Our books






Become a Fan

« Host a Central APA watch party | Main | How can we help you? (February 2025) »

02/03/2025

Comments

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

Michel

I think that any substantive justificatory work belongs in the body, not the introduction. If your premise is controversial, then it needs some defense, and that means a section of its own. Unless it's basically a reply paper, in which case I think there's more leeway to build up from someone else's work.

But there's a limit to how much you can justify your controversial premise without writing an entire paper on the subject. And in my experience, referees are not always very reasonable on that front.

Don’t try

Write papers for those vaguely sympathetic to your assumptions. You’ll never convince those who aren’t, and editing your paper with them in mind will only alienate the reviewers who are predisposed towards accepting.

Charles Pigden

How about saying something like this: My argument depends upon premise X which I admit is controversial. However for reasons of space I will have to defer its defence to another day. For now, I ask those who disagree with X to read my paper as an exercise in if-thenist philosophy. What I am claiming is a) that if X, then my conclusion follows and b) that thesis X, even if false, is non-crazy – something that I hope that my opponents will concede.

That should conciliate all but the most rabid foes to thesis X. Furthermore, it will force any referees who subscribe to not-X to ask themselves whether not-X is so very obvious that a paper that assumes X is obviously unacceptable, which if X is non-crazy, they probably will.

Charles Pigden

Correction Furthermore, it will force any referees who subscribe to not-X to ask themselves whether not-X is so very obvious that a paper that assumes X is completely unacceptable, which if X is non-crazy, they will probably have to concede that it is not..

optimistic

@Charles Pidgen...........I think you have a very optimistic opinion of the typical referee!

Daniel Weltman

There is no single perfect solution. Every option will leave some reviewers satisfied and other reviewers unsatisfied. Write the paper you think is best (e.g. preemptively address those objections you wish to preemptively address) and then keep sending the paper out until you get lucky enough to be reviewed by people who share your sentiments.

Side pubs

More than once I found myself taking a step back and writing a whole paper to explore and motivate a premise so I can come back and refer to it in a footnote in my original paper

academic migrant

Doesn't work for everyone, but you might pitch the paper as building upon a world view that many accept, like sort of millions if not billions. You may further add something like "it's impossible to defend a whole world view in a single paper, but spelling out the implications would help us come back to better understand and evaluate the plausibility of the larger package" or "drawing upon this particular world view may shed insight or show a different perspective on an issue."

If you can, it would even be better to argue that there are some implications that even those who don't accept the world view may take seriously.

Of course this would be in the conditional claim camp, and you should not write as if the conclusion is unconditional.

Circe

I endorse Charles Pigden's strategy. It seems to me to be the standard one: "You have to assume some premises to get the ball rolling--these are mine, and if you don't like them, then consider me to be exploring the consequences of accepting those premises." This has worked for me on several occasions.

Writer

Related option: indicate early on that there are serious objections you must deal with, and that you will respond to them later. Then respond and say, of course, I lack scope to respond fully in a single paper.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

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

Working...
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.

Working...

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.)

Job-market reporting thread

Current Job-Market Discussion Thread

Philosophers in Industry Directory

Categories

Subscribe to the Cocoon