My first glimpse at peer review was via a friend (math PhD student) who spent weeks trying to find a proof for an obscure mathematical assumption before rejecting the paper on that basis. Tbh this makes my eyes roll that much harder at the trashfire that is much of social science
-
-
In any case, I really hope this spurs a ton of conversations... What are the humanities for? How can ideas in philosophical fields be made to pay rent? How do we encourage cross-field reality-checking? How do we encourage greater rigor, even at the cost of politeness? etc. etc.
Show this threadThanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.
How would this work in practice? A paper would have to be registered as a Sokaling before first submission, along with an explanation of what the author thinks is wrong with it. A cryptographic time-locked database could ensure honesty about this.