Men reflect on Ruth Barcan Marcus

Disappointing: The latest issue of the journal Theoria: An International Journal for Theory, History and Foundations of Science contains a section in honor of Prof. Ruth Barcan Marcus, with papers by Graeme Forbes, Manuel Pérez Otero, Mark Richard, Ori Simchen and Sam Wilkinson.  The eminent Genoveva Martí is surely correct, in her introduction to the assembled papers, that Marcus herself would undoubtedly have commented on and criticized the contributions.  Yes, such collections are valuable and indicate worthiness of engagement — all the more reason to feature the work of women in the collection.

Women can take matters into our own hands by responding in numbers to the recent announcement of SWIP-Analytic, “inspired by the success of the Ruth Barcan Marcus conference that was held last spring.”

4 thoughts on “Men reflect on Ruth Barcan Marcus

  1. If I am not wrong, there was a CFP for this special issue, and all the papers have been chosen by anonymous refereeing. This still gives rise to interesting questions, such as how to encourage more women to submit their work to these special issues, and also whether it could be worth adding some invited papers, in addition to the contributed papers.

  2. I’m certain there was a CFP as well. But as we say in the FAQ for the GCC, one reason need not be the only reason to assemble particular scholarly works.

    There seems to be increasing reports of evidence that women’s submission rates are lower than their presence in their given subfields, so I persist in arguing that “ah, well, they didn’t apply in numbers” doesn’t seem satisfactory as a procedure. (Not that you’re saying it is, Esa. I do go on.)

Comments are closed.