Philosophy and Theology
Philosophy & Theology is a peer-reviewed publicatrion (double blind). Submission via e-mail attachment (up to 5 MB) is preferred. Please include a brief curriculum vitae in your message or attach it as a separate file. WordPerfect and Word file formats are preferred word processors; if another application than Word or WordPerfect is used, include a second version saved in RTF (= rich text format). Please also send a PDF of your article that we will use as a "soft proof" in lieu of hardcopy. Be ready to send a clean hardcopy (= no marks or handwriting) for reference, if requested; if for any reason your file is unreadable. If you cannot supply your article digitally, send a clean typescript in standard typewriter font (e.g., Courier) or printer font (e.g., Times), with nothing written on any page, and we will digitize it. Manuscripts may be sent as e-mail attachments to [email protected]
ABOUT REFERENCES AND NOTES
- For pure references (=no content): Do not create notes. For reference style we follow The Chicago Manual of Style (16th edition), which is the author-date method of citation. In practice this means that instead of reference endnotes or footnotes, an alphabetical list of Works Cited (or Bibliography) is placed at the end of the article and referred to in the text in parentheses thus: (Smith 1991, 123-24). In all other matters we impose no style of our own where The Chicago Manual of Style leaves a style decision to the author.
- For footnotes (with content): Because the digital version of Philosophy & Theology now appears as an Acrobat PDF file, which permits footnotes, we no longer require complete omission of notes. Good scholarly style still prefers footnotes over endnotes in order to obviate the need to turn to the end of an article to find endnotes. Nevertheless, good style also favors spare content notes, and in order to keep footnotes to a minimum authors should examine their content notes, decide what can be incorporated into the text (perhaps in parentheses) and try to omit the rest, keeping only the necessary as footnotes.
Please comply with accepted guidelines for nonsexist, gender neutral language. Article manuscripts should be sent in electronic format, to:
The Editor, Philosophy & Theology
P.O. Box 1881
Milwaukee, WI 53201-1881
E-mail: [email protected]
Publication Ethics Statement
The editorial team of Philosophy and Theology is committed to ensuring the integrity of the publication process. Conformance to standards of ethical behavior is therefore expected of all parties involved: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to confirm a chain of reasoning or experimental result. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original works, and if the work and/or words of others have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors should not submit articles describing essentially the same research to more than one journal. The corresponding author should ensure that there is a full consensus of all co-authors in approving the final version of the paper and its submission for publication.
Editors should evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor must not use unpublished information in the editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper.
Reviewers must treat received manuscripts as confidential documents. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors or institutions connected to the paper.
The Publisher will respond to alleged or proven cases of research misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism in close collaboration with the editors. The publisher will ensure that appropriate measures are taken to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question if necessary. This may include the publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent publication of papers where research misconduct has occurred, and under no circumstances encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.