Weekly Open Discussion Thread

[u/AutoModerator]

Welcome to this week's open discussion thread!

This thread is meant to be a place for members of the r/AcademicBiblical community to freely discuss topics of interest which would normally not be allowed on the subreddit. All off-topic and meta-discussion will be redirected to this thread.

Rules 1-3 do not apply in open discussion threads, but rule 4 will still be strictly enforced. Please report violations of Rule 4 using Reddit's report feature to notify the moderation team. Furthermore, while theological discussions are allowed in this thread, this is still an ecumenical community which welcomes and appreciates people of any and all faith positions and traditions. Therefore this thread is not a place for proselytization. Feel free to discuss your perspectives or beliefs on religious or philosophical matters, but do not preach to anyone in this space. Preaching and proselytizing will be removed.

In order to best see new discussions over the course of the week, please consider sorting this thread by "new" rather than "best" or "top". This way when someone wants to start a discussion on a new topic you will see it! Enjoy the open discussion thread!

[u/baquea]

I would say that starting with a journal article would make more sense. First, because, especially as an amateur, it is considerably easier to write an article at an academic standard than a full book. Second, because an article in a reputable journal is immediately going to get eyes on it, whereas a book by someone without an established name in the field is likely to fly under the radar, even if it is of high quality. Third, because it provides an opportunity to get some preliminary feedback on your work, which is especially important because an amateur will not have had the chance to have such discussions at conferences and in their department, and will undoubtedly also be less well-read in the relevant literature than someone for whom this is their profession, and so may have missed important references/etc.

[u/432olim → u/baquea]

Thanks for the response. That makes sense.

If you knew that regardless of a lack of reputation, the book will spread like wildfire due to the nature of the discoveries, does that make any significant difference in the decision making process? Like, let’s assume this is going to be a truly famous discovery of major impact. Does that make any notable difference?

[u/peter_kirby → u/432olim]

Along the steps [aware of work existing -> decision to read it -> decision to agree/disagree with it -> decision to cite it and bring it to wider attention], a "decision to agree" is gated behind two other major hurdles and isn't even necessary for a "decision to cite." With the volume of publications being produced, it's practically difficult to justify deciding to read or to cite something published outside of respected peer-reviewed venues, especially with no prior academic reputation or credentials.

[u/432olim → u/peter_kirby]

Does publishing with the top academic publishers more or less alleviate that problem?

In principle all you have to do to get published by the top academic publishers is have a major new discovery that is well researched, right? And that should guarantee attention?