RSS 2.0 Feed

» Welcome Guest Log In :: Register

Pages: (117) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   
  Topic: Telic Thoughts Thread< Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Posts: 517
Joined: July 2007

(Permalink) Posted: Sep. 23 2007,12:48   

Quote (Thought Provoker @ Sep. 23 2007,12:39)
You asked...

Tell me, TP, what is the factual basis for your confident assertion that this paper was peer-reviewed?

I may be wrong about this.  But this was included in the acknowledgement...
Citations to "This Volume"refer to Toward a Science of Consciousness, (1996) S Hameroff, A Kaszniak, A Scott (eds), MIT Press, Cambridge.

Also published in Mathematics and Computer Simulation 40:453-480, 1996

So what? Neither of those suggest that the paper was peer-reviewed.
And the paper has been very much reviewed, and criticized, by the likes of Tegmark, Grush and Churchland.

Oh, come on! That's not what "peer-reviewed" means, and you know it. "Peer-reviewed" means that it is reviewed by peers BEFORE publication, not after.
But like I said, I may be wrong.

You probably are. My question is, why would you make such a claim without evidence?
Maybe MIT Press and Mathematics and Computer Simulation are less particular than I gave them credit for.

That's just pathetic, TP. The point is that contributions to the secondary literature are rarely peer-reviewed, while those to the primary literature almost always are. I know that none of the reviews I have published were peer-reviewed.

  3497 replies since Sep. 22 2007,13:50 < Next Oldest | Next Newest >  

Pages: (117) < [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... >   

Track this topic Email this topic Print this topic

[ Read the Board Rules ] | [Useful Links] | [Evolving Designs]