Check out this new open access journal!

journal.lib.uoguelph.ca/index.php/nn...

It has taken a long time to bring into being, but it has some excellent articles, some original new translations, along with interesting discussions of those translations.

#philsky

It has only been 10 months

I was very fortunate to be flying to Canada for two job interviews on Bush’s inauguration day. One of them came through, I took it, and I never looked back. I didn’t think it would take 25 years to crumble. Even through the jadedness I am deeply sad.

Fwiw I have my snow tires on. My question is whether in this period of municipal transition will the bike lanes be plowed first

I keep wondering why Portlandia is not making a comeback.

Or we’ve all been like frogs in boiling water since 1979. I’ve been telling people to watch Network since about 2015. It is an amazing film

There were still white grapefruits, which I miss terribly. And I had them for breakfast in the late 70s.

Ian’s this problem what skepticism is for?

A simple explanation would be rankings, through which universities are pitted against each other

The list: Diderot: The indiscreet jewels; The Nun
Rousseau: Julie, ou la nouvelle Heloise
Then there is the whole bibliotheque d’enfer. And there’s Ninon de Lenclos. And more.

Or Therese, Philosophe.

I am of this view that this is just a poor piece of libertine literature, coming nowhere near the achievements of 17th and 18th century predecessors.

Not the best translation!

in the past week I have refereed two articles that clearly haven't bothered to read some of the works they've cited, or if they have they've completely missed the point.

fair enough. there is, however, a way of citing or referring to an article that does not do it justice. I am thinking of cases where the article in question is actually the first to make a particular point -- a simple acknowledgement of that would be progress.