Some interesting thoughts on peer review…

Object-Oriented Philosophy

There are a number of boring, tedious, and even unfair things about academia as presently constituted. No argument from me about that.

But sometimes certain procedures come under fire in ways that I find unconvincing.

For example, I’ve discussed here before that I am unpersuaded by the argument that the peer review system for articles and books needs to be abolished, because it enforces narrow conformism, etc. I think there’s a grain of truth in this, but it ought not to be exaggerated.

Yes, for example: if you submit to a mainstream journal in continental philosophy, and if you do speculative realism or something else fairly new, you’re possibly going to get some haughty nitpicking from well-established reviewers who come from the Derrida/Foucault days, or who do a safe mainstream version of Deleuze, or something along those lines. I’ve gotten that sort of feedback myself. But guess what? The articles…

View original post 540 more words


About Chris

Scholar of religion/nonreligion... PhD Student (Lancaster University), blogger, singer, actor, thinker... Northern Irish living in Scotland. Co-founder of The Religious Studies Project. Director at the NSRN. Baritone masquerading as a tenor. Vegetarian for no particular reason.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: