« The Great Endarkenment, Part I | Main | A fairy tale on Causation (and Hume) »



Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Filippo Contesi

Thanks for these very important and plausible considerations. I am very sympathetic especially to arguments 2 through 4. I would suggest perhaps a corrective, ie, that the very short, Analysis-style paper is also very important. Indeed, wouldn’t the history of philosophy bear this out as well? Besides current norms, haven’t the great works typically been either shorter than current normal-length journal articles or longer?

Filippo Contesi

*Leaving aside

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Your Information

(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

Here's a link to my past blogging (and discussions involving me) at: New APPS.


Blog powered by Typepad