I’m very pleased to announce that we’ll shortly be hosting a discussion of Elizabeth Barnes’ recent Ethics article, “Valuing Disability, Causing Disability,” with a critical précis by Tom Dougherty. We look forward to a great discussion, starting around noon EST tomorrow.
Upcoming Ethics Discussion
Posted on
AuthorKate Manne
AuthorKate Manne 
This is a dispiriting beginning to any discussion. I suppose my saying so will discredit me with some, but here’s hoping for a more auspicious beginning to the real discussion tomorrow. Pleased to see PEA Soup engaging with this article.
Dispiriting, but at least it is an occasion to play RATE THAT TROLL. Our first 3 contestants start off in a spirited fashion, but ‘MMB’ and ‘grunt’ sort of give away the game when they make it clear that both unpopularity and popularity will be used to indict the as-of-yet-non-existent discussion. What fun is trolling if you can’t bait people into a trap? “[B]rainless applied ethics” is sort of a stale insult, but it is good enough to put “anon” in the lead for the night.
Or we could just discuss the article if we are interested and stay out of the comments if we aren’t.
Above Amy and Stephen are referring to some comments that were deleted because they were posted anonymously. We will have more to say about our policy against anonymous commenting in a few days but do not want to distract from the discussion of Barnes paper here.
Stephen, once we’ve played RATE THAT TROLL (awesome) maybe we can get a good game of TROLL BINGO going.
Come on trolls. I believe in you. DON’T LET ME DOWN!!!
@Sobel: Do you mean you just made up a non-anonymity policy because a few people were calling you out on your pandering to the clique who who is grabbing increasingly more power in the profession?
Anonymous: Nope, as per Dave Shoemaker’s comment on the post directly underneath this one, on November 19th: “We have a few times in the past considered allowing anonymous comments, and we have rejected it. Perhaps the most remarkable thing about PEA Soup is that, for all the content published over 10 years now (and with over 2,000,000 hits), the tone has remained, with very few exceptions, pleasant, welcoming, and supportive. I think this is due in large part to our policy strongly discouraging anonymous comments, which can obviously gin up the drunken courage in people to post nasty remarks. We have largely avoided that scene, and we’d like to continue doing so.” We are working on formulating our policy and making it explicit. And I’ll leave your comment up for the sake of clarity, but further anonymous comments will be deleted.