Reference hierarchy
We prefer critical editions and widely used translations, then standard handbooks and encyclopedias such as the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy for biographical and contextual checks, then reputable historical surveys. Social media and unsourced quote aggregators are not accepted as primary evidence.
Verification steps
For each candidate passage we ask: Who is the attributed author? In which work or tradition does the line appear? Is the English wording attested in a reliable translation? Does the sentence distort the surrounding argument when removed from context?
Passages that fail attribution or distort meaning are rejected. Passages that survive are tagged with school, source, and theme labels for discovery.
Theme labels
Themes are editorial access points for readers, not claims that a historical author used the modern English category. Thin or duplicate theme labels are merged into stronger canonical themes so that theme pages remain useful rather than sparse.
Biographical notes
Thinker pages that include dates, works, and overviews follow mainstream scholarly consensus (for example, Confucius 551–479 BCE; Socrates c. 469–399 BCE). Where historicity is debated—as with Laozi—we state the uncertainty plainly.
AI and editorial responsibility
Drafting tools may assist organization, but attributions, dates, and philosophical claims are checked against human-curated sources before publication. The archive’s credibility depends on that review.
Related
Read the editorial policy and about this archive.