From english-humanities-journal-skills
Evaluates whether an analytic philosophy manuscript fits Mind journal, covering topic scope, argument-rigor bar, and desk-reject heuristics.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/english-humanities-journal-skills:mindThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Mind, published by Oxford University Press for the Mind Association, is a leading generalist
Mind, published by Oxford University Press for the Mind Association, is a leading generalist journal in the analytic tradition with deep roots in the UK philosophical scene and a long historical strength in philosophy of mind, language, and logic, alongside metaphysics, epistemology, and value theory. Its defining expectation is a rigorous, original argument that advances a live debate: a clearly stated thesis, a valid and carefully defended line of reasoning, and decisive engagement with the strongest opposing positions, developed at the length the argument requires. Mind also publishes critical notices — substantial, argument-driven engagements with important books — distinct from short book notes. A competent survey, a small variation on a familiar move, or a paper that dodges its best objections is a poor fit. This skill is a fit / venue-selection / re-framing aid. It does not replace the journal's current submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live Mind author instructions.
../../resources/source-basis.md and
../../resources/official-source-map.md; start from the press/society anchors, then cite the
current Mind page you checked.the-philosophical-review / nous / the-journal-of-philosophy.ethics / philosophy-and-public-affairs.analysis.the-journal-of-aesthetics-and-art-criticism.history-and-theory.[Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason)
[Target] Mind
[Area] <closest philosophical sub-area; or critical notice>
[Thesis] <the original claim in one line>
[Argument/engagement] <does the rigor + objection-handling clear a leading generalist bar?>
[Top risk] <the single most likely reason for rejection>
[Official items to re-check] <length / article type / citation style / anonymization / preprint policy>
[Re-route suggestion] <if not a fit, a better-matched venue>
npx claudepluginhub brycewang-stanford/awesome-journal-skills --plugin english-humanities-journal-skillsAssesses manuscript fit for The Journal of Philosophy: checks argument rigour, broad significance, dialectical engagement, house style, and desk-reject risk in analytic philosophy.
Explains Mind journal's triple-anonymous peer review process and quality criteria to help authors prepare submissions that survive severe selection.
Determines if a manuscript fits Organization Studies by evaluating theoretical contribution, qualitative depth, and desk-reject risk. Useful for authors targeting OS or seeking alternative venues.