/lit/ - Literature

>>18085089
https://theconversation.com/safe-space-or-shirking-accountability-a-new-journal-of-controversial-ideas-will-allow-academics-to-write-under-pseudonyms-159433

They'll probably still write PC stuff so I don't care. Academics are hopeless and should be shot

>>18085098
>Minerva came up with the idea after experiencing death threats and difficulty finding employment because of an article she wrote on the ethics of newborn infanticide.[2]
dunno, sounds kinda based

>>18085109
>newborn infanticide
if you don't want a kid, just do an abortion
killing a baby is just vile

Based

>>18085109
>We cannot pretend that academic inquiry is somehow quarantined from the rest of the ethical universe, and claim a right to evade accountability for our work.
>If a certain way of talking about race, for example, has historically served detestable ends, are you implicating yourself in those ends by taking that approach or using that language?
Sounds cringe

>>18085124
I think there is more to that paper than "killing a baby good"

>>18085133
Ah never mind that's not a quote. The writer of this article >>18085091 is seething so that's a good sign

>>18085133
who are you quoting, seriously?

>>18085141
The kiked article you posted dumbass

>>18085089
>morality

Jeff McMahan (White’s Professor of Moral Philosophy, University of Oxford, UK)

Francesca Minerva (Researcher, University of Milan)

Peter Singer (Ira W. DeCamp Professor of Bioethics, Princeton University, USA)


Tl;dr on these individuals? What are their controversial opinions?

>>18085202
Minerva as quoted above published "an article she wrote on the ethics of newborn infanticide"
Peter Signer argued that sex with animals isnt bad if we allow killing and eating them, which gathered some controversy I remember.
https://www.prospectmagazine.co.uk/magazine/heavypetting

>>18085089
Can't separate it until we have ai and remove the human component entirely.

>>18085212
So "controversial" progressive opinions? Lol

>>18085089
It's a trap.

>>18085202
a controversial journal created by revolutionaries like Peter singer, my heart can barely take it

>>18085230
well, minerva received death threats, its controversial enough, aye
>>18085246
It's not like they are doing this for themselves, the journal is open for everyone.

>>18085212
Peter Singer is a provocateur, but a lightweight thinker.

>>18085255
>the journal is open for everyone.
Not really, they still ultimately decide what to filter out

>>18085278
if you argue your position with solid facts and logic, dont know what kind of content could be filtered.

>>18085089
a new place for shills to propagate bullshit

>>18085133
>detestable ends
Purely an opinion

I'm willing to bet that non-progressive entries will, if at all, only be published so the author can be exposed via stilometric analysis.

>>18085308
Probably most of the opinions you read here on 4chan.

>>18085230
Good point, it’s amazing to me how huffed up on their own farts Progressives are. They truly believe their religion is THE religion

>>18085308
“Facts” are now debatable tho

>>18085545
Especially if they MIGHT hurt someone else’s fee fees

>>18085089
>separate science and morality
Yes. Science and ethics, no.
>>18085091
Post screenshots instead of directing traffic to a site you don't support.

What we really need is a journal where you can publish with your cat.

>>18085536
This. So tired of this.

>>18085554
What's the difference between morality and ethics?

>>18085089
whenever a news article mentions "top scientists" or "top sources" doesn't that shirk accountability?

>>18085593
Ethics are an external code of conduct, morals are personal views of right and wrong.

>>18085620
> morals are personal views of right and wrong.
But that implies morality is not universally objective, so it already assumes a philosophical stance

>>18085644
No it doesn't. Morals can be universal and still personal- most universal systems argue that everyone has the same natural moral instincts, because for morals to be universal and observable to subjective people they have to transcend the subjective.

>>18085536
>>18085548
Amazing how this thread came to these two conclusions simultaneously.
Infanticide and bestiality are definitely controversial, and "accountability" should be reserved for actions, not ideas. Anonymity is almost always a good thing.

>>18085663
But if morals are universal why are ethics not just the universal morals?

>>18085089
>Academics
>Science

>>18085682
Because that assumes a universal morality while ethics assume only a limited purview.

They'll probably still differentiate between "right controversial ideas" and "wrong controversial ideas". Simultaneously promoting sex with children while still censoring anything with the slightest hint of racism to it.

>>18085089
Couldn't they write pseudonymously already? Journals pretend like they don't care about names, with their double-blind peer reviews...

>We aim to publish papers that are likely to advance knowledge and promote free inquiry and rational argumentation.
They'll just tell you that your controversial opinion doesn't "advance knowledge" and is harmful to society or whatever

lmao academics pretending that they're allowed to have independent thoughts, cute!

>>18085593
There is none. The morality-ethics distinction is a meme pushed by libertarians.

We will see, the first volume should come out this month

>>18085833
>medical ethics should apply to the patient's actions too
>WHERE IS MY PATIENT CONDUCT REVIEW BOARD YOU GODDAMN LIBERTARIANS???
It's in DPRK if you're interested.

>>18085089
There’s little out there so offensive, yet still based in reality that you couldn’t publish it under a pseudonym as is.

Race differences? Already been covered. Probably to its furthest logical conclusion. At this point the people who want to circle jerk around them are doing it to feel edgy catharsis

Sex differences? Anti-egalitarianism? See above

Research on things like sexual impulses indicative of extremely low moral nature? If you know where to look you can find it

I’m curious to see how it turns out but pattern recognition says it will turn into a reservoir for intellectual bile

>>18085089
>Anon is now writing academic articles
Who is Anonymous? And how is he related to the hacker known as "4chan"?

>>18085109
Based. I wondered about a specific article that I once read when I saw this in the catalog, and knew it had to be the same once I saw your quote.

Article is "After-birth abortion: why should the baby live?" (2012). They probably wrote follow-ups.
Authors: Alberto Giubilini, Francesca Minerva

Stupid /lit/ won't allow PDF uploads.

>>18087390
Low IQ post from a reddit spacing midwit

https://retractionwatch.com/2020/12/21/nature-communications-retracts-much-criticized-paper-on-mentorship/

>>18087390
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DVoklaED4z4
00:12

>>18085135
>>18085109
Wait till anybody uses this to promote non ultra left ideals, they'll have a caveat where they can get doxxed.
It's probably just white babies who are algorithmically predicted to be straight and cis.

Essentially, just "progressive" writers trying to take it a step further rather than oppose it.

>>18085124
>abortion isn’t killing a baby
Oh anon

>>18087618
isn't this just an old marxist trick? read up on the "100 flowers campaign" and it's aftermath

>>18087449
the democrats are already pushing post-birth abortion as recently as 2016. that governor that got busted in blackface had been pushing a post-birth abortion law where doctors would "keep the baby comfortable" with drugs until the parents decide if they want to kill it or not, but when the dnc realized this might be too satanic even for their base, they just happened to find those yearbook photos and the issue was forgotten

>>18087714
>satanic
burgerfat spotted