David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 84 (65):233- (2009)
Let me begin with what may seem a very minor point, but one which I think reveals something about how many philosophers today conceive of their subject. During the past few decades, there has been an increasing tendency for references in philosophy books and articles to be formatted in the ‘author and date’ style (‘see Fodor (1996)’, ‘see Smith (2001)’.) A neat and economical reference system, you may think; and it certainly saves space, albeit inconveniencing readers by forcing them to flip back to the end of the chapter or book to find the title of the work being referred to. But what has made this system so popular among philosophers? A factor which I suspect exerts a strong subconscious attraction for many people is that it makes a philosophy article look very like a piece of scientific research. For if one asks where the ‘author-date’ system originated, the answer is clear: it comes from the science journals. And in that context, the choice of referencing system has a very definite rationale. In the progress-driven world of science, priority is everything, and it’s vitally important for a career that a researcher is able to proclaim his work as breaking new ground. Bloggs (2005) developed a technique for cloning a certain virus; Coggs (2006) showed how certain bits of viral DNA could be spliced; and now Dobbs (2007) draws on both techniques to develop the building blocks of a new vaccine. The idea is that our knowledge-base is enhanced, month by month and year by year, in small incremental steps (perhaps with occasional major breakthroughs); and in the catalogue of advances, the date tagged to each name signals when progress was made, and by whom.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server
Configure custom proxy (use this if your affiliation does not provide a proxy)
|Through your library|
References found in this work BETA
John Cottingham (2008). Cartesian Reflections: Essays on Descartes's Philosophy. Oxford University Press.
John Cottingham (ed.) (1992). The Cambridge Companion to Descartes. Cambridge University Press.
John Cottingham, Nafsika Athanassoulis & Samantha Vice (eds.) (2008). The Moral Life: Essays in Honour of John Cottingham. Palgrave Macmillan.
Michael R. DePaul (1993). Balance and Refinement: Beyond Coherence Methods of Moral Inquiry. Routledge.
Pierre Hadot (1995). Philosophy as a Way of Life: Spiritual Exercises From Socrates to Foucault. Blackwell.
Citations of this work BETA
No citations found.
Similar books and articles
John Kadvany (1997). Varieties of Risk Representations. Journal of Social Philosophy 28 (3):123-143.
Alberto Martinelli (2007). Evolution From World System to World Society? World Futures 63 (5 & 6):425 – 442.
David Carlson (2007). A Commentary to Hegel's Science of Logic. Palgrave Macmillian.
Pete Mandik (2013). This is Philosophy of Mind: An Introduction. Wiley-Blackwell.
W. Schwemmler (1982). The Endoeytobiotic Cell Theory and the Periodic System of Cells. Acta Biotheoretica 31 (1).
Deborah G. Mayo & Aris Spanos (2006). Philosophical Scrutiny of Evidence of Risks: From Bioethics to Bioevidence. Philosophy of Science 73 (5):803-816.
Added to index2009-06-25
Total downloads57 ( #25,832 of 1,096,549 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #258,571 of 1,096,549 )
How can I increase my downloads?