David Bourget (Western Ontario)
David Chalmers (ANU, NYU)
Rafael De Clercq
Jack Alan Reynolds
Learn more about PhilPapers
Metaphilosophy 41 (5):715-716 (2010)
Abstract: The quality of peer-reviewed journals is vulnerable to the absence of declared standards for book reviews. Reviewers should agree to several simple rules before undertaking to review books and while writing them. Sensitivity to an author's aims is one requirement; familiarity with an author's previous and relevant publications is another. Critical judgment is always appropriate, but it can be set apart from an account of the ideas reviewed
|Keywords||approval programmatic hypotheses analytic philosophy freedom book reviews journals standards editors publication|
No categories specified
(categorize this paper)
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Chris Jackson (2012). Recent Texts in Critical Thinking. Teaching Philosophy 35 (4):411-423.
Anne Rowan-Legg, Charles Weijer, J. Gao & C. Fernandez (2009). A Comparison of Journal Instructions Regarding Institutional Review Board Approval and Conflict-of-Interest Disclosure Between 1995 and 2005. Journal of Medical Ethics 35 (1):74-78.
Susan Haack (2007). Peer Review and Publication: Lessons for Lawyers. Stetson Law Review 36 (3).
Marsilio Ficino (2001). Platonic Theology. Harvard University Press.
Lauge Baungaard Rasmussen (2005). The Narrative Aspect of Scenario Building - How Story Telling May Give People a Memory of the Future. AI and Society 19 (3):229-249.
David Shoemaker (2000). ''Dirty Words'' and the Offense Principle. Law and Philosophy 19 (5):545 - 584.
Aida Slavic (2008). Faceted Classification: Management and Use. [REVIEW] Axiomathes 18 (2):257-271.
Aristotle (1995). Politics: Books I and II. Clarendon Press.
Niko Kolodny (2007). State or Process Requirements? Mind 116 (462):371-385.
John Brunero (2010). The Scope of Rational Requirements. Philosophical Quarterly 60 (238):28-49.
Krista Lawlor (2001). New Thoughts About Old Things: Cognitive Policies as the Ground of Singular Concepts. Garland Pub..
J. Scott Armstrong (1997). Peer Review for Journals: Evidence on Quality Control, Fairness, and Innovation. Science and Engineering Ethics 3 (1):63-84.
Added to index2010-10-16
Total downloads8 ( #136,866 of 1,018,319 )
Recent downloads (6 months)0
How can I increase my downloads?