The Philosophers' Cocoon

A safe and supportive forum for philosophers.

Owned & Moderated by Marcus Arvan (University of Tampa)

Contact: marvan@ut.edu

Blog mission & moderation policy

IMPORTANT NOTE on how to ensure anonymity in commenting

Job-Market Reporting Thread (2025-26)

Job-Market Discussion Thread (2026-27)

Anonymous on How can we help you? (August 2026)August 20, 2026
When is it time to pull a paper and resubmit at a different journal. I’m a postdoctoral researcher. I’ve had…
Charles Pigden on How to list Continental Philosophy and History of Philosophy on a CV?August 20, 2026
That should be ‘The first is to convert the proxy into the real *thing* by putting..’ Damn you autocorrect!
Charles Pigden on How to list Continental Philosophy and History of Philosophy on a CV?August 19, 2026
AOS and AOC lists are a bit of catch-all since they cover both teaching and research interests. Typically (especially when…
Anonymous on How to list Continental Philosophy and History of Philosophy on a CV?August 19, 2026
My only caution here is that for people fresh out of grad school, as a committee member it looks implausible…
Anonymous on How to list Continental Philosophy and History of Philosophy on a CV?August 19, 2026
Echoing others above, I’d expect to see either Ancient, Medieval, Early Modern, or Modern as an AOC, or possibly some…

about

Compendium of job-market prep resources

May 20, 2026
Now that it’s summer break and we have a bit of a lull around here (I don’t currently have any “how can we help you?” queries to share for discussion!), I figured it could be helpful to post this site’s job-market resources for candidates who will be going on the market in the fall.

Hope some of you find the resources helpful!

The Cocoon’s Job Market Boot Camp:
The Notes From Both Sides of the Market series:
The Secret Lives of Search Committees series:
And Tips from Search Committee Members:
1
How to handle self-citation in manuscripts?

May 14, 2026

In our new “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:

How should one handle self-citation in manuscripts prepared for double-blind peer review?

Phrases like “as I have argued elsewhere…” might reveal who the author is. I saw people replacing their names with “Author (year)”, but this can be transparent in context such as a sentence like “for details, see Author (xxxx)”. People familiar with the literature (who are supposed to be reviewers) can easily know who this is.

Should one engage with one’s own prior work entirely in the third person throughout the draft? If so, do journals allow authors to change back to the first person perspective after the review process, during proofreading or copyediting?

Another reader added:

I would also like to know the answer to this, since, I now have a view that is distinct in the niche my work fits into, and I am somewhat senior enough that I have enough publications to self-cite. When I have not cited myself adequately, I have received reviewers reports telling me to cite my own work more, and in some cases, suggesting that maybe I don’t understand what my own view actually is …..

It is becoming quite an irritating feature.

Good questions. We have discussed this at the blog in the past, and my recollection is that the general consensus was to cite oneself in the 3rd person. But, as the OP notes, even that can give away one’s identity–so it seems to me that the best policy is to cite oneself in the 3rd person but also do so in an understated way that does not make it clear that you’re the author of the paper. Not sure if this is always feasible, but I don’t know any other better solution.

What do readers think?

16
Classic papers every analytic philosopher should read? (and have they changed?)

May 13, 2026

In our new “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:

What are some classic papers that every analytic philosopher should read, regardless of their specific area? I mean, for example, Frege’s “On Sense and Reference” and Russell’s “On Denoting” seem like papers one should have read even if one does not work in philosophy of language. If a metaphysics/epistemology professor had never read them, it might seem a little surprising. What other papers have a similar status?

I also have a related question. Some papers seem to have been canonical in the past, but are no longer regarded as required reading for everyone. For example, one of my professors told me that in his generation, everyone read Davidson, but for my generation this no longer seems necessary. Do people agree with this? And are there other texts that have this kind of status?

Thoughts from readers?

18
When does a paper (revised from the ground up) count as a “new paper”?

May 12, 2026

In our new “how can we help you?” thread, a reader asks:

At what point (if any) does a revised paper count as substantially new? I’ve been working on a paper on and off since early in my PhD program (I am now several years into postdoc). When I was a grad student, I sent it out to a few good journals and got rejections with helpful feedback that convinced me the paper needed more time in the oven. Since then, I have substantially rewritten the paper 2 or 3 times from the ground up. I don’t think anybody except me and maybe somebody who held the papers up side by side would be able to tell that one is a revision of the other. The current draft uses different terminology, starting assumptions, and argues in a different way for a different thesis. The only holdover from the original draft is a 2-page section, which has itself been reworked a number of times.

With that said, I’m wondering if, at some point, it might be appropriate to send the paper to the journals that rejected the earlier draft. I haven’t done so because my understanding is that doing so is against implicit or explicit disciplinary standards. I’ve recently read, however, of people resubmitting papers when they’ve judged them to be substantially new, with an explanatory note to the editor. My instinct is to err on the side of caution and just submit to new journals, but I would be interested to hear from authors or editors who have had relevant experience.

Good question–I’ve often wondered this myself!

What do readers think?

4

recent posts

about

Compendium of job-market prep resources

How to handle self-citation in manuscripts?

Classic papers every analytic philosopher should read? (and have they changed?)

When does a paper (revised from the ground up) count as a “new paper”?