2024-12-31-accounts - The Aristotelian Society

This text was generated using OCR and may contain errors. Check the original PDF to see the document submitted to the regulator.

THE ARISTOTELIAN SOCIETY Registered Charity Number: 254021

ANNUAL REPORT AND ACCOUNTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED

31st DECEMBER 2024

The Aristotelian Society Executive Committee's Annual Report For the year ended 31st December 2024

The Executive Committee present their report along with the accounts for the Society for the year ended 31st December 2024. The accounts comply with the Society's rules and applicable law.

Legal and Administrative Information

The Aristotelian Society for the systematic study of philosophy, based at Room 280, Steward House, 32 Russell Square, London WC1B 5DN, is a registered charity (No. 254021) and is governed by a set of rules dated 1984. The Society was originally founded in 1880.

The officers of the Society are as follows:

Honorary Director Dr Michael Hannon President Fabienne Peter Editor Jessica Leech

Aims and Organisation

The object of the Society is the advancement of public education in the field of philosophy and the publication of its proceedings to this end. The society is staffed by a part time administrator, editors, web editor and editorial assistant.

The ordinary business of the Society is managed by an Executive Committee consisting of the officers and the following elected members during the year to 31st December 2024 and up to the date of this report:

Dr Michael Hannon Dr Fabienne Peter Dr Jessica Leech Dr Sarah Fine Dr John Callanan Dr Aidan McGlynn Dr Lucy O’Brien Dr Giulia Felppi Dr Fiona Leigh Dr Mona Simion

Excluding the Editors, The Trustees of the Charity comprise the members of the Executive Committee and the officers of the Society.

Review of Progress

The Society continued to meet fortnightly during the academic year to hear papers on philosophical matters. Papers were published prior to the meetings on the Society’s website. The Proceedings were published in three online issues during the year as well as in hardback and the Supplementary Volume was also published online and in hardback.

The annual Joint Session with the Mind Association was held at the University of Birmingham and there were 177 delegates (last in person conference 2023: 212). The Society’s direct costs were £43,451.50 (last in person conference 2023: £19,074). The local organiser made a profit of £713.50 (last in person conference 2023: £13,716).

Overall subscriptions to the publications were 178 at the end of 2024 (2023: 229). There were 13 new subscriptions in the category of Lifetime membership (no publications) (2023: 11), which brings the total number of individual members in this category to 599 (2023: 546)- these are exclusive of institutional subscriptions, which are handled by OUP. Lastly, there were 215 other general subscriptions (no publications) (2023: 236).

Page: 1

The Aristotelian Society Executive Committee's Annual Report For the year ended 31st December 2024

Review of Financial Position

Membership income has increased from £6,196 in 2023 to £7,725 in 2024. The Society received income from Oxford University Press (OUP) (the publisher of the Proceedings and Supplementary Volume) of £99,399 (2023: £84,838). There was a net income over expenditure for the year of £25,107 (2023: £1,242) leaving cash (current and deposit accounts) balances of £259,683 at 31st December 2024 (2023: £232,469). The net assets of the Society have increased to £418,681 (2023: £334,257), including cash held on longer term deposits.

Publication of Proceedings and Joint Session talks and income from JSTOR remain the Society's main income stream. The 2024 Joint Session conference involved higher catering costs and room hire fees than the Society was able to obtain in 2023, but this was compensated for by higher registration fees, and made up for through increased income. Bursary expenditure remains the same it has been since 2022.

Statement of Executive Committee's Responsibilities

The Charities Act 2011 requires the Executive Committee to prepare a statement of accounts for each financial year which comply with the regulations made under the Act.

The Executive Committee are responsible for keeping accounting records which disclose with reasonable accuracy the financial position of the charity and contain entries showing from day to day all monies received and monies expended by the charity and the matters in respect of which those transactions took place and also contain a record of the assets and liabilities of the charity. The law also sets out the Executive Committees' responsibilities for the preparation and content of the Executive Committees' Annual Report.

The Executive Committee are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the charity and ensuring their proper application under charity law and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.

Statement of Public Benefit

The Executive Committee confirms that it has referred to the guidance contained in the Charity Commission's general guidance on public benefit, including its guidance (PB2) "Public Benefit: Running a Charity", when reviewing the charity's aims and objectives and in planning future activities.

The Aristotelian Society continues to be very proud of its placement in the voluntary sector, the impact it continues to have, and the benefit it believes it is able to present to the general public.

The object of the Society is the advancement of public education in the field of philosophy and the publication of its proceedings to this end. Through affordable subscription rates, free podcasts of talks, social media engagement, and a programme which covers a broad range of philosophical traditions, the Society continues to make philosophy widely available to the general public. The Society also co-organises the Joint Session with the Mind Association - the largest gathering of philosophers in the UK - and also provides grants to philosophy conferences all across the UK.

Reserves Policy

The Society has payments of approximately £100,000 per year and has approximately £200,000 in reserves. The Society aims to have in reserves approximately two years of payments.

Reasons for Policy

The Society has for many years aimed to have significant reserves. This is for three main reasons:

The income of the society comes very largely from one source: the receipts from Oxford University Press for the Proceedings and Supplementary Volume. The Society has little control over the extent of that income, and it could in theory dry up very quickly.

Page: 2

The Aristotelian Society Executive Committee's Annual Report For the year ended 31st December 2024

Reserves Policy continued

The commitments of the Society are fixed and stretch two to three years into the future. It is, for example, already committed to producing the material for publication in the Proceedings and Supplementary Volume of the Society for two years, and committed to a Joint Session for July next year. Should the income dry up the Society would need, as far as possible, to be able to meet the commitments it has made and wind down its affairs in an orderly fashion.

The Society needs easily accessible reserves, beyond those of running costs for a short period because the responsibility of the Joint Session means that it faces, annually, the risk of having to make large 'rescue payments'. This can occur, if, for example, the accommodation arrangements fall through, the local organiser drops out and an organiser has to be bought in on a market salary, or if the local organiser makes a serious mistake on the budget.

Given the fixed nature and extent of its income, the Society is able to consider new worthwhile initiatives, such as switching to on-line publication of Proceedings, only if it is able to insulate itself against risk. Having significant reserves enables it to do this.

Statement of Trustees' Responsibilities

The Trustees are responsible for preparing the Trustees’ Report and the financial statements in accordance with applicable law and United Kingdom Accounting Standards (United Kingdom Generally Accepted Accounting Practice).

The law applicable to charities in England and Wales requires the Trustees to prepare financial statements for each financial year which give a true and fair view of the state of affairs of the Charity and of the incoming resources and application of resources for that period.

In preparing those financial statements the Trustees are required to:

Select suitable accounting policies and then apply them consistently;
Observe the methods and principles in the Charities SORP;
Make judgments and estimates that are reasonable and prudent;
Prepare the financial statements on a going concern basis unless it is inappropriate to presume that the charity will continue in business.

The Trustees are responsible for keeping proper accounting records that disclose with reasonable accuracy at any time the financial position of the charity and to enable them to ensure the financial statements comply with the Charities Act 2011, the Charities SORP and the provisions of the trust deeds. They are also responsible for safeguarding the assets of the Charity and hence for taking reasonable steps for the prevention and detection of fraud and other irregularities.

This report has been approved by the Executive Committee and signed on their behalf

28 October 2025 ………………………………………… Date: ………………… Dr Michael Hannon Honorary Director

Page: 3

Independent Examiner's Report to the Trustees of The Aristotelian Society For the year ended 31st December 2024

I report to the trustees on my examination of the accounts of The Aristotelian Society for the year ended 31 December 2024.

Responsibilities and basis of report

As the charity trustees of the Trust you are responsible for the preparation of the accounts in accordance with the requirements of the Charities Act 2011 (‘the Act’).

I report in respect of my examination of the Trust’s accounts carried out under section 145 of the 2011 Act and in carrying out my examination I have followed all the applicable Directions given by the Charity Commission under section 145(5)(b) of the Act.

Independent examiner’s statement

I have completed my examination. I confirm that no matters have come to my attention in connection with the examination giving me cause to believe:

accounting records were not kept in respect of the Trust as required by section 130 of the Act; or
the accounts do not accord with those records.
the accounts do not comply with the applicable requirements concerning the form and content of accounts set out in the Charities (Accounts and Reports) Regulations 2008 other than any requirement that the accounts give a ‘true and fair view which is not a matter considered as part of an independent examination.

I have no concerns and have come across no other matters in connection with the examination to which attention should be drawn in this report in order to enable a proper understanding of the accounts to be reached.

Karen Wardell

Date: 28 October 2025

Partner, Moore Kingston Smith LLP

For and on behalf of Moore Kingston Smith LLP Chartered Accountants

9 Appold Street London EC2A 2AP

Page: 4

The Aristotelian Society Receipts and Payments Account For the year ended 31st December 2024

Income Receipts Membership Subscriptions Receipts from publications JSTOR Permission fees received Joint session receipts OUP's sales of journals Net VAT movements Miscellaneous Investment Income Interest income and sale of investments Total Receipts Direct Charitable Expenditure Conference grants Podcast expenses Speaker expenses Joint session expenses General Expenses Net salaries and editors' fees Presidents' costs PAYE and NI Pension Student Bursaries Postage Other Expenditure Rent Stationery and postage Computer and IT costs Bank charges Audit, accountancy and payroll Catering Miscellaneous Subscription VAT paid Travel Website Insurance Total Payments Net Income	£ £ 7,725 13,921 - 4,115 99,399 17,964 - 135,400 1,207 144,331 7,313 - 24 4,863 713 33,406 6,405 6,492 1,138 29,317 38 89,710 7,506 - 1,306 415 5,184 - - - 13,689 - 902 513 29,514 119,224 25,107 2024	£ £ 6,196 14,243 - - 84,838 15,635 428 115,144 752 122,092 7,201 - 2,101 4,086 579 35,600 5,217 3,647 1,118 23,653 88 83,290 7,516 140 1,175 381 4,775 1,677 - - 21,173 104 143 476 37,560 120,850 1,242 2023

All receipts and payments are Unrestricted funds movements. The Charity holds no Restricted funds.

Page: 5

The Aristotelian Society Cash and Reserves

For the year ended 31st December 2024

Net Receipts for the year Net Transfers (to)/ from Reserves Cash and bank balances at 1 January Cash and bank balances at 31 December	2024 £ 25,107 2,107 232,469 259,683	2023 £ 1,242 100,293 130,934 232,469

Page: 6

The Aristotelian Society Statement of Assets and Liabilities at 31st December 2024

Notes Monetary Assets Bank and Cash balances: Bank deposit accounts Bank current account CAF Cash account PayPal account - held for investment purposes CAF 90 Day Account Debtors: OUP sales 3 Other debtors Total Assets Liabilities Creditors: Auditors' remuneration Accruals & deferred income Grants VAT Total Liabilities Net Assets	£ £ 3,085 220,342 135 36,121 259,683 72,663 108,919 58,414 4,379 62,793 431,395 4,163 1,355 1,820 5,376 (12,714) 418,681 2024	£ £ 3,025 199,728 - 29,716 232,469 71,516 71,516 42,003 500 42,503 346,488 4,082 4,853 2,192 1,104 (12,231) 334,257 2023

All assets and liabilities of the Charity are held in Unrestricted funds. The Charity holds no Restricted funds.

The Annual Report and Accounts were approved for issue by the Executive Committee and signed on their behalf by:

28 October 2025 ………………………………………… Date: …………….. Dr Michael Hannon Honorary Director

Page: 7

The Aristotelian Society Notes to the Financial Statements For the year ended 31st December 2024

1 Accounting Policies

Basis of Preparation of Accounts

The financial statements have been prepared under the Charities Act 2011, on the receipts and payments basis, following the guidance issued by the Charities Commission.

Allocation of Expenditure

All expenditure in connection with the Society's meetings and publications, together with an appropriate proportion of travel and office costs, has been treated as direct charitable expenditure in the Receipts and Payments Account.

2 Trustees and Employees

The Society had an average of two (2023: one) employees during the year, whose staff cost amounted to £33,406 (2023: £35,600). An honorarium of £5,957 (2023: £5,126) was paid to the editors. Trustees were reimbursed expenses of £6,405 during the year (2023: £5,217).

3 Publishers' Sales Sales of OUP journals net of VAT for the year Less advanced payments Amount due at 31 December 2024	2024 £ 101,748 (43,334) 58,414	2023 £ 85,337 (43,334) 42,003

Page: 8

THE ARISTOTELIAN SOCIETY

MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE & COUNCIL

MONDAY 22 APRIL 2024 13.00-16.00 Meeting held on Microsoft Teams.

AGENDA

1. MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING AND MATTERS ARISING

No new matters arising. Fine asked for further news of what had occurred with the profit split from the 2023 Joint Session. Hannon and Stelle confirmed that the profits had been split 30%/30%/40%, that the Society had invoiced for their proportion and been paid, and that they had received confirmation that the IP had divided the profits in the way it was asked to.

2. OUP ANNUAL REPORT

Adam Blow (Publisher, OUP) introduced himself and provided further detail on the marketing and publishing reports. Blow indicated that 2023 was a peak year for content engagement for the Society; the highest since 2020. Blow also indicated that readership for the Proceedings journal was vastly European (48%) and reviewed the most-downloaded articles of the past year. Blow noted that institutional subscriptions for the Proceedings were slightly down because of increased interest in Open Access, but that this did not appear to be affecting statistics and engagement very negatively.

Leech asked whether it was possible to break down the data from the ‘Other’ category on the marketing report, on the topic of which websites users come from when visiting content on the journal. If for instance one of the leading websites was PhilPapers, there might be an opportunity to encourage authors to promote their papers on PhilPapers and increase access from that end. Blow was unaware but stated that he would investigate this and report back to Leech and Stelle.

Institutional subscriptions for the Supplementary Volume were declining for the same reasons above, but again, this did not appear to be cause for significant concern. Leech asked why the Supplementary Volume was not included in many subscription packages, because it contains papers by more established philosophers than the Proceedings and is published in the US. Blow indicated that packages were put together by the sales team so he had no answer for this but would investigate internally at OUP and return a response.

Fine asked whether the journal still ran a promotion demonstrating the most-read articles for philosophy journals, and whether they would do one this year, as she thought this might be a good way to promote AS journals. Blow thanked her for the suggestion and agreed to look into this as well.

Stelle asked about causes for the increase in Open Access income for 2024 and whether it was possible to predict whether these numbers would decrease, stay stable, or grow. Blow stated that Open Access was performing strongly as a category of publication and would likely remain stable, if not grow, but there was no way to predict this for certain. He noted positively however that the Society’s reader base lines up with the biggest Open Access markets in the world.

Blow thanked the Committee for their work publishing the journal.

Action: Stelle to follow up with Blow about information regarding (a) more granular data for website access trails, (b) sales packages for the Supplementary Volume, and whether the journal could be expanded into more of these, and (c) promotions for most-read articles.

3. ANNUAL ACCOUNTS FOR 2023

Hannon invited the Committee to view the Accounts and noted that a draft copy could be located in the Dropbox folder, pending the production of bank statements from the closed old CAF Gold Account to be formalised. He noted that the final version of the accounts would be distributed when this was available along with a brief summary to the Committee via email, and invited the Committee to ask any questions about the draft version now, and to do the same in future when the final version was available.

Action: Hannon to send the Committee an update with the final accounts when these were available and an overview of the financial situation they presented.

4. THE PROCEEDINGS

(i) Update on speakers 2024/25

Leech directed the Committee to the list of confirmed speakers in the Dropbox and noted there had been two changes of date to accommodate Bank Holiday Mondays. The confirmed speakers and new dates were:

First term

30-Sep-24 Inaugural Address: Fabienne Peter (Warwick) 14-Oct-24 Chike Jeffers (Dalhousie) 28-Oct-24 Greg Restall (St. Andrews) 11-Nov-24 Christopher Cowie (Durham) 25-Nov-24 Susanna Schellenberg (Rutgers)

Second term

13-Jan-25 Monima Chadha (Monash)

27-Jan-25 Alexander Prescott-Couch (Oxford) 10-Feb-25 Nadine Elzein (Warwick) 24-Feb-25 Claire Field (Zurich) 10-Mar-25 Pauline Kleingeld (Groningen)

Third term

28-Apr-25 Léa Salje (Leeds) 12-May-25 Frisbee Sheffield (Cambridge) 19-May-25 Vid Simoniti (Liverpool) 02-Jun-25 Rahel Jaeggi (Humboldt Berlin) 16-Jun-25 Sarah McGrath (Princeton)

(ii) Nomination of Speakers 2025/26

Leech thanked the Committee for their nominations and noted that Pamela Hieronymi had been invited last year and been unable to attend, as had Anna Pakes. After discussion, the following shortlist was reached:

Colin Chamberlain (UCL) [Early modern] Greg Currie (York) [aesthetics] Giulia Felappi (Southampton) [Language] Kathrin Glueer-Pagin (Stockholm) [Mind/epi/pol] Anil Gomes (Oxford) [Mind/Kant] Pamela Hieronymi (UCLA) [ethics/action] Thomas Hofweber (UNC) [Metaphysics] Sophie Horowitz (Amherst) [Epistemology] Anneli Jefferson (Cardiff) [moral and psychology] Malcolm Keating (Smith visiting Glasgow) [Indian philosophy, lang and epi] Anna Pakes (Roehampton) [aesthetics/dance] Lewis Ross (LSE) [legal] Joe Saunders (Durham) [Kant, post-Kantian, ethics] Simon Shogry (Oxford) [Ancient] Johanna Thoma (Bayreuth) [ethics, philosophy of public policy] Christopher Willard-Kyle (Kentucky) [Epistemology/ethics/race] Joel Smith (Manchester) [Phenomenology] Ema Sullivan-Bissett (Birmingham) [Mind]

Action: Leech to send draft list round for approval in order to determine who to prioritise and who to designate as reserve speakers.

(iii) Suggestions for virtual issues

Fine suggested an issue on Michael Dummet; McGlynn one on Peter Clark.

Action: Leech to canvass for suggestions via email.

(iv) Suggestions for blog post

Leech raised the idea of writing something, perhaps in an online forum like Daily Nous, about the Society’s unique publication model as a method of generating interest in its activities.

Simion voiced a concern that the journal’s model might be increasingly out of step with a wider shift toward triple-blind reviewing in academic journals, and a blog post on this topic may therefore backfire. Leech responded that although this was true there were virtues to the journal’s publication model, and Walters noted that in his editorial role he has found triple-blind does not always result in greater diversity of institution or seniority. Peter noted that forums like Warwick University’s Pea Soup blog may be appropriate.

Action: Leech to invite the Committee to email in suggestions for alternate publication venues.

THE JOINT SESSION
(i) 2024 Joint Session (University of Birmingham)
- a. Editor’s update on postgraduate papers, symposia programme, and chairs

Leech confirmed the symposiasts, postgraduate speakers, and chairs for 2024, noting that all chairs but two had been confirmed. The final list of symposiasts and postgraduate speakers was as follows:

Symposiasts:

Inaugural Address - Quassim Cassam (Warwick) Freedom and Domination - Cécile Laborde (Oxford) and Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen (Aarhus) Political Epistemology -Linda Martín Alcoff (CUNY) and Robin McKenna (Liverpool) Metaethics and the Nature of Properties - Jussi Suikkanen (Birmingham) and Neil Sinclair (Nottingham) Bertrand Russell on Experience - MGF Martin (Oxford/Berkeley) and Donovan E Wishon (Mississippi) The Humanities - Stephen Grimm (Fordham) and Lilian O’Brien (Helsinki) Logical Consequence - Gillian Russell (Australian Catholic University) and Sara Uckelman (Durham)

Postgraduate Speakers:

Theoretical Practical Christabel Cane (UCL) Lauren Miano (Princeton) Jacopo Berneri (Oslo) Joseph Sibley (UCL) Frederik Anderson (St. Andrews) Owen Clifton (Queen’s University) Wouter Cohen (Manchester) Zachary Brants (UCSD

Leech commented on postgraduate papers this year, stating she did not have robust data but approximately only 20% of submissions appeared to be from women. There was one woman on each panel, but due to low submissions nothing more than this could be done without distorting the review process to an unacceptable degree. Leech therefore proposed revisiting in a future meeting the question of how the Society might solicit more applications from female scholars.

Simion asked whether the journal could commit to publishing the postgraduate papers, as a way of supporting junior scholars going forward. Leech suggested committing to sending out all 8 papers

for review every year as another solution, which was adopted by the Committee.

Action: Leech to raise the issue in the July meeting of how to solicit applications, particularly from female scholars, for the Postgraduate Sessions.

Action: Leech to coordinate with Stelle how to implement the new process for reviewing all postgraduate papers from the Joint Session.

a. Registration

Stelle confirmed that all postgraduate speakers and invited speakers had registered, and encouraged all Committee members who had not registered to do so. She also noted that Vale Village accommodation would close by 13 May so those interested in staying there needed to bear this in mind.

(ii) 2025 Joint Session (University of Glasgow) – Editor’s update on symposia speakers

Leech confirmed symposiasts for the 2025 Joint Session:

Inaugural address- Helen Beebee (Leeds)

Christoph Kelp (Glasgow) and Anne Meylan (Zurich)

Elizabeth Camp (Rutgers) and Eliot Michaelson (KCL) Chris Lebron (Johns Hopkins) and Aness Webster (Durham) Anna Alexandrova (Cambridge) and Kareem Khalifa (UCLA) Sara Heinämaa (Helsinki) and Kate Kirkpatrick (Oxford) Therese Cory (Notre Dame) and Hamid Taieb (HUB)

(iii)

Preliminary nomination of speakers for 2026 (University of Leeds)

Leech invited nominations for the 2026 Joint Session. Leech noted need to ensure diversity across geography, subject area, career stage, race, ethnicity, and gender. After discussion, the following suggestions were presented:

Yuriko Saito (Rhode Island School of Design) 1[st] / Nick Riggle (San Diego) 2[nd] Tom Dougherty (UNC) / Manon Garcia (FUB) (either way around) Michael Cholbi (Edinburgh) 1[st] / possible 2[nd] Louise Richardson (York). Seyla Benhabib (Yale) 1[st] / Olúfe ́mi O. Táíwò (Georgetown) 2[nd]

Some combination of Kurt Sylvan (Southampton), Selim Berker (Harvard), Lisa Titus (nee Miracchi) (Denver) Kathrin Koslicki (Neuchatel) 1st

Action: Leech to conduct follow-up discussion on pairs by email.

(iv) Update on venue for 2027 and 2028

Hannon confirmed that the venue for 2027 would be Reading and 2028 had now been confirmed as Sheffield, although Max Hayward had indicated he would prefer to have a co-organiser.

(v) Venue nominations for 2029

Hannon guided the Committee toward the Venue Nominations tab on the Nominations google document and invited Committee members to think about locations and associated organisers who are competent and would be good choices for the role.

Fine asked how many rooms were necessary for the conference because Jesus College Cambridge had excellent facilities and may be a good choice for 2029. Hannon will confirm this and report back to Fine.

Action: Hannon to update on the number of rooms necessary for the conference and to solicit suggestions via email.

(vi) Changes to Joint Session schedule going forward

Hannon indicated that in July he would bring up the following proposals for changing the JS schedule, and invited comments or objections before these formal proposals went to the Mind meeting in July.

(1) Remove Society meetings from the official public programme.

(2) Use the Society meeting times to free up slots for other programmes

(3) Shorten symposium sessions to 1hr 30 mins, and perhaps allocate this time to the PG sessions

(4) Running all symposium sessions in parallel or on their own to eliminate worries about hierarchy between parallel/non-parallel speakers.

Simion suggested no parallel sessions at all for symposia so that more junior symposiasts did not lose out to more popular, parallel symposiasts, and a buffet-style dinner instead of seated, which she was keen implement in 2025 at Glasgow.

McGlynn added that he believed some of the features the Committee was proposing to change had been implemented fairly recently for contingent reasons— in one recent year, a particular cohort had needed later sessions on the Friday, for example—but remained in the schedule, and tradition should not be a barrier to making the schedule more accessible and comfortable.

Leech noted that for 2024 the symposia were all running parallel, as an efficient response to the problem of an over-long schedule, but confirmed this was not a final decision and still open to change from 2025 onward.

Action: Hannon to bring these proposals to forward to the AGM meeting with the Mind Association in July.

6. CONFERENCE GRANT APPLICATIONS & REPORTS

Hannon reminded the Committee of the need to prioritise one-off events and graduate conferences, and to give lower priority to invitation-only conferences and established events, although all applications should be considered on their merits. Callanan asked what the policy was around

recurring events, and Hannon indicated this was acceptable, particularly if they were graduate events, but there was no bar in theory to funding a recurring event.

Leech, Walters, and Fine suggested eliminating CG042155 on the basis that it was not, strictly speaking, a philosophy conference. Leech noted that CG042164 was an invite-only conference, which the Society should not fund, and that the application for CG 042154 indicated they would use the money for conference perks, which did not seem like an efficient allocation of resources.

Simion proposed eliminating CG042152 because this was a reading party not a conference; Hannon indicated this was also not a one-off event and had taken place without Society funding in the past, though this was not a deal-breaker. Callanan seconded eliminating CG042154 and CG042152, citing concerns about costs of venue for the former and a worry that the latter historically has not privileged new research, and then left the room to allow the Committee to discuss his own grant proposal (CG042161). This proposal raised the concern that it was ineligible on the wording of guidelines because it took place in Dublin. The idea of changing the guidelines going forward to allow conferences in Ireland was suggested, with Fine indicating support. This may need to be decided over email or at a future meeting but the rules could not change retroactively for the current group of applications, so CG042161 must be eliminated as ineligible.

Hannon noted that CG042163 contained no philosophy speakers except those doing a publishing workshop; Leech worried that postgraduates were not well represented for a postgraduate conference. Simion and Callanan raised concerns about CG042160 and CG042157; Hannon and Leech seconded these. The eventual outcome was a decision to fund:

Grant	Institution	Amount
CG042153	University of Bristol/University of Southampton	300
CG042156	University of Manchester	500
CG042158	University of Oxford	300
CG042159	University of Nottingham	450
CG042162	UCL	500
CG042165	University of Sheffield	500
CG042166	University of Warwick	500

7. RESPONSE TO CHANGES IN PUBLISHING

Hannon noted there were no new concerns on this front.

8. COUNCIL MATTERS

(i) New committee members for 2024/25

Leech invited the Committee to discuss the submitted Expressions of Interest, noting that a possible factor to bear in mind was the need to maintain someone with Logic and Languge expertise once Walters departed. She recommended Giulia Felappi for this purpose. McGlynn voiced support for Lubomira Radoilska on the basis of her expertise and commitments with regard to decolonizing

philosophy; Fine recommended Mohammad saleh Zarepour (McGlynn seconded). Simion discussed Elise Woodard as a strong candidate with commitments to supporting minority scholars, Committee experience, and an impressive body of work for someone at her career stage. At this point Hannon left the room to allow the Committee to discuss Woodard impartially.

After subsequent discussion the Committee voted and elected Giulia Felappi by majority.

Action: Hannon to write to Felappi inviting her to the join the Committee.

At this point multiple members needed to leave because the meeting time had overrun. Leech indicated they would need to reconvene soon to discuss the rest of the agenda. The meeting was concluded at 16:05.

THE ARISTOTELIAN SOCIETY

MEETING OF THE EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE & COUNCIL

TUESDAY 14 MAY 2024 10.00-11.00 Meeting held on Microsoft Teams.

AGENDA (cont. from 22 April 2024)

8. COUNCIL MATTERS

(ii) Multiple terms for Committee members

Leech invited the Committee’s thoughts on what the Society’s policy should be on multiple terms for Committee members going forward. In 2021 the Committee had discussed allowing members to renew their terms if they wanted to, and subsequently approved this for Fine, Leigh, and Simion. Leech and Hannon both thought it appropriate to raise the issue again in order to confirm the details of the policy. Leech asked whether the Committee still believed that renewal was appropriate, how many terms they envisioned if so, and what the renewal procedure should be.

Fine said that the original discussion in 2021 had emphasised the value for the Society of continuity in terms of knowledge and governance if committed members wanted to stay on. Walters disagreed, stating that regular that turnover had the advantage of more equitably distributing the opportunity to be a member. To this, Hannon noted that in current year the Committee had a wide and strong group of applicants, but only one position to award.

Leech wondered if the problem might be solved contextually, with the Committee evaluating on the basis of the applications received whether it was a small application pool, in which case it might make sense to maintain a member for the sake of continuity, or a year like the present one in which there were many promising applicants. Leech also proposed maintaining the policy of optional renewal for another term but a cap at two terms, and indicated that the Committee might want to maintain the right to decline renewal in anticipation of the unlikely but possible scenario where the member seeking renewal had inadequately fulfilled their duties or been difficult to work with; she also asked what the Committee thought about requiring a re-application process instead of automatic renewal.

Simion disagreed with this suggestion, concerned that evaluating the CVs of fellow Committee members would endanger comity on the Committee. Hannon suggested that, whatever the method

of renewal, if it was not automatic the decision could be taken by the Officers to preserve goodwill on the Committee.

He then proposed the following language: “Standing members may serve at most one additional term, in agreement with the Officers of the Society.” The reasons for this wording were: (a) to avoid the issue of having Committee members reapply, (b) to avoid the issue of having Committee members assume that the decision to extend for another term is entirely their own, (c) to shield the full Committee from bearing any responsibility (or dealing with awkwardness) in cases where Officers were not in favor of extending for another term.

This language was approved by the Committee.

(i) Update on 2026/27 presidency

Hannon confirmed that Alexander Bird had received the most votes from the Committee in October and been invited to be President for 2026/27, which he accepted. He then drew the Committee’s attention to the nominations list for 2027/28 and asked that members fill this out.

Action: Hannon to invite the Committee via email to nominate for the 2027/28 presidency.

9. YEARLY SALARY REVIEW

Hannon reminded the Committee of when that the policy on salary increases was decided at the Joint Session in 2022, and Stelle referred them to the document demonstrating a 2.5% increase in line with inflation. The Committee was happy to approve.

10. REVIEW OF STUDENT BURSARY FUNDING

Hannon noted this was a historical item, begun when the bursary amounts had increased from £3,000 to £ 5,000 to monitor the financial impact of offering higher awards. As the Society’s finances appeared to be in relatively good health Hannon reported there were no present concerns to be discussed.

11. EXTRAORDINARY STUDENT BURSARY FUNDING

Stelle left the room. The following minutes were provided and approved by Leech and Hannon.

Leech informed the committee of Anna Stelle’s outstanding contributions to the Society in her new role as Managing Editor. Leech highlighted that the demands of the position significantly exceeded the advertised time commitment, posing a challenge to Anna’s PhD studies. In recognition of her exceptional efforts, the Committee decided to award Anna an ‘Extraordinary Student Bursary’ of £5000. This award, in addition to the five regular Society Student Bursaries, aims to support her PhD studies and acknowledge her remarkable work in promoting philosophy in the UK.

Stelle re-entered the room and was informed of the decision, for which she thanked the Committee. The Committee thanked her for her service to the role.

12. ANY OTHER BUSINESS

Leech asked the Committee to confirm again whether they had voted on 22 April to approve conference grant CG042166, because there had been a discrepancy after the last meeting in Stelle’s minutes. The Committee confirmed this grant was approved.

The meeting was concluded at 11:00. The date of the next meeting of the Executive Committee will be in July 2024, in person at the Joint Session in Birmingham.

The Aristotelian Society

Minutes of the Meeting of the Executive Committee

Friday 12 July 2024 12:30 – 14.00

Rooms 109, Teaching and Learning Building, University of Birmingham

PRESENT: Jessica Leech, Fabienne Peter, Lee Walters, Aidan McGlynn, Sarah Fine, Anna Stelle, Michael Hannon

APOLOGIES: Mona Simion, Fiona Leigh, Scott Sturgeon, MM McCabe

Agenda

1. Minutes of the last meeting & matters arising

Hannon made apologies for Sturgeon’s absence, introduced the meeting, and began by asking if there were any corrections to the minutes of the last meeting.

The minutes of the last meeting were approved.

2. 2026 Joint Session – Leeds: review of nomination of speakers from Mind

Leech began by giving the background to Yuriko Saito’s invitation—Saito was unable to accept last year due to caring responsibilities, and Leech had expected that the Society would go back to Saito. On this basis she expressed surprise that Mind had ranked Saito last of the Society’s nominations, and asked the Committee’s advice for whether they should support her nomination in the Joint Meeting.

Fine noted that both lists were heavily skewed toward international speakers, in the context of a conference that was intended to showcase the depth and diversity of UK philosophy. Walters noted that Mind’s suggestions didn’t include seconds, and the Society should try to add UK scholars through these suggestions.

Hannon also reminded the Committee of the need for diversity of topics.

After some discussion, the Committee agreed the following pairs and points to take forward to Mind:

Kurt Sylvan = ?? Matti Eklund (Uppsala) Yuriko Saito (RSDI) = (UK philosopher)

Tom Dougherty (UNC) / Manon Garcia (FUB) == either way around Seyla Benhabib (Yale) 1st. Olúfe ́mi O. Táíwò (Georgetown) 2nd.

3. Joint session venue nominations 2027 and 2028

Hannon reminded the Committee that the University of Reading were hosting in the 2027, with Luke Elson as Local Organsier; and the University of Sheffield in 2028, putatively with Max Hayward as Local Organiser, but Hayward had indicated it was likely he would need a coorganiser. Fine announced to the Committee that Jesus College Cambridge had agreed to host the Joint Session in 2029, with Clare Chambers, based at Jesus, acting as Local Organiser.

4. Student Bursaries

Hannon announced the list of Burasary winners for 2024-25 and thanked the sub-Committee for their work in evaluating applications. The winners were:

Alex Murphy, UCL
Adham Al-Shazly, Cambridge
Alice Wright, KCL
Mariona Miyata-Sturm, Oxford
Leia Hopf, Bristol

5. Any other business

No other business.

The meeting was concluded at 13:40.

The Aristotelian Society

Minutes of the Annual General Meeting

Friday 12 July 2024 14.00 – 14.15

Rooms 109, Teaching and Learning Building, University of Birmingham

PRESENT: Jessica Leech, Fabienne Peter, Lee Walters, Aidan McGlynn, Sarah Fine, Anna Stelle, Michael Hannon

APOLOGIES: Mona Simion, Fiona Leigh, Scott Sturgeon, MM McCabe

Agenda

1. Minutes of the last meeting & matters arising

The minutes of the last meeting were approved with no corrections.

2. 2024 subscriptions

Stelle reported on the subscription figures for 2023 (179 new member subscriptions), which were an improvement from 2022 (83 new subscriptions).

3. Future presidencies

Hannon reported on the following future appointments:

2024/25 Fabienne Peter, 2025/26 Lucy O’Brien, 2026/27 Alexander Bird.

Hannon then referred to the nominations document he had circulated to the Committee ahead of the meeting, which provided a ranking of nominations for 2027/28 as: Jessica Brown, Sarah Sawyer, Rosanna Keefe (in order of votes).

Action: Hannon to extend an invitation to Brown.

4. Any other business

No other business.

The meeting was concluded at 14:15.

The Aristotelian Society

Meeting of the Executive Committee & Council

Monday 30 September 2024 13.00-16.00

Meeting held on Teams.

Agenda

1. Minutes of the last meeting and matters arising

Sturgeon asked if anyone had corrections to the previous minutes; Leech noted that Oderberg/Koslicki was a reserve for 2026. Regarding future invitations, she stated that if we didn’t need reserves for 2026 we could invite those speakers for 2027, and in general that since we were inviting two years in advance for the SAV and PAS, and could push reserves forward across the board.

2. Proceedings

i. Update on speakers for 2025/26

Leech reported that we have a full programme for 25-26 and directed the Committee’s attention to the listed speakers and dates in the Dropbox folder. These are:

First term

29-Sep-25 Inaugural Address: Lucy O’Brien (UCL) 13-Oct-25 Sophie Horowitz (Amherst) 27-Oct-25 Joe Saunders (Durham) 10-Nov-25 Malcolm Keating (Smith) 24-Nov-25 Guilia Felappi (Southampton)

Second term

19-Jan-26 Lewis Ross (LSE) 02-Feb-26 Anna Pakes (Roehampton) 16-Feb-26 Colin Chamberlain (UCL) 02-Mar-26 Anneli Jefferson (Cardiff) 16-Mar-26 Johanna Thoma (Bayreuth)

Third term

20-Apr-26 Simon Shogry (Oxford) 27-Apr-26 Chris Lebron (Johns Hopkins) 11-May-26 Anil Gomes (Oxford) 18-May-26 Pamela Hieronymi (UCLA) 01-Jun-26 Thomas Hofweber (UNC)

3. Joint Sessions

i. Report from 2024 Joint Session (Birmingham)

Stelle referred the Committee to the report in contained in the papers for the meeting and let the Committee know that the 2024 Joint Session had made a net profit of £350. This meant the Society had succeeded in its ambition to merely break even, not make a profit, and Stelle thanked the Local Organisers, Jussi Suikkanen and Nikk Effingham.

ii. Update on arrangements for 2025 (Glasgow)

Stelle invited Simion to give the Committee an update. Simion indicated that the website was nearly up and running, and should be ready for the following day (1 October). What remained was only to check that all the links were working correctly.

iii. Update on speakers for 2026 and 2027

Leech reported that the programme was nearly full for 2026, and progress had been made for 2027. At the moment, the line-up looked as follows:

2026

Angela Breitenbach (Cambridge). 'Kantian Climate Justice’ = Alyssa R. Bernstein (Ohio)
Michael Cholbi (Edinburgh). Grief and moral virtue = Louise Richardson (York).
Pekka Vayrynen (Leeds) = Matti Ekland (Uppsala). Specific topic pending.
Gregory Currie (York emeritus). "Art as the manifestation of agency" = Eileen John (Warwick).
David Oderberg (Reading). ‘Hylemorphism as a Generalised Research Programme’.
Manon Garcia (FUB). ‘Sex as shared agency’ = Carol Hay (University of Massachusetts Lowell).

2027

Asa Wikforss (Stockholm). Deadline 1[st] June 2026. Knowledge resistance, disinformation and “bad beliefs” = Kurt Sylvan (Southampton).
Seyla Benhabib (Yale) seems to be on for 2027. Waiting for confirmation. Topic will take a while.

iv. Update on venue for 2026

Stelle informed the Committee of trouble in the planning of the 2026 Joint Session, set to be in Leeds. The Leeds Conferences team had provided a quote for conference costs that was much higher than had been paid in previous years; after negotiation, Stelle had managed to lower the quote to £55,991, which was high, but in the range of the more expensive conferences the Society had run in the past (Edinburgh 2017: £51,486).

This seemed to be due to higher rates for room hire than the Society had paid in the past, and the requirement of a flat ‘daily delegate rate’ of £44 per delegate, negotiated down from £45. Daily delegate fees had been used in a Joint Session contract once before (Edinburgh 2017) and counselled against by McGlynn in the July 2024 Joint meetings because they made it more difficult to meet expenses through increasing delegate numbers. The rate quoted was also much higher than the rate paid in Edinburgh

(£27.50 per person). The second problem was that Leeds’s only availability was 29-31 July 2026, meaning the conference would be pushed to later in the year than ever before; the third was that Leeds had not yet appointed Local Organisers. There had been a previous miscommunication about this point and it seemed the contacts did not intend to be Los and needed to recruit for the role. She added that it might also be reasonable to consider whether inflation, rising costs in general post-pandemic, and rising costs across the university sector meant that the conference would be more expensive to put on going forward.

Stelle invited comments from the Committee from the situation, including suggestions on whether: (a) the plan to hold 2026 in Leeds should be abandoned; (b) whether the entire schedule should be moved up one year; (c) whether 2027 (Reading) should be moved up with the attempt to find a new institution to fill 2027, the rest of the schedule remaining the same.

Simion was worried about the impact higher costs would have on the registration fee and about the prospect of fewer numbers if the conference was held later in July, when academics were closer to or in the August holiday. Uncertain attendance would also make it difficult to confidently calculate in advance what level of registration fee would be needed to cover costs. McGlynn also worried about delegate rate and asked Stelle to confirm whether the contract contained a minimum spend/attendance requirement, suggesting that in his opinion it would be a very bad deal if so.

Leech noted that it was important for her to know the dates in the near future, as she had issued invitations to symposiasts on a vague timeline while this issue was being worked out, but specific days would need to be confirmed with them soon.

O’Brien asked if the other future years/venues had local organisers attached. Hannon indicated that Reading (2027) had Luke Elson as LO; Sheffield (2028) had a contact, though not necessarily an LO—it was as yet unclear—and Cambridge (2029) had Clare Chambers as LO.

Peters said that if Leeds was untenable, the reasonable next step would be to see if the Society could switch the years for Reading and Leeds, instead of moving everyone up. Fine agreed.

Stelle noted to the Committee that Leeds had indicated to her that they had no availability for earlier July dates in any year as they had standing conferences which were always hosted there during that time of year, but she would check with Leeds to confirm this.

Actions: Stelle to investigate whether Leeds could accommodate earlier dates in 2027 and whether they required a minimum attendance guarantee for the conference.

Actions: Stelle to contact Luke Elson (2027) and ask whether it was possible at this point for Elson to move 2027 planning to 2026.

Actions: Stelle and Hannon then to return the issue to the Committee in future meetings.

v. Venue nominations for 2030

Hannon suggested this item be skipped for now, given that the 2026 session was a greater priority, and the Committee was already unusually well-covered in terms of future provision relative to the Society’s normal timelines for planning.

4. Conference funding applications and reports

Hannon introduced grant application process for new members of the Society and invited comments on applications.

Discussing the individual applications, Committee members variously highlighted issues including whether or not a conference was invite-only, the diversity of the listed speakers, and how well-worked out the proposals and budgets were, among others.

The outcome of the discussion was to fund the following grants:

Ref	Institution	Amount requested	Amount approved
CG042168	Birkbeck University	468	340
CG042170	University of York/University of Leeds	500	340
CG042171	University of Nottingham	500	340
CG042172	University of Oxford	500	340
CG042174	University of St. Andrews	500	340
CG042175.	University of Reading/Bristol/	300	300
	University Italian Switzerland

Leigh noted that it might be helpful to add a statement to the website about the Committee only funding applications which furthered the ‘aims and principles of the Aristotelian Society’; this was approved.

The Committee also approved Robson’s request to add a requirement to the application guidance that conference reports must be contained in a single document, though they noted this could be Word or PDF.

Stelle action: Stelle to notify Robson of the grant outcomes and ask her to update wording of the conference grant page to reflect the changes above.

5. Website statistics

Stelle informed the Committee of the statistics contained in the papers, and pointed out in particular that the average email open rate of 51% (compared to 38% last year) was a welcome increase, and execellent in terms of MailChimp’s average of 21%.

6. Society nominations

i. Update on Council members

Hannon indicated that Sturgeon would now be moving to the Council and thanked him for his work as President.

Hannon introduced a separate issue that some members of the council were now deceased, including the Society’s relative recent former President, Robert Stern. He asked the Committee for their views on how that could be indicated on the website.

Simion stated that dates of the person’s lifespan (birth-death) could be placed below the person’s name. Peter suggested that maybe the solution was to divide the page into three sections: members of Council, recent presidents (say 10 years), and a full list of past presidents. One consideration was that this might interfere with the steady chronology currently displayed on the Council page.

Fine noted she was in favour of keeping all past presidents listed under the ‘Council’ portion, and that she liked the photos the Society currently had and thought they should keep these.

Leech asked what the practical distinction was between Executive Committee and Council. If the Council was involved in nominations, then it seemed appropriate that they should attend meetings where nominations to the Executive Committee, Presidents, and Officers would occur. O’Brien noted that when she was Director, this had been a practice upkept by some former Presidents.

O’Brien made the point that it was odd for non-governing people with no attachment to the Society to be on the Council. Hannon noted that maybe this required a longer discussion about what the distinction is between ‘Past Presidents’ and ‘Council,’ what the function of the Council was, and what language was most appropriate for these bodies. Hannon noted that the Society had not treated the Council as any sort of decisionmaking body during his time in the role.

Actions: Hannon, Leech, and Stelle will come up with proposals to send to the Executive Committee on what the Council portion website could look like.

Actions: Stelle to put a longer discussion about the role and composition of the Council on the agenda for the April 2025 meeting.

ii. Update on President for 2027-28

Hannon updated the Committee on the future presidents, including Lucy O’Brien for 2025-26 and Alexander Bird for 2026-2027. Hannon informed the Committee that in July the Committee nominated Jessica Brown; he had written to her but not yet received a response. If this was a negative response he would, following the vote in July, then write to Sarah Sawyer, the Rosanna Keefe, reflecting the proportions of the votes these candidates had received in the July meeting.

Action: Hannon to invite Jessica Brown and update the Committee on the eventual outcome.

iii. Honorary member nominations

Hannon reminded the Committee that in 2016 Longworth proposed that former Editors should be Honorary Members. This had not yet been done for Longworth himself and Hannon indicated he would write to Longworth inviting him. Hannon also proposed that anyone who has given significant support to the Society should qualify for honorary membership.

Leech indicated that Directors should also receive this commendation, in addition to Editors, as there seemed no reason to make a distinction between the two.

O’Brien indicated that it might be difficult to keep track of who does or doesn’t have a subscription; Hannon suggested discussing with Stelle how the subscriptions work and what the administration process behind this would be.

Action: Hannon to write to Longworth inviting him to be an honorary member and discover how intricate the process of adding honorary members would be to maintain.

7. Any other business

Sturgeon called for any other business.

Callanan, referring back to discussions had about conference grants, indicated that there was a strong argument to have an expansionist attitude going forward to what they funded so that the applications they received did not become siloed in particular areas of philosophy, as seemed to be the case this year, where the applications privileged metaphysics.

Action: Stelle to mention this when introducing conference grants in the April meeting, to ensure diversity of approach and subject matter.

Stelle asked for recommendations on how to increase online (facebook, twitter, email) engagement from women, indicating that of the 6.k page likes and 6495 page follows on the Society’s facebook page, 72% of these were men and 27% women. This did not reflect the composition of the Society’s speakers, audiences, or Committee, nor the gender split in the discipline. Stelle was unsure why the numbers skewed this way, though suggested it might have something to do with gendered trends in professional facebook usage, and invited Committee members to email her with thoughts about how to shift these figures if they had any.

The meeting was concluded at 14:45.

The next meeting of the Executive Committee & Council will be held on 28 April 2025 at 13.00 on Teams, link to follow.