Metaphilosophy 41 (5):715-716 (2010)

David Weissman
City College of New York
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
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/j.1467-9973.2010.01656.x
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 58,861
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

No citations found.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
20 ( #521,984 of 2,426,275 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
1 ( #542,164 of 2,426,275 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes