Should authors be allowed to be anonymous for controversial research proposals?
There is a fascinating article on the Times Higher Education site today - which is summarised below:
The inaugural issue of the Journal of Controversial Ideas covers the following: can the use of force be justified against humans who hurt animals? Could a violent criminal be sentenced to be put into a coma? Can white people ever legitimately use blackface? “But for all these provocative subjects, the biggest controversy appears to be over a simple question of academic practice colliding with the culture wars pervading higher education: whether scholars should be publicly accountable for what they write or allowed to remain anonymous to protect them from recrimination,” writes Jon Marcus. The journal’s founders tell him the journal is essential in airing ideas that would otherwise be suppressed in academia, while critics argue it is founded on the dangerous idea that research can take place in a moral vacuum.
I urge you to read it in full. It stirs up many feelings in me, but I am surprised to find myself generally supporting the idea. What do you think?