- Joined
- Jan 28, 2013
- Messages
- 94,823
- Reaction score
- 28,342
- Location
- Williamsburg, Virginia
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
It is a common misconception that Peer Review Journals are like regular newspapers or magazines. For one, the person submitting has to pay to do so and pass a certain set of criteria. Average cost to be published in a Peer Review Journal is between 1 and 2 thousand dollars. I would bet Harvard is on the higher end. And the purpose of a Peer Revew Journal is not to take a stance and declare with authority. Only provide a public forum for professionals to exchange ideas. After a person does the research and formulates their hypothesis, they submit it for peer review. Which means they say "Hey look at this, Can you prove it wrong?" In this case they did, doesn't mean they should pull the paper. Because then the rebuttal paper written to prove that one wrong would only be one sided and make no sense to people in the future.
So to recap, a Peer Review Journal exists to offer other people a chance to prove the paper wrong. Not to sell copies, or prove an agenda. So it would be fruitless to retract everything proved wrong in a Peer Review Journal. Of course you can ignore this, and continue treating the medium as a form of public journalism. Luckily, tools of higher education aren't susceptible to public opinion. As they don't really serve the public.
A forgery? You don't say?
Since there is ZERO evidence that Jesus even lived, how could there be evidence of a wife?
Thank you for the review no one needs. The OP is taken from Retraction Watch, a MacArthur genius grant-funded site established to monitor the integrity of those peer reviewed journals. Their take:
[FONT="][I]What the [URL="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=HTR"]Harvard Theological Review[/URL] giveth, it evidently will not taketh away.[/I][/FONT]
[FONT="]The venerable publication about religious matters is refusing to retract a 2014 article by a noted scholar of early Christianity despite evidence that the article — about Jesus’s wife — was based on a forgery.[/FONT]
And those people can advocate for censorship all they like, Peer Review Journals are free to retract anything they like at their discretion. And until the day I die, I will defend their right to do so. Just like I will defend Fox New's right to say any blithering nonsense they want. And your right to tell me I am full of crap.
A forgery? You don't say?
Since there is ZERO evidence that Jesus even lived, how could there be evidence of a wife?
A forgery? You don't say?
Since there is ZERO evidence that Jesus even lived, how could there be evidence of a wife?
There is historical evidence of Jesus, mainstream Christianity just doesn't acknowledge it. Scholars believe his name was Joshua, and he was a rabbi.
You act like these are some big watchdogs, keeping Science safe. Peer Review Journals don't censor the papers they are paid to publish by the author. They don't care if the papers are proven false, and they run low profit margins. Constantly printing retractions wouldn't kill Harvard, but it would some of the smaller niche journals. I have no doubt these institutions, and even your intentions are noble, but the only people who are in danger of being led astray by a disproven paper are people who shouldn't be quoting Peer Review Journals in the first place. And pressuring Journals into constant retractions will cause them to start censoring what papers they let in, and that hurts science more than a retraction helps it.
There is historical evidence of Jesus, mainstream Christianity just doesn't acknowledge it. Scholars believe his name was Joshua, and he was a rabbi.
"Censoring what papers they let in" is the point of peer review.
Censoring the methodology to which the person has reached a consensus is the point of a Journals in-house Peer Review, the larger community of professionals that read the journal are the judges of what the paper says.
In academic publishing, the goal of peer review is to assess the qualityof articles submitted for publication in a scholarly journal. Before an article is deemed appropriate to be published in a peer-reviewed journal, it must undergo the following process:
· Because a peer-reviewed journal will not publish articles that fail to meet the standards established for a given discipline, peer-reviewed articles that are accepted for publication exemplify the best research practices in a field.
- The author of the article must submit it to the journal editor who forwards the article to experts in the field. Because the reviewers specialize in the same scholarly area as the author, they are considered the author’s peers (hence “peer review”).
- These impartial reviewers are charged with carefully evaluating the quality of the submitted manuscript.
- The peer reviewers check the manuscript for accuracy and assess the validity of the research methodology and procedures.
- If appropriate, they suggest revisions. If they find the article lacking in scholarly validity and rigor, they reject it.
What Is A Peer-Reviewed Article? - Evaluating Information Sources ...
guides.lib.jjay.cuny.edu/c.php?g=288333&p=1922599
Lloyd Sealy Library
Feb 9, 2016 - ... State University Libraries, gives a quick definition of a peer-reviewed article. ... In academic publishing, the goal of peer review is to assess the ... Because a peer-reviewed journal will not publish articles that fail to meet the ...
Um, that's the Jesus of Christianity. Not sure what you're getting at.
And until this one was published and disproven, it met the criteria. I am failing to see why I should change my mind. It's been disproven, what more do you want. Oh, you want it removed from view because uninformed people constantly quote it in a pointless discussion that I don't care about. I did have an insult here, but realized that was poor form. My apologies.
I quite agree that it met the criteria for publication, helped along, I'm sure, by the fact the author was a Harvard professor publishing in a Harvard journal. The problem with not retracting is that downstream, after the current controversy has faded, it risks being cited in good faith by unknowing researchers.
I understand your point, and it isn't wrong. I just can't condone pressuring them. It's fine if they do it for their own reasons. But its a slippery slope once we start forcing these Journals to capitulate because of public opinion. I am just amped up from a discussion elsewhere, someday's I just don't like people.
Well you wanted a source to him being referred to as Joshua. If you want one to a source that says historical Jesus is different from the Bibles Jesus and Christians ignore it. I point you to the internet. You can also take a free Religious Studies course offered by Harvard through Edx.org That offers both secular and religious version of Jesus.
I see. Sooo, I have to take a paid course to discover what you're talking about. In other words, you've got nothing.
Thanks for clearing that up.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?