Thrice in the past two days, I've come across articles in the journal Philo. I regret to say that before this, I wasn't aware of the journal and have missed out on some good stuff--perhaps because USD doesn't subscribe to it (I hope to change this). This got me thinking about what other good stuff I may be missing out of ignorance. So I thought I'd post about my ignorance and ask the rest of you to help me rid myself of at least some of it. (I'm inclinded, however, to think that I'm not the only ignorant in these matters--though perhaps I am.)
I regularly read just about everything in Faith and Philosophy (though I'd love to see their website more up to date and offer electronic availability of contents) and Religious Studies. I also regularly read, though with slightly less comprehensiveness, Philosphia Christi (which could also use a web-update of contents) and the International Journal for Philosophy of Religion. Of course, good philosophy of religion stuff can often be found in many of the discipline's main (for lack of a better word--I can't think of exactly the property I mean here) journals, such as the Australasian Journal of Philosophy.
Are there any places that the rest of you regularly go to keep up with the literature in philosphy of religion that I may be missing? (I'm at home rather than USD's library, so perhaps I'm temporally forgetting some that I regularly check. If so, apologies in advance.)
A slightly different question is about the relative quality of these journals. Any thoughts on this would also be appreciated, though I realize that there are a host of questions/issues that this immediately raises. Neverthless, I'm inclined to think that for most of us there is a correlation between our evaluation of a journal's overall level of quality and the regularity with which we tend to read it (assuming that we're not ignorant of it and that we're interested in the journal's field, etc...).
Technorati Tags: philosophy of religion, international journal, ignorance, stuff, thrice, electronic availability, religious studies, philo, ignorant, aware, faith, hope, ask, love
Technorati Tags: philosophy of religion, international journal, ignorance, stuff, thrice, electronic availability, religious studies, philo, ignorant, aware, faith, hope, ask, love
Kevin,
In addition to the fine journals you've mentioned, I also consult the following, which regularly carry good articles on philosophy of religion:
The Heythrop Journal
The Modern Schoolman
Philosophy and Theology
Zygon
Also, there is a good online journal devoted to philosophy of religion, Ars Disputandi (URL = http://www.arsdisputandi.org/)
Hope that helps!
Kevin,
This tells me how often the blogroll gets checked! ;) You might take a look at Sophia too. I'd also like to see F&P put content online.
Matthew,
OK, so I'm a (insert favorite derogatory remark here). I see that section of the blogroll now. I could claim that I just couldn't find it on the new formate, but my mother taught me not to lie (unless there are large sums of money involved). I sometimes do check Sophia (I remember that it also recently had an article on the tradtional view of hell that would have been improved if the author had read Stump's article).
Thanks Matthew and Sean. I'll try to stop asking stupid questions now. Boy, how about open theism and universalism... :)
Kevin,
Lots of hotshots publishing at Philo, but mostly for naturalistic/atheistic conclusions. Their webpage is also not nearly up to date. I like looking for phil. rel. papers in APQ, Phil. Studies, AJP, Philosophia, Erkenntnis and other general journals. First, it is harder to get a phil. rel. paper in these journals than to get a, say, epistemology/metaphysics paper in. I actually heard the editor of one of these journals say that he doesn't like publishing phil. rel. papers and does so, typically (his words) only when Plantinga sends them a paper. I recently published a phil. rel. paper with Theoria, and they clearly don't want typical phi. rel. papers. They publish fairly technical papers (with the exception of some stuff in ethics). But I am hoping that more philosophers of religion will send their more technical papers to them. I sort of like Religious Studies as well. I've published two or three things with them, but they really discourage the standard analytical approach of displaying enumerated propositions. This makes life hard and I am not sure why they do that. Still, lots of stuff there is worth reading. I am so far largely unimpressed with Philosophia Christi and Sophia.
Mike,
Your papers were some of the ones in Philo that I was referring to. Looking at their contents over the past few years, I am impressed.
All the general journals are ones that I try to browse through regularly. But your comment about Plantinga makes me wonder about the blind review process--evidently that journal doesn't do things that way.
I hadn't noticed what you say about Religious Studies. Evidently, what I've published in it isn't "too analytic"! :) Though, now that I think about it, neither of those papers had too many numbered propositions, theses, etc....
Kevin,
Very few phil. rel. papers get by the editor in that journal and out to referees. I agree that it's troubling. I also agree that Religious Studies is a very good journal. Several people I know think it is the best in the field and it is hard to deny that the papers are among the very best. My worry was from a purely self-interested point of view. The style of the journal doesn't fit well with the way I write. But it does fit well with the way I read!
F&P just started putting content on Poiesis.