Aims and Types of Review
William James Studies aims to publish informative and thoughtful reviews of recent books appearing on any aspect of William James’ body of work, as well as books on topics relevant to James’s interests, including Pragmatism, Philosophy of Religion, Philosophy of Science, Political Philosophy, Metaphysics and Ontology, among others. WJS publishes full-length “reviews” of approximately 2,000 words and shorter “notes” of approximately 700 words. Full-length reviews tend to be of books predominantly focused on William James or books that the editors consider of significant interest to the community of James readers, and the notes cover books not necessarily about James yet related to his concerns.
Reviewing for William James Studies
WJS warmly welcomes new reviewers, and an updated list of books awaiting review can be found here: http://williamjamesstudies.org/books-for-review/. If you would like to review a listed book – or know of another work that should be reviewed – please contact the Book Review Editor: firstname.lastname@example.org.
Reviews (2,000 words): Reviews should give the reader a solid grasp of the content of the work while subjecting it to a (charitable) critique of its strengths and possible weaknesses. Usually this means offering an overview of the book, a summary of its argument(s), an explanation of its structure and flow, a treatment of whatever elements of the work the reviewer finds notable, and its relevance for any ongoing discussions in the literature.
Notes (700 words): Notes should give the reader a general sense of the content of the work and an understanding of its relationship to James or his concerns. The shorter length means that detailed treatments of topics should be avoided, although a few charitable or critical observations are appropriate.
Needless to say, the content and length of the review (or note) entirely depends on the work in question; these are guidelines, not hard and fast rules, and the final contours of the contribution can be worked out with the editors of WJS.
Exemplary reviews and notes can be found here: José Medina’s review of Outline of a New Liberalism: Pragmatism and the Stigmatized Other by Nelson W. Keith or Zachary Tavlin’s notes for American Philosophy before Pragmatism by Russell B. Goodman.
Reviews should be submitted as Word documents with twelve point font, double-spaced. On questions of style and documentation, each manuscript must be consistent with The Chicago Manual of Style (seventeenth edition). Manuscripts should accompanied with full endnotes and bibliography (no footnotes).