Sometimes I get the feeling that Collini is hearing people urging others to be civil, and mis interpreting it as a demand that they stop arguing. The two demands, however, are utterly different, and one can’t sustain a rational dialogue without the virtue of civility. A demand for delicacy and caution is not a demand for silence, it’s a necessary aspect of making speech flourish. Because Collini is right about the goal for which we should strive - a community of rigorous and open argument - it seems unfortunate that he is not attuned to the problems of civility often faced by unpopular minorities who are making new demands. Arguments are not abstract propositions in the air. They are human performances towards other humans, in which the choice of vocabulary, the tone of voice and the look in the eyes all matter for whether the performance is virtuous or vicious. So we should seek the goal to which Collini points us, but pursue it with all our ethical and emotional wits about us.