Submissions

Login or Register to make a submission.

Submission Preparation Checklist

As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
  • The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration (or an explanation has been provided in Comments to the Editor).
  • The submission file is in OpenOffice, Microsoft Word, or RTF document file format.
  • Where available, URLs for the references have been provided.
  • The text is single-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
  • The text adheres to the stylistic and bibliographic requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines.

Author Guidelines

The present guidelines for authors are divided into two main sections:

1. Guidelines for submission.

2. Guidelines for camera-ready papers.

Section 1. refers to submissions ready for double-blind review. For this reason, any personal detail of the author or authors should be avoided. Guidelines in section 2., on the contrary, should be used to prepare articles after they have been accepted for publication and when no further blind review process is needed.

Both papers for submission and camera-ready papers should be sent in .doc format.

In order to facilitate authors, we have also predisposed two templates – one for submission and one for camera-ready articles – exemplifying the editorial norms presented here.

For any doubt or requirements, please email: info@phenomenologyandmind.eu

 

1. Guidelines for Submission

Submissions should be prepared for double blind peer-review, thus avoiding any personal reference to the author or authors. The length of paper and abstract, as well as the number of keywords, are specified in the Call for Papers for which authors intend to submit their manuscripts.

You may (even though you are not requested to) follow the Guidelines for camera-ready papers also in the phase of submission, with the exception for references to your name and your previous works which should be anonymized as specified below.

1.1 Authors’ names

You must avoid mentioning yourself as author(s) of the submitted paper.

1.2 Quoting Authors’ Previous Works

Since submission has to be anonymized, please avoid referring to previous works making it clear that they are from the same author or authors. Avoid, for instance: “as I have discussed previously (Last name, year)” and similar sentences.

In order to make sure anonymity is guaranteed, please indicate any reference to previous works inserting “(XXX)”, without any further information.

1.3 References

If previous works from the authors of the papers have to be mentioned, please insert them, in this phase, only indicating “XXX” with no further information (nor title or year of publication).

 

2. Guidelines for Camera-Ready Papers

2.1 Main text

Line-spacing: 1.5
Superior margin: 2,5 cm
Inferior margin: 2,5 cm
Left margin: 2,5 cm
Right margin: 2,5 cm
Language: English (United States)
Font: Times New Roman, 12, justified
Please do not insert any further spacing or indent.

2.2 Title and paragraphs’ titles

Paper’s main title font: Times New Roman, 18, justified, bold.
Paragraphs’ titles: Font: Times New Roman, 12, justified, bold.
Please enumerate the paragraphs.
Never end a title with a full stop.

2.3 Abstract and keywords

After the main title, please insert the abstract and the keywords.
Abstract font: Times New Roman, 12, justified
Line-spacing: 1.0
Title of abstract font: Times New Roman, 12, justified, bold
Line-spacing: 1.5
Please insert a space after the title and do not insert any further spacing or indent.
Keywords font: Times New Roman, 12, justified (the word “Keywords” should be bold and followed by a colon)
Line-spacing: 1.0

2.4 Starting Quotation

In case you wanted to start your article with a quotation:

Font: Times New Roman, 11, on the right, italics (without quotations marks).
Please insert the reference to author and publication (not in italics), as explained in 2.8 below.

2.5 Footnotes

Footnotes can be inserted and have to be enumerated. They have to be always superscript. Footnotes numbers must follow almost any punctuation marks. Exceptions: footnote numbers should not follow dashes (–), and if they appear in a sentence in parentheses, the footnote number should be inserted within the parentheses.

Line-spacing: 1.15
Font: Times New Roman, 10, justified
Please do not insert any further spacing or indent.

2.6 Acknowledgments

Acknowledgments can be inserted as the first footnote to the title and enumerated (footnote n° 1).

2.7 Bulleted Lists

Bulleted lists (either symbolic, numerical, or alphabetical) can be inserted in the main text.
Line-spacing: 1.5
Indent: 0,6 cm
Protruding: 0,6 cm
Font: Times New Roman, 12, justified
Please do not insert any further spacing or indent.
If you wish to insert a bulleted list nested in another one, please use Indent: 1 cm (protruding: 1 cm) for the nested bulleted list.

2.8 In-Text References

Always capitalize proper nouns, including author names and initials: D. Jones.

If you refer to the title of a source within your paper, capitalize all words that are four letters long or greater within the title of a source: Permanence and Change. Exceptions apply to short words that are verbs, nouns, pronouns, adjectives, and adverbs: Writing New Media, There Is Nothing Left to Lose.

When capitalizing titles, capitalize both words in a hyphenated compound word: Natural-Born Cyborgs.

Capitalize the first word after a dash or colon: "Defining Film Rhetoric: The Case of Hitchcock's Vertigo".

Italicize the titles of longer works such as books, edited collections, movies, television series, documentaries, or albums: The Closing of the American Mind; The Wizard of Oz; Friends.

Put quotation marks around the titles of shorter works such as journal articles, articles from edited collections, television series episodes, and song titles: "Multimedia Narration: Constructing Possible Worlds"; "The One Where Chandler Can't Cry."

When your parenthetical citation includes two or more works, order them the same way they appear in the reference list (viz., alphabetically), separated by a semi-colon.

(Berndt, 2002; Harlow, 1983)

When your parenthetical citation includes two or more works by the same author, separate them by a semi-colon without repeating author’s last name.

(De Monticelli 2000; 2003)

In case you mention two authors with the same last name, to prevent confusion, use first initials with the last names.

(E. Johnson, 2001; L. Johnson, 1998)

If you have two sources by the same author in the same year, use lower-case letters (a, b, c) with the year to order the entries in the reference list. Use the lower-case letters with the year in the in-text citation.

Research by Berndt (1981a) illustrated that...

When indirectly referring to others’ published works, please do not indicate them in the footnotes, but use the following format to mention them: (Last name, year of publication).

In case authors are two: (Last name & last name, year of publication).

If authors are more than two: (Last name et al., year of publication).

“et al.” should always be in italic.

For direct mentions – that is when the author name is mentioned in the main text just before the brackets – please indicate only: (year of publication). In case you also quote passages from this work, please see 2.9.

2.9 Quotations

For short indirect quotations (up to 40 words), authors should use double quotation marks (“…”). When quoting inside a quote, use single quotation marks (‘). After the quotation, please indicate the corresponding reference as follows.

(Last name, year of publication, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

In case authors are two: (Last name & last name, year of publication, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

If authors are more than two: (Last name et al., year of publication, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

“et al.” should always be in italic.

Punctuation should always follow the reference.

For short direct quotations (up to 40 words) please indicate only the page reference in brackets if author and year are already mentioned in the same sentence. If only author is already mentioned in the same sentence, please indicate: (year, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

Example:

According to Jones (1998), "Students often had difficulty using APA style, especially when it was their first time" (p. 199).

If the author is not named in a signal phrase, place the author's last name, the year of publication, and the page number in brackets after the quotation.

Example:

She stated, "Students often had difficulty using APA style" (Jones, 1998, p. 199), but she did not offer an explanation as to why.

For long quotations (more than 40 words):

Insert a line-space between the main text before and after the quotation.
Line-spacing: 1.5
Indent: 0,6 cm
Spacing before and after: 6 pt
Font: Times New Roman, 11, justified (without quotations marks).
Please do not insert any further spacing or indent.

After the indirect quotation, please indicate the corresponding reference. Punctuation should always follow the reference.

The reference should be as follows: (Last name, year of publication, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

In case authors are two: (Last name & last name, year of publication, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

If authors are more than two: (Last name et al., year of publication, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

“et al.” should always be in italic.

For long direct quotations (more than 40 words) please indicate only the page reference in brackets if author and year are already mentioned in the same sentence. If only author is already mentioned in the same sentence, please indicate: (year, page or pages [preceded by “p.” when a single page is mentioned or “pp.” when more pages are mentioned with a hyphen among pages]).

In case authors want to emphasize something within a quotation, please use italics and add in the brackets with references

“emphasis added”: (Last name, year of publication, page, emphasis added).

2.10 Quoting Authors’ Previous Works

References to other works by the authors should be mentioned by following regular guidelines.

Moreover, the complete name of the author or authors should be included before the main title.

Line-spacing: 1.15
Font: Times New Roman, 12, justified
A non-numerical but symbolic footnote should be included for each author indicating name, last name, affiliation, and email address divided by commas.

2.11 References

The list of references should include only works mentioned in the paper.

Line-spacing: 1.15
Font: Times New Roman, 10, justified
Indent first line: 0,5 cm (protruding)
Please do not insert any further spacing or indent.
The standard for style is the American Psychological Association (APA) Manual of Style (6th edition).
When referring to a work by several authors, please indicate all their names.

For references, follow the following examples:

Book:

Strunk, W., Jr., & White, E. B. (1979). The guide to everything and then some more stuff. New York, NY: Macmillan;

Gregory, G., & Parry, T. (2006). Designing brain-compatible learning (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin;

Chapter of a Book:

Bergquist, J. M. (1992). German Americans. In J. D. Buenker & L. A. Ratner (Eds.), Multiculturalism in the United States: A comparative guide to acculturation and ethnicity (pp. 53-76). New York, NY: Greenwood;

Journal Article with DOI:

Paivio, A. (1975). Perceptual comparisons through the mind's eye. Memory & Cognition, 3, 635-647. doi:10.1037/0278-6133.24.2.225;

Journal Article without DOI (when DOI is not available):

Becker, L. J., & Seligman, C. (1981). Welcome to the energy crisis. Journal of Social Issues, 37(2), 1-7;

Hamfi, A. G. (1981). The funny nature of dogs. E-journal of Applied Psychology, 2(2), 38-48. Retrieved from http://ojs.lib.swin.edu.au/index.php/fdo;

Online Newspaper Articles:

Becker, E. (2001, August 27). Prairie farmers reap conservation's rewards. The New York Times. Retrieved from http://www.nytimes.com;

Encyclopedia Articles:

Brislin, R. W. (1984). Cross-cultural psychology. In R. J. Corsini (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology (Vol. 1, pp. 319-327). New York, NY: Wiley;

Developmental genetics. (2005). In Cambridge encyclopedia of child development. Retrieved from http://0- www.credoreference.com.library.muhlenberg.edu:80/entry/cupchilddev/development al_genetics;

Technical and Research Reports (often with corporate authors):

Hershey Foods Corporation. (2001, March 15). 2001 Annual Report. Retrieved from http://www.hersheysannualreport.com/2000/index.htm;

Book Reviews:

Dent-Read, C., & Zukow-Goldring, P. (2001). Is modeling knowing? [Review of the book Models of cognitive development, by K. Richardson]. American Journal of Psychology, 114, 126-133;

Data Sets:

Simmons Market Research Bureau. (2000). Simmons national consumer survey [Data file]. New York, NY: Author;

Blog post:

Lincoln, D. S. (2009, January 23). The likeness and sameness of the ones in the middle. [Web log post]. Retrieved from http://www.blogspace.com/lincolnworld/2009/1/23.php;

Website with no author or date of publication:

Census data revisited. (n.d.). Retrieved March 9, 2009, from Harvard, Psychology of Population website, http://harvard.edu/data/index.php;

Reprint from Another Source:

  • Citation in the text:

(Newton, 1998/1999)

  • Reference List Citation:

Newton, W. (1999). Return to Mars. In C. Mari (Ed.), Space Exploration (pp. 32- 41). New York, NY: H.W. Wilson. (Reprinted from National Geographic, pp. 2-26, August 1998);

In this example of a reprinted book review, the author of the book is named first, followed by the editor of the reprinting source, then the reviewer. In your parenthetical citation, it is necessary to name the author of the book, while the reviewer is named to distinguish from other reviews of this book.

When books are edited by one person, please insert “(ed.)”, when editors are more than one, please use “(eds.)”.

If a work has not been published yet, “forthcoming” should be inserted instead of the year of publication in the brackets.

References should be divided by a semicolon; a full stop has to be used only for the last reference. They should be in alphabetical order (by last name).

If an author or authors have more than one publication in the reference list, they should be listed by chronological order with the most recent as the first one.

2.12 Page Numbers

Please insert page numbers at the bottom of the page.
Font: Times New Roman, 9, centered

2.13 Further information

Foreign words should always be written in italics.
Please avoid abbreviation.
Images and graphs can be used. Authors are responsible for the usage and should ask for permission in case they want to include a picture or a graph that has already been published in others’ works.

Free Submission

Free Submission Articles

Phenomenology, Axiology, and Metaethics

Special Issue of Phenomenology and Mind

 

 

Deadline for paper submissions: February 15th, 2022

The issue will be published in December 2022

 

 

 

Call for Papers

 

Today the philosophical debate on values and their possible experience is still one of the most crucial to engage with. This is not just because of the ethical, social or political upshots it can possibly have, but also because of the theoretical issues it posits, which still need to be deeply investigated. Such an investigation is perhaps particularly required on the side of phenomenology. Indeed, even though classic phenomenologists such as Husserl, Scheler, Stein, Ingarden, von Hildebrand and others have dedicated important works to these themes, their heritage still needs to be explored and further developed, in particular to make a phenomenological discourse on axiology that can be fruitfully put in dialogue with other philosophical perspectives on the status of values, such as those developed and still discussed in the metaethical debate.

Against this background, the journal Phenomenology and Mind invites submissions for a special issue dedicated to “Phenomenology and Metaethics”. The volume will aim at providing phenomenological insights both on the noematic side of the issue, investigating the nature of axiological properties, and on the noetic side, focusing on the experience of such properties. In this context, a – non-exhaustive – list of possible questions to investigate is the following:

  • What is the nature of axiological properties?
  • What is the relation between axiological properties and natural ones?
  • Can the relation between axiological properties and natural ones be accounted for in terms of phenomenological Fundierung? And what about accounting for them in terms of supervenience?
  • How can we phenomenologically describe the relation between goods and values?
  • Is it possible to develop an actual material axiology? What would it be like?
  • How do we experience axiological properties?
  • Can we account for the experience of axiological properties in perceptual terms?
  • What is the role of intuition – if any – in the experience of axiological properties? How should intuition be conceived properly in this context?
  • Is the experience of axiological properties a form of feeling? How should we describe it?

 

 

Guest Editors

 

Andrea Cimino (KU Leuven)

Dermot Moran (Boston College)

Andrea Staiti (University of Parma)

 

 

Submission Guidelines

 

Submissions must be prepared for double blind review. Manuscripts – in .doc format – should not contain any identifying information and must not exceed 6000 words (references included).

 

Moreover, they must contain:

- An abstract of no more than 150 words

- 4/5 keywords

 

All manuscripts must be in English

 

For stylistic details, see: http://www.rosenbergesellier.it/ita/riviste/phenomenology-and-mind/norme-redazionali;

 

Submissions should be sent via the Phenomenology and Mind website

(http://www.fupress.net/index.php/pam) by February 15th, 2022.

 

The author should register here and then log in to submit her paper. Please, be sure to submit your paper to the session “Phenomenology, Axiology, and Metaethics”

 

 

For information, please contact: andreasebastiano.staiti@unipr.it

 

 

Important dates:

 

Deadline for submissions: February 15th, 2022

Notification of acceptance: April 15th, 2022

Publication of the issue: December 2022

The True, the Valid and the Normative

Call for papers

The inquiry into the concepts of true and false has generally privileged, in contemporary philosophy, apophantic truth, that is, the truth of dicta (sentences, propositions, statements, or utterances). However, the predicates ‘true’ and ‘false’ seem to also apply to other entities apart from dicta. Amedeo Giovanni Conte, among others, brought back attention to the not infrequent cases where we speak of the truth and falsity of res, of things. In what sense, for instance, can we speak of true gold, a true diamond, a true warrior, or the true Kant? And in what sense can we speak of false gold, a false diamond, a false name, a false will, or a false banknote? Further, can we argue that a true warrior ought to be brave? The answer to such questions seems to imply the distinction introduced by Conte (2016) between two species of truth: de dicto, or semantic truth, which specifically pertains to a dictum qua dictum, and de re, or ontological truth, which generally pertains to a res qua res, to a thing qua thing. What are the relations between the two species of truth? What do they have in common, and in what do they differ?

The introduction of the distinction between de re and de dicto truth into the debate on normativity and related issues discloses new perspectives that participants in this School are invited to explore. What is at stake are, on the one hand, the nature and scope of de dicto truth and de re truth respectively, along with their relations to one another; on the other hand, the possible impact of these two notions on the investigations on normativity and its sources, as well as on the notions of validity and effectiveness of norms.

When considering the issue of the scope of de dicto truth, one may ask whether de dicto truth is to be predicated exclusively of apophantic sentences or constative utterances (Austin 1950; 1962), or whether it can be predicated also of anapophantic sentences, such as performative sentences—which appear to be self-verifying. Given that a similar form of self-verification seems to be implied also in prescriptive sentences, what kind of facts, or states-of-affairs are brought about by such sentences? Is it possible to speak of “deontic states-of-affairs” (Conte 1970; 2006; see also Sbisà 2014 on deontic states and deontic objects)? What would be the implications for the investigation of the relations between truth and validity of norms? Notably, can the validity of norms—at least when norms are understood as prescriptive sentences—be conceived as a form of de dicto truth, that is, as the correspondence to a deontic reality? Is such a deontic reality to be understood exclusively as a product of prescriptive sentences, or is it also possible to conceive a pre-existent deontic reality? What would be the implications as to the possibility of applying logic to norms?

When considering the notion of de re truth, on the other hand, what can be its implications for the philosophy of the normative? Notably, is there a relation between de re truth and the normative and axiological dimensions of reality?

The fact that we call invalid banknotes “false” banknotes suggests, for instance, that at least in the domain of institutional phenomena the de re truth or falsity of an entity is directly linked to and conditioned by the very norms or constitutive rules that determine the validity conditions of that entity. Should we speak here of a “normative truth of things”? Can it be argued, conversely, that in other circumstances specific oughts or norms can be derived from the de re truth of an entity—like when we say that a true warrior ought to be brave, as suggested by Edmund Husserl (1900-1901)? Is this a further kind of normative truth of things? How does the concept of de re truth relate to the notion of “eidetic legality”? Can it be fruitful for the determination of the bonds and constraints that phenomena lay upon thought, language, action, and reality?

Warrior is also a good example of what scholars have recently called ‘dual character concepts’—concepts that encode both a descriptive dimension and an independent normative dimension for categorization (Knobe, Prasada, & Newman 2013; Leslie 2015; Reuter 2019). When is a person appropriately categorised as a true warrior? Can the notion of de re truth help us illuminate the normative dimension of dual character concepts?

A final aspect of the investigation of the relations between truth and normativity concerns the controversial notion of the effectiveness of norms. Some legal philosophers maintain that the existence of norms should be identified with their effectiveness within a social group, and that consequently an ineffective norm is not a de re true norm. Others suggest that satisfaction, or fulfilment, rather than validity, should be considered as the deontic análogon of de dicto truth in the logic of imperatives and norms. Both these perspectives, however, arouse the following question: are all norms capable of being fulfilled? For instance, a norm establishing that one’s legal capacity begins with birth does not seem to be fulfillable at all, since it does not prescribe any behaviour. Furthermore, does the fulfilment of a norm exhaust the possible ways in which a norm affects an agent’s behaviour? For instance, if we consider a poker cheater, aren’t the rules of poker, despite not being fulfilled, still operating and impacting on her/his behaviour when s/he hides an ace up his sleeve—as suggested by the notion of “nomotropic behaviour” introduced by Conte (2000; 2016)? How does the phenomenon of nomotropic behaviour relate to the notions of both de dicto and de re truth of norms?

 

Section 1. Truth of language vs. truth of things

  • The truth of linguistic entities vs the truth of non-linguistic entities: what do de dicto (semantic) and de re (ontological) truth have in common? How do they differ?
  • In what sense can an object (a res) be true? In what sense can it be false?
  • What is the difference between ‘a true professor’ and ‘the true professor’? Can we speak of de re truth both in relation to the correspondence to an eîdos and the correspondence to an ídion?
  • Are there true questions and true lies?
  • What are the relations between the de dicto and de re truth (or falsity) of linguistic entities? Can the de dicto truth (or falsity) of a linguistic entity condition, or be conditioned, by its de re truth (or falsity)?
  • Does the notion of de dicto truth boil down to apophantic truth, or anapophantic dicta can be de dicto true, too—as the self-verification of performatives suggests?

Section 2. Truth and validity

  • Can de dicto (semantic) truth be predicated of norms? Do prescriptive sentences self-verify?
  • Is there a deontic reality to which norms may truly correspond?
  • Is the validity of norms the logical deontic análogon of the de dicto truth of apophantic propositions?
  • Can the deontic validity of a norm be derived from the logical validity of an inference?
  • In what sense the de re truth of an institutional entity may depend upon the rules or norms on its validity?
  • Is an invalid norm still a de re true norm? What is the relation between de re truth, validity and existence of norms?

Section 3. Truth and the normative and axiological dimensions of reality

  • What are the normative implications of de re truth?
  • Can an ought be derived from the ontological truth of an entity?
  • Is a true x a good x? Is ‘true’ an evaluative predicate?
  • Can the notion of de re truth be fruitful for the investigation of dual character concepts?
  • In what sense a token is a true or a false token of a type? In what sense a type is the true type of a class of tokens?
  • What are the ontological conditions of the de re truth of an entity?
  • How does the concept of de re truth relate to the notion of “eidetic legality” and to the bonds and constraints that phenomena lay upon thought, language, action, and reality?

Section 4. Truth and validity in action: norm effectiveness and nomotropic behaviour

  • What are the relations between de re truth, validity and effectiveness of norms? Is an ineffective norm still a valid and de re true norm?
  • Is the satisfaction or fulfilment of a norm the deontic análogon of the de dicto truth of propositions?
  • Can a norm be verified by action?
  • Does the effectiveness of norms boil down to fulfilment?
  • Are there true norms that are incapable of being fulfilled?
  • In what sense the behaviour of a thief or a cheater is still a “nomotropic behaviour”?

Submissions must be prepared for double-blind review. Manuscripts – in .doc format – should not contain any identifying information and they cannot exceed 4000 words (references included). Manuscripts must be written in English. Moreover, they must contain:

-        an abstract of no more than 150 words;

-        the indication of the section to which the author(s) wants to contribute;

-        4/5 keywords.

 

For stylistic details, see:

http://www.rosenbergesellier.it/eng/journals/phenomenology-and-mind/editorial-norms

 

Submissions should be sent via the Phenomenology and Mind website by May 31st, 2021.

Authors should register here  and then log in to submit their paper. Please, make sure to submit your paper to the session “The True, the Valid and the Normative”.

 

For further information, please contact Paolo Di Lucia (paolo.dilucia@unimi.it) and/or Lorenzo Passerini Glazel (lorenzo.passerini@unimib.it).

 

Important dates:

Deadline for submissions: May 31st, 2022.

Notification of acceptance: July 31st, 2022.

San Raffaele School of Philosophy: September 20th–22nd, 2022.

Publication of the special issue (expected): June 2023

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.