not up for debate? no-platforming and the censorship of 'tipping' issues

No-platforming refers to the practice of preventing, or attempting to prevent, an individual (or organisation) from using a platform to speak. This article examines no-platforming in the context of universities, focusing on epistemic considerations. Analysing the debate surrounding no-platforming in relation to whether an issue is epistemically settled, I draw attention to pro tanto epistemic considerations for no-platforming when an issue is epistemically unsettled, and pro tanto epistemic considerations against no-platforming when an issue is epistemically settled. In doing so, I urge discussions on the epistemic value/disvalue of no-platforming to go beyond debating whether an issue is epistemically settled, and to take into account the nuanced ways that no-platforming can promote or hinder various epistemic goals.