Suppose it were true Tuvel's article has caused harm. In and of itself, that doesn't seem a good enough reason for its retraction.
-
normal standards for publication in a philosophy journal, then tough luck. Religious people in the (early) Soviet Union were harmed by anti-
religious sentiment, but in and of itself, that doesn't mean one can't argue for atheism. Or similarly that one cannot point out that the
-
-
doctrinal claims of Islam are complete nonsense, because there is anti-Muslim sentiment and violence.
-
You have to take the possibility of harm into account - to trans people, to Muslims, or whoever - if you're going to make an argument, but
-
even if you judge that the consequence of the argument is more harm that's not necessarily decisive, because truth matters.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.