They dedicate some lines of their editorial to Mr Vaerwaeter's confession to being a paedophilia and his argument for a broader acceptance by society, saying they hope it promotes a 'lively debate'.
'We believe that discussion is the hallmark of a healthy, well-functioning and truth-oriented society, and we hope this journal can contribute to promoting academic freedom and freedom of thought and discussion,' they say. The final editor is Professor Jeff McMahan, an expert in moral philosophy at the University of Oxford who has argued academics need a publication like his journal to share 'dangerous ideas' They add that the fact they publish something should not be taken as an indication they agree with the author's argument, but go on to say they stand by the principles of free speech. In their most recent editorial, they comment they are 'very pleased' with how the journal is progressing, one year after launching and they are happy to present such papers that offer a 'rigorous, scholarly discussion of some idea that might be considered too controversial to be discussed in other forums'. 'What does and does not count as dangerous will be determined by the editors, in consultation with the editorial board and, if necessary, external experts, on a case-by-case basis,' their publication policy reads. Their publication does have some rules, stating, for example, it would not publish information on the creation of biological weapons, and said the final decision on what should be printed rests with the editors. The trio of editors established the Journal of Controversial Ideas in response to a rise in 'cancel culture' and to allow academics to publish 'offensive, immoral, or dangerous' papers under a fake-name if they wished.
Wade, a landmark decision that allowed individual states to set their own limits on abortion access. The situation in the US is far more complex, with abortion limits and exemptions now under increasing scrutiny in wake of the Supreme Court overruling Roe v. These include if the mother's life would be put in danger by the pregnancy continuing or if a test has revealed the child has a severe disability. The general limit for abortions in the UK is 24 weeks of pregnancy - but they can be carried out after this point under very limited circumstances. This, she argued, is a simple extension of the logic that allows mothers to terminate pregnancies if the foetus is found to have a severe disability. One has previously said sex with animals, or bestiality, 'does not have to be cruel' while another has argued for the merits of killing some newborns, a practise they coined as an 'after-birth abortion'.Īnother editor, Francesca Minerva of the University of Milan, came to fame for writing an article about 'after-birth abortions'
Its editors are no strangers to controversy themselves, either.
This is just one of a number of incredibly contentious articles approved for publication by its editorial board, with others including a guide on using racist language, a defence of white people 'black-facing' and the idea of using medically induced comas as a form of corporal punishment. Writing under a pseudonym he argued that society should do more to accept his 'sexuality'. It sprung to worldwide attention earlier this week after one researcher used it to anonymously confess to being a paedophile. Launched last year in response to the rise in ' cancel culture', the publication celebrates publishing essays which would otherwise struggle to see the light of day elsewhere. From when and how to use the n-word to suggesting we should put criminals in comas instead of jail, the Journal of Controversial Ideas is fittingly named.
0 kommentar(er)
