Is Pre-Publication Peer Review a Good Idea?

2min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

In some sense it kind of we want to make order science work operate more like working philosophy. The paper is called is pre-publication peer review a good idea question mark and that's partly to reflect the fact that right now we think the evidence isn't always as strong as we'd like it to be before making a clear assessment. And you're not even necessarily questioning peer review but the idea of not letting anyone read the paper until it has been published. In fact open peer review though is a word for a different kind of thing but related to whatever person.

Everybody talks about the truth, but nobody does anything about it. And to be honest, how we talk about truth — what it is, and how to get there — can be a little sloppy at times. Philosophy to the rescue! I had a very ambitious conversation with Liam Kofi Bright, starting with what we mean by “truth” (correspondence, coherence, pragmatist, and deflationary approaches), and then getting into the nitty-gritty of how we actually discover it. There’s a lot to think about once we take a hard look at how science gets done, how discoveries are communicated, and what different kinds of participants can bring to the table.

Support Mindscape on Patreon.

Liam Kofi Bright received his Ph.D. in Logic, Computation and Methodology from Carnegie Mellon University. He is currently on the faculty of the London School of Economics in the Department of Philosophy, Logic, and the Scientific Method. He has worked on questions concerning peer review and fraud in scientific communities, intersectionality, logical empiricism, and Africana philosophy. He is well-known on Twitter as the Last Positivist.

See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.