As promised, here are my article picks for each issue of Sci Phi Journal (again, this is not to say that the other articles in each issue were bad, many of them were very strong, just these are the ones that stood out to me):

Issue 1:

“ “I am Groot”: An Aristotelian Reflection on Space Aliens and Substance by Daniel Vecchio

An look at what Aristotle would have made of Rocket Racoon and Groot from Guardians of the Galaxy, and the questions of identity that they raise.

Issue 2:

“The Making of the Fellowship: Concepts of the Good in the Lord of the Rings” by Tom Simon

A breathtaking survey of what the various “Speaking peoples” in Middle Earth regarded as the highest good.

Issue 3:

“The Tyrant’s Headache” by Eric Schwitzgebel

A fun critique of a functionalist philosophy of pain

Issue 4:

Now this is a really tough pick, as all of the articles are very good, but I’m going to go for “The Confluence Between Scientific and Literary Imagination” By Arlan Andrews, which looks at the common source of both literary and scientific creativity, and how one often inspires the other (especially when it comes to sci-fi).

Issue 5:

“On Emotion Drugs” by Jeff Corkern

A fresh perspective on the question of whether recreational ‘emotion’ drugs should be legalised not in terms of personal liberty or their unintended side-effects, but through looking at the core purpose of the drugs themselves.

Issue 6:

“General Directive 18: Self-Defensive Genocide in the Starfire Universe” by Patrick S. Baker

Is genocide ‘in self-defence’ ever justified?

Issue 7:

I have to be honest, I didn’t think the articles in Issue 7 were as strong as in other issues – they were all decent and interesting without any one article particularly grabbing me.

Jeff Corkern’s “On the Influence of Emotion Drugs on History” looks at the factors that may have retarded the development of the pre-Spanish American civilizations that were so quickly wiped out, and Jeff Racho’s “Mad Max:Fury Road – Surrounded by Political Sound and Fury, Signifying Nothing”, which is more of a film review than an article, looks at whether this film’s controversial hype of being a ‘feminist’ film actually stands up to scrutiny.