Is, to dispute well, logic's chiefest end?
April 27, 2021 8:17 PM Subscribe
The premier issue of the peer-reviewed Journal of Controversial Ideas features an extremely abstruse article arguing against a certain itself rather arcane argument that trans women are not women. The Journal will be distinctive because it will allow contributions to be published pseudonymously as protection against contributors being cancelled.
One of the editors of the Journal, iconoclastic and austere philosopher of ethics Peter Singer, discusses this and other projects, the value of uninhibited disputation, and how he does not invariably live up to his own ethical ideals in an interview posted by the New Yorker.
(I hope linking to the journal article does not offend anybody overmuch! I do know some feel the particular topic to be above disputation, whether 'for' or 'against'. Singer speaks to this issue in the interview in what seems to me a respectful and readable way, and on the whole the material seems to me worthy of being posted about here, as a diptych.)
One of the editors of the Journal, iconoclastic and austere philosopher of ethics Peter Singer, discusses this and other projects, the value of uninhibited disputation, and how he does not invariably live up to his own ethical ideals in an interview posted by the New Yorker.
(I hope linking to the journal article does not offend anybody overmuch! I do know some feel the particular topic to be above disputation, whether 'for' or 'against'. Singer speaks to this issue in the interview in what seems to me a respectful and readable way, and on the whole the material seems to me worthy of being posted about here, as a diptych.)
This post was deleted for the following reason: The mod staff feels that the womanhood of trans women is above disputation and we do not welcome arguments about it at MetaFilter. -- Eyebrows McGee
« Older World's Greatest Jailbreak Artist | 25 years of Australian gun control since Port... Newer »
This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments