Disputatio aims at publishing first-rate articles and discussion notes on any aspects of analytical philosophy (broadly construed), written in English or Portuguese. Discussion notes need not be on a paper originally published in our journal. Articles of a purely exegetical or historical character will not be published.

All submissions to Disputatio are made by email. Please read the instructions below before submitting a paper. To be considered for publication, both Unsolicited contributions (Articles and Discussion Notes) and Solicited Contributions (Reviews etc.) must meet the Minimum Standard (solicited contributions do not have to be made anonymous).

  • 1. Before Submission
  • Authors may also read Disputatio‘s Editorial Procedures and Referees’ Instructions pages below before submitting a paper.

Editorial Policy

  • 2. The Submission Process
  • Submissions are made by email attachment to [email protected]. Manuscripts prepared for blind review may be submitted in .doc, .docx, .rtf, PostScript and .pdf. These files will be converted into a PDF file for the review process. Authors who write in LaTeX must convert their files to PDF prior to submission. Some recent word-processing formats such as .odt must also be saved as PDF.

  • Book reviews
    Books and book review proposals should be sent to the book reviews editor:

  • Célia Teixeira, Disputatio
    Centro de Filosofia da Universidade de Lisboa
    Faculdade de Letras
    Alameda da Universidade
    1600-214 Lisboa, Portugal

  • or by e-mail: [email protected]

  • 3. Minimum Standard
  • Submissions must be either in English or Portuguese, double-spaced or with margins of not less than 25mm (or one inch), in A4 page size, and automatic page numbering. A short but informative abstract (around 100 words) at the beginning of the paper is required, followed by 5 keywords.

  • Disputatio‘s word limits: 8000 words for full articles, 3500 words for discussion notes, 2500 words for book reviews. See style, below.

  • Typescripts must be carefully proofread prior to submission. Authors who submit articles in English, or Portuguese, but who are not native English, or Portuguese, speakers, may choose to have their work revised by a native speaker or by professional editing services.

  • Articles should be prepared for blind review, and no occurrence of the name(s) of the author(s) or any institutional affiliation may be shown in the paper itself. All references to an author’s own work(s) must be disguised (e.g. by being made in an impersonal and neutral form), with journal and book titles/publishers suppressed, or omitted altogether. Acknowledgments of gratitude must also be omitted. (Self-identifying references may be restored after the evaluation process is complete.)
  • Any submission that is accepted (conditionally or unconditionally) for publication must be brought into conformity of Disputatio‘s style, described below. Publication will not otherwise be proceeded with.

  • Authors own the copyright of their articles. Disputatio owns all other materials.

  • 4. Style
  • A paper that has been accepted must be supplied in a limited range of formats namely .doc, .docx, or .rtf. (Authors whose original submission was written in LaTeX must convert their articles to one of those formats.)

  • Authors should take the appearance of a recent article in Disputatio as a rough guide for the production, conventions and layout of a finished typescript (here is a sample paper and here is a sample book review.).

  • If an accepted paper is written in Portuguese, then it must include an abstract in Portuguese and an abstract in English as well.

  • Papers

    8000 words maximum for papers.

    3500 words for discussion or critical notes.

    Abstract of about 100 words.

    5 keywords.

    No endnotes; just numbered footnotes.

    Quotations longer than 3 lines should be detached from the main text.

    Do not use contractions (e.g. write ‘do not’ instead of ‘don’t’).

    Use single quotation marks for mention, and double quotation marks for scare quotes and internal quotation.

    Author-date system should be used in the text, as follows:

    ‘(Author date: page)’ for quotations: The inferences drawn in these examples would all satisfy Williams’ conception of a ‘sound deliberative route’ (Williams 1981: 104).

    ‘Author (date)’ for author reference: The inferences drawn in these examples would all satisfy the requirements put forward by Williams (1981).

    ‘Author date’ for book reference: The inferences drawn in these examples would all satisfy the requirements put forward in Williams 1981.

    ‘Author (date: page)’ for page reference: The inferences drawn in these examples would all satisfy the requirements put forward by Williams (1981: 104).

    Only works referred to in the paper should be gathered at the end, under the heading ‘References’, using the author-date system, as follows:

    Books: Authorsurname, Authorname. Date. Title of the Book. City: Publisher.

    Books, translations: Authorsurname, Authorname. Date of original publication. Translated Title of the Book. Translated by Name. City: Publisher, Date of Edition Referred to.

    Books, Ancient classics: Authorname. Title. Edited by Name. City: Publisher, Date of Edition.

    Chapter: Authorsurname, Authorname. Date. Title. In Title of Book. City: Publisher.

    Paper in a collection: Authorsurname, Authorname. Date. Title. In Title of Book, ed. by Authorname Surname. City: Publisher.

    Paper in a journal: Authorsurname, Authorname. Date. Title. Name of Journal Number:pagesstart-end.


    Aristotle. Nichomachean Ethics. Translated by Martin Ostwald. Indianapolis: Bobbs-Merrill, 1962.

    Blackburn, Simon. 1998. Ruling Passions: A Theory of Practical Reasoning. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Cohon, Rachel. 1986. Are External Reasons Impossible? Ethics 96: 545-556.

    Hume, David. 1740. A Treatise of Human Nature. Edited by L.A. Selby-Bigge and P.H. Nidditch. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1978.

    Kant, Immanuel. 1781. The Critique of Pure Reason. Translated by Norman Kemp-Smith. London: Macmillan, 1929.

    Williams, Bernard. 1981. Internal and External Reasons. In Moral Luck. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book reviews

    2500 words maximum.

    Book reviews do not have titles.

    No footnotes.

    No endnotes.

    No bibliography or references.

    Quotations longer than 3 lines should be detached from the main text.

    Citations of the book under review by page number only.

    Citations of other books or papers:

    (Author name & surname, Book Title, city, year, page.)

    (Author name & surname, ‘Paper title’, Journal Title Issue #, year, page.)

    (Author name & surname, ‘Paper title’, in Edited Volume Title, ed. by Editor
    Name and Surname, city, year, page.)

    Do not use contractions (e.g. write ‘do not’ instead of ‘don’t’).

    Use single quotation marks for mention, and double quotation marks for scare quotes and internal quotation.

Editorial Procedures

The Evaluation of Submissions

All Unsolicited Contributions to Disputatio are triple-blind refereed: the names and institutional affiliations of authors are not revealed to the Editors, to the editorial board, or to the referees. Without the prior permission of the Editors, referees and Board members will not show to other people material supplied to them for evaluation. All published submissions have been anonymously reviewed by at least two referees.

The evaluation process has up to five sequential stages, as follows:

  • Preliminary vetting by the Editors.
  • Refereeing, 1
  • Refereeing, 2 (referees may be members of the Editorial Board, or indicated by members of the Editorial Board or the Advisory Board).
  • Scrutiny of submission and referees’ reports by the Editors.
  • Final decision by the Editors.

A paper may be rejected, or returned to the corresponding author for revision, at any stage in this process. Successful completion of each stage will lead to the next. Authors should note that positive referees’ reports are not a sufficient condition for acceptance. The Editors take the final decision about acceptance.

In recent years, Disputatio has accepted about 12% of submissions. Our average reply time is currently 4 months.

Conflicts of Interest

The Editors (Teresa Marques and Célia Teixeira) will not submit Articles or be commissioned to write Critical Notices during their term of office. (They may submit replies to Articles or Discussion Notes that involve their work. In this case, they will not participate in the process of assessment, and an Associate Editor will serve as Proxy Editor throughout the process.)
If a member of the Editorial Board submits an Article, a Discussion Note, or is commissioned to write a Critical Notice, then s/he will not be involved, in any way, in the assessment process. The Editors will not participate in the evaluation of material submitted by a close colleague, joint grant holder, former student, etc.

Editorial Referee’s Instructions


We always ask referees how long they need to referee an article. We usually expect that referees in principle take no more than 6 weeks to give a verdict, to ensure a quick reply time to authors.


Referees are asked to fill in our report form that is emailed to them together with the anonymised article.


A referee is asked to indicate clearly whether acceptance (with no or minor revisions), conditional acceptance (with revisions), rejection with possible resubmission or rejection is recommended. If revision is recommended, we usually ask the same referee to review the revised version. (In this case, a copy of the manuscript should be retained.) In the case of a paper longer than 8000 words (or a Discussion Note longer than 3500), referees should bear in mind that the acceptance bar rises with increasing length. Suggestions about how a long paper could profitably be shortened are very useful. It greatly assists the Editors in coming to a decision if referees provide sufficient commentary so that the basis of their judgment is clear. This is also vital information for authors.
Referees should bear in mind that Disputatio makes available as much of their reports as possible to the author(s). They should adopt a judicious tone in their assessment, but if a paper is of poor quality the report must indicate this.


A paper accepted for publication in Disputatio should display in a high degree the usual academic virtues — argument, organization, originality, scholarship, significance. But it is also desirable that submissions are enjoyable to read, and that they might interest someone who does not already have detailed knowledge of its subject matter.