It's been a bit quiet around here cuz things have been quite hectic around here, that is, here at Lemmings and here down under. Ya know, conferences, visitors, the Wig, dinners, and deadlines. Will be back with more frequent postings and updates after things quiet down at the end of August. In the meantime some announcements:
Just returned from the AAP -- the Australian version of the APA -- highly recommendable. Much like Pacific APAs, just better. David Chalmers has uploaded some pics from the conference. The seafood was just fabulous (hate that word but it's true), the talks were very high quality (blind refereeing is highly overrated!), and our very own Jonathan Schaffer won the prize for the best AJP paper in the last couple of years. That's impressive, especially given that he just won the APA prize for the best journal article in the last couple of years. Good going, Jonathan!
Later this week there is a fantastic-looking conference on the relational and representational character of perception, organized by Susanna Schellenberg. So, if you're in the neighborhood, you probably would do well to check it out.
Episteme, Issue 4.3 - a themed issue on Testimony will be freely available for download for 14 days (July 7 - July 21). I am a big fan of open access!
The latest issue of The Reasoner is now freely available for download in pdf format. I am a big fan of open access!
There is an upcoming graduate philosophy conference in the Nothern spring 09 at the University at Buffalo on the work of Lynne Rudder Baker, followed by a grown-ups conference, also on the work of LRB. Attendees include: Lynne Rudder Baker (MIT), Amie Thomasson (U of Miami), Derek Pereboom (U Conn), Crawford Elder (Cornell), and Brian Garrett (McMaster). Check it out.
I think this X-PHI survey is still running. If it is, go take it. It's good fun and actually makes you re-evaluate your own beliefs, desires and intentions -- probably not what they intended but a nice side effect. And, according to Jonathan, I am now officially a supporter of X-PHI (having run a couple of highly irregular linguistics surveys) -- so go take that survey, would you!
Monday, July 14, 2008
The AAP, Seafood, Open Access, and More
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
I'd be interested in knowing how the AAP does go about deciding which papers get presented, and why this selection process results in overall higher quality papers than the APA. Do other values (for example, opportunities for grad students and lesser known scholars to present) get sacrificed by foregoing blind review?
Thanks for your question, Leo! The answer is no. In fact, compared to a standard APA meeting more graduate students and lesser known scholars present papers at the AAP. There are simply more parallel sessions, and if you're a little careful in your selection of talks you go to, the talk quality definitely matches the talk quality at an average APA meeting.
I didn't mean to imply that the talk quality is higher at the AAP, just that it isn't remarkably lower in spite of the fact that there is no blind refereeing.
As you might know from earlier posts here at Lemmings, I am a big fan of blind refereeing when it matters. And it certainly matters if minorities, graduate students and lesser known scholars would otherwise be discriminated against.
Post a Comment