一个可能的审查提交关于意识的性质的案例

M. Weiler, Raphael Fernandes Casseb, A. Moreira-Almeida
{"title":"一个可能的审查提交关于意识的性质的案例","authors":"M. Weiler, Raphael Fernandes Casseb, A. Moreira-Almeida","doi":"10.31156/jaex.24121","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":" To advance the scientific understanding of consciousness, one should be open to theoretical pluralism to freely develop and rigorously test a wide diversity of paradigm candidates and communicate the ideas and findings to the scientific community. Science development is jeopardized when journals tend to present a field’s state-of-the-art findings in a biased or misguided way or suppress investigations of a particular perspective. We describe the challenges and pitfalls we faced as guest editors during the editorial review process of a special issue of the journal Frontiers on “The Nature of Consciousness” and how we responded to it. We describe and discuss how the journal staff overruled our editorial role to enforce what was very likely academic censorship. We then offer a couple of recommendations to authors and editors that may face similar issues. We believe that following these recommendations will ultimately contribute to practical and theoretical advances in the understanding the nature of consciousness and the mind–brain relation.","PeriodicalId":242256,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition","volume":"6 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Possible Case of Censorship of Submissions on the Nature of Consciousness\",\"authors\":\"M. Weiler, Raphael Fernandes Casseb, A. Moreira-Almeida\",\"doi\":\"10.31156/jaex.24121\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\" To advance the scientific understanding of consciousness, one should be open to theoretical pluralism to freely develop and rigorously test a wide diversity of paradigm candidates and communicate the ideas and findings to the scientific community. Science development is jeopardized when journals tend to present a field’s state-of-the-art findings in a biased or misguided way or suppress investigations of a particular perspective. We describe the challenges and pitfalls we faced as guest editors during the editorial review process of a special issue of the journal Frontiers on “The Nature of Consciousness” and how we responded to it. We describe and discuss how the journal staff overruled our editorial role to enforce what was very likely academic censorship. We then offer a couple of recommendations to authors and editors that may face similar issues. We believe that following these recommendations will ultimately contribute to practical and theoretical advances in the understanding the nature of consciousness and the mind–brain relation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":242256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition\",\"volume\":\"6 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-18\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.24121\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anomalous Experience and Cognition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31156/jaex.24121","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

为了推进对意识的科学理解,人们应该对理论多元化持开放态度,自由地发展和严格地测试各种各样的范式候选人,并与科学界交流思想和发现。当期刊倾向于以一种有偏见或被误导的方式呈现一个领域的最新发现,或压制对某一特定观点的研究时,科学发展就会受到损害。我们描述了我们作为客座编辑在《前沿》杂志特刊“意识的本质”的编辑审查过程中所面临的挑战和陷阱,以及我们如何应对它。我们描述并讨论了期刊工作人员如何推翻我们的编辑角色,以执行很可能是学术审查的事情。然后,我们向可能面临类似问题的作者和编辑提供一些建议。我们相信,遵循这些建议最终将有助于在理解意识的本质和心脑关系方面取得实践和理论的进步。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Possible Case of Censorship of Submissions on the Nature of Consciousness
 To advance the scientific understanding of consciousness, one should be open to theoretical pluralism to freely develop and rigorously test a wide diversity of paradigm candidates and communicate the ideas and findings to the scientific community. Science development is jeopardized when journals tend to present a field’s state-of-the-art findings in a biased or misguided way or suppress investigations of a particular perspective. We describe the challenges and pitfalls we faced as guest editors during the editorial review process of a special issue of the journal Frontiers on “The Nature of Consciousness” and how we responded to it. We describe and discuss how the journal staff overruled our editorial role to enforce what was very likely academic censorship. We then offer a couple of recommendations to authors and editors that may face similar issues. We believe that following these recommendations will ultimately contribute to practical and theoretical advances in the understanding the nature of consciousness and the mind–brain relation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信