| name | mind-workflow |
| description | Use as the entry point for any Mind (philosophy journal) article. Routes to the right Mind sub-skill based on where you are in the lifecycle and whether the piece is an article, discussion note, book review, or critical notice. Mind is analytic philosophy — argument, not data — so the router's first job is to confirm there is a sharp thesis and a sound argument. It dispatches; it does not draft content. |
Mind Workflow Router (mind-workflow)
The orchestrator for a Mind submission. Figure out the stage and the content type, then send the
user to the matching skill. Mind takes quality as the sole criterion and excludes no area, style,
or school of philosophy — but every accepted piece rests on a clear thesis defended by a valid,
sound argument. The router's first job is to make sure that argument exists before polishing prose.
When to trigger
- Starting a new Mind paper and unsure where to begin
- Mid-project and unsure which skill applies next
- Deciding whether the piece is an article, discussion, book review, or critical notice
- Returning with a decision letter (route to
mind-revision-and-response)
First question: which content type?
| Situation | Type | Route to |
|---|
| Original, free-standing argument | Article (~8,000 words) | normal pipeline below |
| Short response to a specific published paper | Discussion | mind-thesis-and-argument + mind-objections-and-replies, tighter scope |
| Evaluative summary of a recent book | Book review | mind-literature-positioning + mind-writing-style |
| Longer engagement developing your own ideas from a book | Critical notice | mind-thesis-and-argument + mind-objections-and-replies |
Most submissions are articles. Discussions, reviews, and critical notices are tighter; do not
inflate one into an article (or pad an article down into a note).
Routing map (stage → skill)
Idea / fit for Mind? → mind-topic-selection
Where does it sit in the debate?→ mind-literature-positioning
What exactly is the thesis? → mind-thesis-and-argument
Strongest objection answered? → mind-objections-and-replies
Are the concepts precise? → mind-conceptual-analysis-and-method
Is the paper well-built? → mind-structure-and-exposition
Does it read clearly? → mind-writing-style
References in MIND house style? → mind-citation-and-style
How will it be judged? → mind-review-process
Ready to submit? → mind-submission
Got a decision / R&R? → mind-revision-and-response
Default order
topic-selection → literature-positioning → thesis-and-argument → objections-and-replies → conceptual-analysis-and-method → structure-and-exposition → writing-style → citation-and-style → review-process → submission → revision-and-response
Iterate: most papers loop thesis ↔ objections ↔ conceptual analysis several times before exposition.
Anti-patterns
- Polishing prose before the thesis and argument are actually settled
- Treating Mind like an empirical venue (it has no data, statistics, or robustness checks)
- A survey of a topic with no original thesis of one's own
- Skipping the strongest objection — at Mind the reply is much of the contribution
Router pass for Mind
Use this as a second-pass capability check. First lock the target thesis, argument map, objection sequence, and dialectical payoff; then test whether the manuscript addresses analytic-philosophy reviewers who expect a precise thesis, live objection, argument structure, and contribution to an active debate.
- Primary move: Run fit gate, evidence gate, writing gate, source-map gate, and output contract; stop when a gate lacks evidence.
- Decision ledger: return
claim / evidence / blocker / next edit rows so the next pass can patch the manuscript directly.
- Neighbor test: compare against Philosophical Review for broader top philosophy, Nous for analytic breadth, Ethics for normative/political theory; if the neighboring outlet has the stronger audience claim, recommend re-routing before polishing.
- Verification floor: before submission-ready advice, re-open
resources/official-source-map.md for volatile rules and name the one unresolved fact that could change the recommendation.
Output format
【Stage】idea / positioning / thesis / objections / concepts / structure / writing / citation / review / submit / revise
【Type】Article / Discussion / Book review / Critical notice
【Route to】mind-<skill>
【Why】one line
【Then】the next skill after that
Supplementary resources
