Smith is not the epicenter of hostility to free speech. On university campuses nationwide we are witnessing an increasing tide of trigger warnings. They are popping up on syllabi, in discussions of public art, and even finding their way into official school policies
Announcement
Collapse
Civics 101 Guidelines
Want to argue about politics? Healthcare reform? Taxes? Governments? You've come to the right place!
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
Try to keep it civil though. The rules still apply here.
See more
See less
Liberals Are Killing the Liberal Arts
Collapse
X
-
On campuses across the country, hostility toward unpopular ideas has become so irrational that many students, and some faculty members, now openly oppose freedom of speech. The hypersensitive consider the mere discussion of the topic of censorship to be potentially traumatic.Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s
-
I'd say that "Huckleberry Finn" is a poor choice of example for one group "killing the liberal arts." That's a book that's been beset with criticism and outright bans for over 100 years, for reasons ranging from promoting bad manners among youth to anti-Southern sentiment to coarse language to racism. Virtually every major ideological group has taken pot shots at "Huck Finn," proving its subversive worth a thousand times over.
The topic, though, seems to be the inclusion of "trigger warnings" or the use of perceived hate speech outside the confines of academic discussion or education. It's difficult to see how this opposing "freedom of speech" in a particularly untoward manner.
Points for the Yeats quote, btw."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostI'd say that "Huckleberry Finn" is a poor choice of example for one group "killing the liberal arts." That's a book that's been beset with criticism and outright bans for over 100 years, for reasons ranging from promoting bad manners among youth to anti-Southern sentiment to coarse language to racism. Virtually every major ideological group has taken pot shots at "Huck Finn," proving its subversive worth a thousand times over.
The topic, though, seems to be the inclusion of "trigger warnings" or the use of perceived hate speech outside the confines of academic discussion or education. It's difficult to see how this opposing "freedom of speech" in a particularly untoward manner.
Points for the Yeats quote, btw."As for my people, children are their oppressors, and women rule over them. O my people, they which lead thee cause thee to err, and destroy the way of thy paths." Isaiah 3:12
There is no such thing as innocence, only degrees of guilt.
Comment
-
Originally posted by seer View PostYes, and it is not the conservatives doing this. How long have I been ringing this clarion bell?Learn to do right; seek justice. Defend the oppressed. Take up the cause of the fatherless; plead the case of the widow.--Isaiah 1:17
I don't think that all forms o[f] slavery are inherently immoral.--seer
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View Post
The topic, though, seems to be the inclusion of "trigger warnings" or the use of perceived hate speech outside the confines of academic discussion or education. It's difficult to see how this opposing "freedom of speech" in a particularly untoward manner.
Trigger warnings are the precursors to censorship. Indulge a sense of victimhood; encourage others to wallow in the pain of encountering contradicting ideas and you have a ready-made excuse: to protect their feelings.Last edited by Paprika; 11-12-2014, 10:52 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostKuminae was speaking at a panel for alumnae titled “Challenging the Ideological Echo Chamber: Free Speech, Civil Discourse and the Liberal Arts.” If you'd read the article, the backlash for her speaking the unspeakable was significant.
Trigger warnings are the precursors to censorship. Indulge a sense of victimhood; encourage others to wallow in the pain of encountering contradicting ideas and you have a ready-made excuse: to protect their feelings.
And trigger warnings themselves no more "indulge a sense of victimhood" than viewer discretion warnings on television do. I've never once felt a sense of victimhood when something like "Law and Order: SVU" opens with investigators combing the scene of a brutal rape — but I'm happy to have the heads up, nonetheless, and I imagine some people really do benefit from having that warning to change the channel. Trigger warnings for books do no harm, except in this nebulous sense of "indulging a sense of victimhood" stuff that seems a lot more callous than caring. When we start getting licensed psychiatrists agreeing that this is a real problem, we'll be justified in giving it more weight."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostThe full article is paywalled, unfortunately. But there are two potential topics here: one deals with public backlash against saying something deemed hate speech in public and the other deals with the discussion and study of the Liberal Arts, presumably in classes or academia. In the latter case, I think we're really dealing more with trigger warnings than anything else, as a liberal arts class in college is unlikely to shy away from "banned book" content or such discussions.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostPerhaps you should read the article instead of relying on what you think."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostSeeing as how it's pay-walled, all I've got to go on is what you're providing in the OP and subsequent posts. If there's more context and you want the discussion to revolve around that, you've got to set it up — I ain't never paid for no WSJ articles and I ain't startin' now!
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostIs ingenuity altogether lacking? It is possible the article is reproduced on other websites that do not have paywalls.
Regardless, your paragraph about trigger warnings can stand or fall on its own merits without the article as backup. If trigger warnings aren't a matter of topic, it's strange that they're included in the OP. If they are a matter of topic, I imagine we can discuss them with or without everyone else first scouring the Internet for a site that's circumvented WSJ's copyright."I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostWhy not link to that instead of chiding people for not reading the article following the paywalled link into the OP? Not sure why you're trying to call me out on this.
Regardless, your paragraph about trigger warnings can stand or fall on its own merits without the article as backup. If trigger warnings aren't a matter of topic, it's strange that they're included in the OP.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Paprika View PostI don't chide people for not reading the article, as though it is compulsory to read it; I chided you for not reading it and yet concluding that something is what is "really" being dealt with as opposed to another.
It is a matter of topic in the article. What was the problem was you trying to make out that the article was "really" about them and not "anything else".
Nothing I wrote assumed what the article was "really" about. I tried to lay out a framework based on the information you provided and explained my inferences from that. I think they are decent and rational inferences but they are very tentative and easily changed given new information. If you want the discussion to go in a different direction based on information in the article that isn't accessible to others, you have to provide that information. Otherwise, you can't complain when people try their best to make and explain the inferences they get from the OP!"I wonder about the trees. / Why do we wish to bear / Forever the noise of these / More than another noise / Robert Frost, "The Sound of Trees"
Comment
-
Originally posted by Sam View PostNothing I wrote assumed what the article was "really" about.
I tried to lay out a framework based on the information you provided and explained my inferences from that. I think they are decent and rational inferences but they are very tentative and easily changed given new information. If you want the discussion to go in a different direction based on information in the article that isn't accessible to others, you have to provide that information. Otherwise, you can't complain when people try their best to make and explain the inferences they get from the OP!
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by Mountain Man, Today, 06:07 PM
|
10 responses
50 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by Mountain Man
Today, 09:33 PM
|
||
Started by seer, Today, 09:26 AM
|
6 responses
33 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by rogue06
Today, 11:28 AM
|
||
Started by seer, Today, 07:47 AM
|
8 responses
56 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by seer
Today, 09:58 AM
|
||
Started by Cow Poke, Yesterday, 02:53 PM
|
25 responses
145 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by Sparko
Today, 06:50 AM
|
||
Started by CivilDiscourse, Yesterday, 10:34 AM
|
31 responses
129 views
0 likes
|
Last Post Today, 07:36 AM |
Comment