Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy

Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy is a peer-reviewed academic journal devoted to the study of ancient philosophy. The journal is indexed by PhilPapers and the Philosopher's Index.[1][2] Each volume however is assigned an ISBN on its own,[2] and the volumes have been described as being rather more like an anthology than a journal issue.[3]

Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy was started in 1983 by Julia Annas. At the time of its founding, it was commended as a supplement or even rival to the journal Phronesis.[4] It was also criticized for using transliterations of the ancient Greek language texts rather than the original alphabet.[5] It is one of the major journals for ancient philosophy.[6] The journal is published by Oxford University Press and the current editor is Victor Caston at the University of Michigan. Apart from Annas, previous editors were Brad Inwood, C. C. W. Taylor and David Sedley.[7]

Notes
  1. PhilPapers Publications List
  2. Philosopher's Index Publications List Archived 2014-09-04 at the Wayback Machine
  3. Pakaluk, M., "Review: David Sedley, Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy, Volume XXV, Winter 2003", Bryn Mawr Classical Review 2006.06.18 http://bmcr.brynmawr.edu/2006/2006-06-18.html
  4. Price, A. W., "Review: Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy: Volume I", Philosophical Books, vol. 25, no. 2 (April, 1984), pp. 75–77.
  5. Glucker, John, "Review: Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy: Volume I", Philosophia, vol. 16, no. 3–4, (1986), p. 434.
  6. Vanhaelen, M., "Philosophy" in Gagarin, M. (ed.), The Oxford Encyclopedia of Ancient Greece and Rome (Oxford University Press, 2010), p. 2053.
  7. Oxford Studies in Ancient Philosophy - Philosophy Series - Series - Academic, Professional, & General - Oxford University Press
gollark: Hmm. I actually can't find whatever gibson is screenshotting. Weird.
gollark: I mean "it is probably better even if I am misleading people, which I don't think I am".
gollark: If you think I'm misleading people wouldn't that be *worse*?
gollark: That is inaccurate.
gollark: Probably. I don't aim for this, and I expect it to be more accurate than the limited public information. I could probably correct ubq if they still care.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.