Australasian 

  Philosophical Review


       Access via Taylor& Francis        AAP Member access     aap.org.au

Call for Proposals for Open Peer Commentaries

Theme: Philosophy of Biology 

Lead Author: Joshua R. Christie, Carl Brusse, Pierrick Bourrat, Peter Takacs and Paul E. Griffiths

"Are biological traits explained by their 'selected effect' function?"

Curator: John Matthewson 

Panel: John Matthewson and Christopher Lean

Invited commentaries from:

Justin Garson, Justine Kingsbury, Ruth Garrett Millikan, Samir Okasha, Nicholas Shea 

======================================================

The APR is seeking proposals for open peer commentaries on Joshua R. Christie, Carl Brusse, Pierrick Bourrat, Peter Takacs and Paul E. Griffiths "Are biological traits explained by their 'selected effect' function?"


Proposal abstracts should be brief (200-500 words), stating clearly the aspects of the lead article that will be discussed, together with an indication of the approach that will be taken. More details are available on the APR website, aap.org.au/APR


Abstract submissions are due on 05 December 2022.

Invitations to write commentaries of 2000-2500 words will be issued on 15 December 2022.

Full-length commentaries will be due on 13 February 2022.

To view the lead article & commentaries you must register as an APR Commentator.  Register here via this form

Access Article and Invited Commentaries Here (password required). 


Guide for commentary proposals

Proposal abstracts should be brief (200-500 words), stating clearly the aspects of
 the lead article that will be discussed, together with an indication of
 the line that will be taken. Selection of commentators depends upon weighing a range of factors, including balance of approaches and points of view, and other considerations about academic diversity.

Things to bear in mind:

1. Do NOT write a commentary instead of a proposal.

2. Be succinct: somewhere between 200 and 500 words. (You may write a longer proposal, but you do so at your own peril!)

3. Clearly state which aspects of the target article you intend to discuss, and indicate the line that you intend to take. We will only publish commentaries that respond to the lead article.

4. We are happy to receive proposals for co-authored commentaries. However, we will NOT publish more than one commentary that has your name on it in any given issue.

5. There will be blind review of proposals. Make sure that you do not include identifying material in your proposal.

6. There are no barriers to repeat commentary: those who have recently published commentaries are welcome to submit proposals for commentaries in upcoming issues.

7. Links to draft invited commentaries are provided above. You should avoid commenting directly on these, as they are subject to the opportunity for revision. However, preference will be given to submitted commentaries that do not substantially overlap with the content of invited commentary drafts. 


The materials provided to you as a commentator are not to be copied or reproduced; nor are they to be transmitted to any third party in any format. They are available to you for the sole purpose of preparing a proposal for commentary.

Powered by Wild Apricot Membership Software