What is the best way to conduct a peer review?

[Systematic]

Is it publishing your findings to see if they can be repeated?

Is it publishing the theory that is likely supported by the findings?

Is it a full analysis of the thinking that goes into the theory?

Is it standing behind your hypothesis in the face of skepticism?

Is it promoting skepticism?

Is it all about what can be demonstrated?

Is it something else?

Is it all of the above?

[Philosophy Explorer]

Is it publishing your findings to see if they can be repeated?

Is it publishing the theory that is likely supported by the findings?

Is it a full analysis of the thinking that goes into the theory?

Is it standing behind your hypothesis in the face of skepticism?

Is it promoting skepticism?

Is it all about what can be demonstrated?

Is it something else?

Is it all of the above?

It is getting your findings published in the first place. But there are other ways.

PhilX