What's On Your Mind?

[Echogem222]

Exactly as it says... what's up? What's on your mind?

Thinking about building a new house? A sandwich?

Worried about politics? Your aunt's health?

Looking at your sock and wondering what in the world you stepped in this time?

What else?

I guess I'm just frustrated with the way philosophy is at the professional level when presenting new ideas. I get the importance of knowing what you're talking about, as well as explaining things clearly, but even when you're doing both of those things, unless it's explained a certain way, your idea gets rejected if you try to publish it, it doesn't matter what the idea is, how revolutionary or important it is, it just gets ignored. So, no matter how I see it, professional philosophy is very stagnant. Maybe I'm just being biased because of how many negative experiences I've had with that system, maybe I've just been super unlucky, but even so, there's still something wrong with that system.

 

[Orbit]

I guess I'm just frustrated with the way philosophy is at the professional level when presenting new ideas. I get the importance of knowing what you're talking about, as well as explaining things clearly, but even when you're doing both of those things, unless it's explained a certain way, your idea gets rejected if you try to publish it, it doesn't matter what the idea is, how revolutionary or important it is, it just gets ignored. So, no matter how I see it, professional philosophy is very stagnant. Maybe I'm just being biased because of how many negative experiences I've had with that system, maybe I've just been super unlucky, but even so, there's still something wrong with that system.

How many articles have you submitted to peer-reviewed journals? What was the result? A desk reject? Reject with feedback? Petered out during revisions?

 

[Echogem222]

How many articles have you submitted to peer-reviewed journals? What was the result? A desk reject? Reject with feedback? Petered out during revisions?

When I say publish, I don't mean in the sense of journals (though even just looking at the statistics for that sort of thing, and the writing styles of all the people who do get their work published, it's pretty obvious what the set standard is), I'm talking about running into pro philosophers online, and showing my work to them (so trying to "publish" it that way), how negative their reactions are, every single time I've even gotten a response and wasn't just flat out ignored. And it isn't just me, I've seen people discuss online, how they basically experience exactly what I do, but in the sense of trying to publish to a journal. There's like an elitist standard of pro philosophers. There do seem to be some journals that are trying to be more diverse in who they accept ideas from (at least they seem to be), but for certain journals to specialize in that, just shows that there is a real problem. However, even those journals have no one that I've been able to find that deviate from the normally required writing style by a significant margin.

But as I said before, maybe I'm just being biased and things aren't as bad as I think, but even so, there's obviously a problem that isn't being fully addressed in the way it needs to be.

 

[crossfire]

I'm trying to decide what to top my pizzas with before they go in the oven. (Specifically, whether or not roasted squash seeds would be a good addition to mushrooms, olives, garlic, onions, and feta cheese.)

 

[JustGeorge]

I'm trying to decide what to top my pizzas with before they go in the oven. (Specifically, whether or not roasted squash seeds would be a good addition to mushrooms, olives, garlic, onions, and feta cheese.)

I like squash seeds, but not sure I'd like them on a pizza.

(Or onions. )

 

[crossfire]

I like squash seeds, but not sure I'd like them on a pizza.

(Or onions. )

I thought I'd roast the squash seeds while I'm preheating my pizza stone. I'm still debating on whether to put them on the pizzas.

 

[Orbit]

When I say publish, I don't mean in the sense of journals (though even just looking at the statistics for that sort of thing, and the writing styles of all the people who do get their work published, it's pretty obvious what the set standard is), I'm talking about running into pro philosophers online, and showing my work to them (so trying to "publish" it that way), how negative their reactions are, every single time I've even gotten a response and wasn't just flat out ignored. And it isn't just me, I've seen people discuss online, how they basically experience exactly what I do, but in the sense of trying to publish to a journal. There's like an elitist standard of pro philosophers. There do seem to be some journals that are trying to be more diverse in who they accept ideas from (at least they seem to be), but for certain journals to specialize in that, just shows that there is a real problem. However, even those journals have no one that I've been able to find that deviate from the normally required writing style by a significant margin.

But as I said before, maybe I'm just being biased and things aren't as bad as I think, but even so, there's obviously a problem that isn't being fully addressed in the way it needs to be.

Maybe this is just me, but I'd bypass the "pro philosophers" on the internet and submit my work to a journal. Even if they reject it the first time, they usually will send it out for peer-review, and you get to see the comments and suggestions that were made. You can use the feedback to make your work stronger.

 

[Echogem222]

Maybe this is just me, but I'd bypass the "pro philosophers" on the internet and submit my work to a journal. Even if they reject it the first time, they usually will send it out for peer-review, and you get to see the comments and suggestions that were made. You can use the feedback to make your work stronger.

Yeah, but what about the writing style issue?

 

[Orbit]

Yeah, but what about the writing style issue?

What exactly do you mean by "the writing style"? What is the problem?

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

When I say publish, I don't mean in the sense of journals (though even just looking at the statistics for that sort of thing, and the writing styles of all the people who do get their work published, it's pretty obvious what the set standard is), I'm talking about running into pro philosophers online, and showing my work to them (so trying to "publish" it that way), how negative their reactions are, every single time I've even gotten a response and wasn't just flat out ignored. And it isn't just me, I've seen people discuss online, how they basically experience exactly what I do, but in the sense of trying to publish to a journal. There's like an elitist standard of pro philosophers. There do seem to be some journals that are trying to be more diverse in who they accept ideas from (at least they seem to be), but for certain journals to specialize in that, just shows that there is a real problem. However, even those journals have no one that I've been able to find that deviate from the normally required writing style by a significant margin.

But as I said before, maybe I'm just being biased and things aren't as bad as I think, but even so, there's obviously a problem that isn't being fully addressed in the way it needs to be.

When I was a late teenager / early adult, I hung out with a few philosophers. They weren't bad people, and were often good company, but they were very bookish, sophisticated, and could potentially be seen as acting like they were a bit high class

Syntax was also extremely important to them.

As for fitting into such a group, if one wanted to.... it's complicated. A lot of philosophers I've met seem to believe that "An enemy of an enemy is my friend", so if I wanted to be friends with one, I would just kind of argue alongside them in support of their argument.

 

[Echogem222]

What exactly do you mean by "the writing style"? What is the problem?

Don't you need to write an Abstract, then an introduction, then an area that actually explains the content you're addressing, then an area for possible counter arguments, then a conclusion, then acknowledgements (if any), then references (if any)? Doing it that way every time is extremely tedious, and it also needs to be well explained in each part. Though I understand a lot of Philosophy, I never went to college due to cost and personal reasons, so writing that way just isn't the way I think (though I'm not talking about the references and acknowledgements, I can understand those parts).

 

[Orbit]

Don't you need to write an Abstract, then an introduction, then an area that actually explains the content you're addressing, then an area for possible counter arguments, then a conclusion, then acknowledgements (if any), then references (if any)? Doing it that way every time is extremely tedious, and it also needs to be well explained in each part. Though I understand a lot of Philosophy, I never went to college due to cost and personal reasons, so writing that way just isn't the way I think (though I'm not talking about the references and acknowledgements, I can understand those parts).

I think you understand the format well enough to write in it. I'd just get started. Get published!

 

[Echogem222]

I think you understand the format well enough to write in it. I'd just get started. Get published!

I don't get what you're trying to say. Are you saying I should just ignore the fact that I don't know how to write that way, and do things that way anyway?

 

[Orbit]

I don't get what you're trying to say. Are you saying I should just ignore the fact that I don't know how to write that way, and do things that way anyway?

I'm saying you should down at your desk and start by outlining your paper in the standard format. Fill in the sections with the appropriate material. You don't have to go to college to practice writing. It's like learning anything else, you just need to put your mind to it, because there's no way around it. (Unless you want to self-publish or start a blog/substack etc)

 

[Echogem222]

I'm saying you should down at your desk and start by outlining your paper in the standard format. Fill in the sections with the appropriate material. You don't have to go to college to practice writing. It's like learning anything else, you just need to put your mind to it, because there's no way around it. (Unless you want to self-publish or start a blog/substack etc)

I'll consider it.

 

[PoetPhilosopher]

I'll consider it.

To provide another perspective, I'm a little cautious of the idea of just telling you that you can do it, and sending you on your way.

ie, I feel that there is a high level of professionalism to some journals, and it's important to keep a balanced view while not getting one's hopes up too much during the process.

To relay a story, I once submitted something to a place. The editor told me they loved it and said it would likely be published. Then, she stated that there was a sort of review process. I was shown the reviews. I soon learned that good writing skills were extremely important. If you said anything at all ambiguous, the people reviewing things would attack the idea, even if most people had the ability to "fill in the blanks". If I were to say "The dog sat down." it'd lead to the criticism of "Sat down where?" If I were to say "The dog sat down on the carpet." it'd lead to the question "What kind of carpet?" To use a slight analogy.

I wrote a response to the reviewers' concerns, because the editor requested I do it, and the reviewers responded back with, "We tend to criticize and scrutinize anyone without an impeccable resume in the field. Otherwise, we'll just nod our heads in agreement."

That being said, I'm not sure if the process I faced could be considered "peer review" or not. It was just something I submitted to a press.

 

[John53]

Exactly as it says... what's up? What's on your mind?

Thinking about building a new house? A sandwich?

Worried about politics? Your aunt's health?

Looking at your sock and wondering what in the world you stepped in this time?

What else?

I'm wondering if belly button fluff is flammable.

 

[Echogem222]

To provide another perspective, I'm a little cautious of the idea of just telling you that you can do it, and sending you on your way.

ie, I feel that there is a high level of professionalism to some journals, and it's important to keep a balanced view while not getting one's hopes up too much during the process.

To relay a story, I once submitted something to a place. The editor told me they loved it and said it would likely be published. Then, she stated that there was a sort of review process. I was shown the reviews. I soon learned that good writing skills were extremely important. If you said anything at all ambiguous, the people reviewing things would attack the idea, even if most people had the ability to "fill in the blanks". If I were to say "The dog sat down." it'd lead to the criticism of "Sat down where?" If I were to say "The dog sat down on the carpet." it'd lead to the question "What kind of carpet?" To use a slight analogy.

I wrote a response to the reviewers' concerns, because the editor requested I do it, and the reviewers responded back with, "We tend to criticize and scrutinize anyone without an impeccable resume in the field. Otherwise, we'll just nod our heads in agreement."

That being said, I'm not sure if the process I faced could be considered "peer review" or not. It was just something I submitted to a press.

Thank you, that's very useful to know.

 

[Quagmire]

I'm wondering if belly button fluff is flammable.

This is just the kind of seemingly innocent thought that can lead to catastrophic consequences.

 

[JustGeorge]

I'm wondering if belly button fluff is flammable.

I bought a new lighter today.