‘Letters to the Editors’ Now Accepted

Some time ago, the BJPS editors took the decision to make discussion notes pass a very high bar to be considered for publication. Our page budget is limited and we wanted to save what resources we have for the most original, substantial contributions to the philosophy of science literature.

This left a gap, however, for responses making a short, sharp point worth having on record but not requiring a full-length paper. This also meant that if non-philosophers, especially scientists—with whom philosophers of science ought to be in dialogue—wished to engage with and respond to our articles, they would need to commit to writing full-fledged philosophy papers. (And, as some wits might have it, it’s bad enough philosophers having to do this without forcing anyone else down that dark road.)

To accommodate this need, we are now accepting letters to the editors, and you can find our first exchange here, with a letter from biologist Andy Gardner on Samir Okasha’s recent article, ‘Cancer and the Levels of Selection’, and a response from Okasha.

Letters must be in direct response to a BJPS article, and they must meet the highest standards of collegiality. They may concern factual errors, overlooked literature, objections, counterexamples, or any other matter of philosophical interest. Letters will not be peer reviewed. Publication will be at the discretion of the editors. Authors of target articles will be given the opportunity to respond, after which no further exchanges will be published. Full details of our requirements can be found here.