Planned topics

This issue will revolve around matters of purpose, function and criteria and hierarchy involved in the criticism of academic texts. What is the meaning of a “cognitive improvement”? Does an academic text play merely an informative and explanatory role? Does partial knowledge of the state of research and/or mixtures of various discourses within an academic text and presenting its results at the cost of abandoning a more academic style invariably lead to an exclusion of noesis? We will also put forward the following questions: what it means to deal with a difficult academic subject? When can we consider an academic subject to be difficult? Is it important to consider the amount of effort dedicated to the cognitive process or should one simply focus on its results? We will try to ponder the evaluation and methodological originality of texts. We will also consider issues such as “the social value of academic research” in relation to the humanities. Furthermore, we will attempt to establish which criteria of evaluating an academic text are obligatory and which are merely facultative as well as how to formulate criticism in a way propitious for noesis. Finally, we will deal with the genres and traditions associated with academic criticism.