Max More wrote:
> Yes, the journals I'm considering specialize in philosophy of biology and
> philosophy of science. Some of these journals include papers by people like
> Ernst Mayr, one of the leading evolutionary biologists, along with
> philosophers whose expertise lies in analyzing these concepts as used by
> scientists. Mayr's own papers on the meaning of "species" are just as much
> philosophy as they are biology
Great. It sounds like you have positioned your paper most efficiently. I wasn't sure because you mentioned "Philosophy Journals" without stating that they were specific to the philosophy of biology. To me a "Philosophy Journal" is not necessarily biology-specific.
> Philosophers who are writing papers in philosophy of science know that they
> need to thoroughly understand the scientists vocabulary. I'm surprised that
> you would think I would consider submitting a paper on species without
> carefully researching the area.
I did not question your understanding of the vocabulary, nor did I imply
that you had not carefully researched your topic area. I was pointing
the consequences of submitting your paper to different types of journals,
since you had not specifically stated which types of "Philosophy Journals" you were considering.
> I found the rest of your comments puzzling. Perhaps you are unfamiliar with
> philosophy of science. I'm not proposing new nomenclature that scientists
> should adopt through a standards committee.
I did misunderstand this point. I did indeed think that your paper was proposing a new nomenclature for the classification of new transhuman species.
-- Harvey Newstrom <http://newstaffinc.com> Author, Consultant, Engineer, Hacker, Researcher, Scientist.