Analysis was founded in 1933 to provide a forum for short discussions of topics in philosophy. It quickly established itself as one of the characteristic journals of philosophy within the analytic tradition, with a distinctive style that has been maintained to the present day. Articles lend themselves to the presentation of cogent but brief arguments for substantive conclusions, and often give rise to discussions which continue over several interchanges. A wide range of topics is covered, including: philosophical logic and philosophy of language, metaphysics, epistemology, philosophy of mind and moral philosophy. The journal is published quarterly.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.
This item is part of a JSTOR Collection.
For terms and use, please refer to our
Analysis
© 1950 The Analysis Committee