https://twitter.com/libsoftiktok/status/1488675032985268228
A book he wrote in 2009:
Sex, Discrimination, and Violence is about how the systematic application of some basic principles of applied ethics yields some surprising and very unpopular results. In particular, Stephen Kershnar investigates three areas: sex, discrimination, and violence. In his discussion of sex, he concludes that adult-child sex is not always wrong and that it is not clear that watching rape pornography is bad for the viewer. When discussing discrimination, Kershnar argues for the following startling conclusions: persons of different races on average differ in their value, professional schools may and probably should discriminate against women, and equal opportunity is not worth pursuing. In his discussion of violence, he contends that in some cases governments are morally permitted to use torture in order to interrogate suspected terrorists and may assassinate foreign leaders. These controversial conclusions will no doubt spur animated and thoughtful discussion amongst readers.
With the hilarious review:
Few will want to accept Kershnar's conclusions, but many will enjoy learning as they try to figure out where he has gone wrong. -- Thaddeus Metz, University of Johannesburg
Seems like the academic version of trolling for clicks. Honestly shocking to me he's not been called out until now. Published an article called, "A liberal argument for slavery" in 2003.
