagement rather than respect for the moral law. As such, they fail to meet the criteria for moral praiseworthiness. My analysis extends to Kant’s Formula of Humanity, arguing that participants in these videos are treated merely as means to an end. Their suffering and vulnerability are instrumentalized within a monetized entertainment structure, undermining their status as ends in themselves. Central to this claim is a critique of consent under conditions of financial desperation: even when participants formally agree, their choices are constrained in ways that compromise genuine voluntariness. I conclude that, on a Kantian framework, materially beneficial actions may nevertheless be morally blameworthy when grounded in self-interest and exploitation rather than duty.

What to Expect After Death (Thomas Ham)

Death, and the possibility of posthumous experience, is perhaps the most captivating and perplexing problem presented to man, deepened by the complete failure of human reason to posit a viable answer. Our natural intuition could be said to be that death is the complete cessation of experience, which creates an interminable nothingness. Coming to terms with this nothingness is difficult. Naturally, non-theological attempts to posit a post-death experience have sprung up over the decades. Recently, Tom Clark, a self proclaimed naturalist (the view that every phenomenon’s cause can be found in nature), has argued for a different kind of post-death experience — one where we persist as eternal awareness. I will investigate this claim further, and examine the nature of this experience. Is it something to look forward to, or nothing worthwhile?

The Trial of David Louis, Who Raised His Hand and Broke the Laws of Nature (Saxon Hernandez)

“Well, now that we’ve settled the matter with this Thales fellow, shall we have a look at the remaining files?” said Judge 7.

“There are 40,786 files left. Which shall we tackle first?” responded Judge 6.

“Good heavens, are we really that far behind?” Judge 7 replied. “Just take the top of the pile, though if I have to read one more anecdote about water, I’m liable to tank Greece’s economy again.”

Judge 6 pulled the top file, which read:

GALACTIC NOMIC TRIBUNAL

Office of Post-Trial Documentation and Obligatory Bureaucracy, Case No. UNI-1-OCT14-7743-ΔΦ

CASE FILE SUMMARY - FOR TRIBUNAL USE ONLY

Subject: Louis, David

Species: Human

Charge: Voluntary action under determinism; suspected contravention of natural law

Jurisdiction: UNI-1

Status: Open, 4,848 in queue.