Calls for Papers

Deadline for submissions is one year before the publication dates below.

Intending authors should directly contact the Advisory Editor(s) listed for the relevant issue. They should refer to the Oxford University Press submission guidelines when preparing their work for submission.

Publication Date: Issue Title (click title for description)

Jul 2019:

102:3 Jul. 2019.
Advisory Editor: Ken Games (Birkbeck).
Deadline for submissions: Jul 31, 2018

Recent scholarship on Nietzsche has turned to themes that are not generally within the provenance of the Anglo-American philosophical tradition, for instance nihilism, the affirmation of life, the problem of finding meaning in the modern world, the import of “the death of God,” the question of the function and value of high culture. We are seeking papers that speak to these and other core Nietzschean interests, but aim to make them accessible to a wider audience.

Apr 2019:

102:2 Apr. 2019.
Advisory Editors: Mario De Caro (Rome/Tufts), Brian Epstein (Tufts), and Erin Kelly (Tufts).
Deadline for submissions: Apr. 30, 2018

The study of responsibility in ethics focuses on the nature of agency, accountability, blame, punishment and, crucially, the distribution of responsibility for complex moral problems. Work in social ontology examines the nature of entities such as groups, corporations, money, and law, and what it is for certain social entities to have intentional states and to act. Emerging research at the intersection of these fields of study explores both normative dimensions of work in social ontology and metaphysical assumptions and implications of ethical theorizing about collective responsibility. In this issue we invite submissions that explore the following kinds of questions: How can work in social ontology contribute to and inform the analysis of collective responsibility? What ontological claims about the nature of organizations and agency are involved in moral and legal practices? And conversely, how does normative inquiry inform social ontology? What normative questions and assumptions underpin our social categories and how we analyze them? The social dynamics of public and private institutions, law, and other social structures raise important questions about the role of power in social practices that involve ascriptions of responsibility. Accordingly, we welcome papers that will engage both ethical and ontological questions connected with, for example, war, economic policy, climate change, as well as corporate and criminal justice.

Jan 2019:

102:1 Jan. 2019.
Advisory Editor: John Broome (Oxford) (
Deadline for submissions: January 31, 2018

Much of the philosophy of climate change has revolved around the injustice of climate change and how it should be corrected. But climate change also raises philosophical questions about value. We need to estimate how bad the results of climate change will be, and make a judgement about how much effort should be put into controlling it. What is the proper way to take account of the very large uncertainties and risks that surround climate change? Climate change will reduce, or possibly enlarge, the future human population of the world and it may conceivably lead to the extinction of humanity; how should these possibilities be incorporated into our judgements of badness? What benefit for climate change might be achieved by slowing the growth of population? How should we value the harm that climate change is doing to human cultures, to nature and to non-human animals? How should all these considerations feed into the ‘social cost of capital’ as it is used in economic evaluation of climate policies? These questions and others will be considered in this issue of the Monist.

Oct 2018:

101:4 Oct. 2018.
Advisory Editor: A.W Carus (
Deadline for submissions: Oct 31, 2017

It is well known that Carnap, in his “Overcoming of Metaphysics Through Logical Analysis of Language” of 1932, used Heidegger’s philosophy to provide examples of metaphysical pseudosentences. What is less well known is that Carnaps’s critique of metaphysics was rooted in a broader, positive metaphilosophy, which underwent a radical change in the early 1930s that gave rise to the principle of tolerance, the basis for Carnap’s later outlook. The earlier critique of metaphysics thereby yielded to a different kind of critique, with a focus on replacing “external” questions — questions not articulable in an explicitly specified linguistic framework — by practical questions concerning which framework to choose. Papers are invited that address not only Carnap’s own metaphilosophy, but also the status of present-day metaphysics in the light of Carnap’s critique — including such questions as: Must the later, tolerance-oriented metaphilosophy actually exclude metaphysics? And if not, which forms of metaphysics will remain safe? Does the later critique apply, for instance, to current analytic metaphysics? And how does it relate to current work under the heading of ‘metametaphysics’? These are not just historical questions, but also address issues of importance to many aspects of current philosophy.

July 2018:

101:3 Jul 2018.
Advisory Editors: Tiziana Andina (, Carola Barbero (, and Carolyn Korsmeyer (
Deadline for submissions: July 31, 2017

Food is normally considered as something natural, but there are good reasons to consider it also as belonging to the realm of artifacts and sometimes even as rising to the level of works of art. Food contributes to building that part of our human identity that has to do with culture and tradition and with social standing. Our relationship with food can be healthy, but it can also take on the form of a disease. In this issue of The Monist, philosophers and representatives of disciplines such as psychology, economics, sociology, and medicine will attempt to investigate the role and value of food in our lives. What kind of object is food? How are we to classify it in our ontology? What are its functions in our lives?