Today’s college students are becoming more sensitized to the harshness of the outside world. Instead of learning to be resilient to others’ comments, they are being taught to take offense to any little word that could in some way be connected with a bad experience they might have had, and college administrators and professors are aiding this childish behavior. They are backing this movement to make adults into children. With this new movement to rid college campuses of any speech that may make anyone feel uncomfortable, students are being treated less like adults, and more like elementary children. In their essay, “The Coddling of the American Mind”, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathon Haidt express their concern about this movement. They point out how there has been a previous movement similar to this one in that they both seek to restrict speech and broaden diverse-prospective. However, they conclude that, “The current movement is largely about emotional well-being.” and, “…it presumes and extraordinary fragility of the collegiate psyche…” (4). Due to this oversensitivity of college students, some popular comedians have even stopped performing on college campuses. As a result of this movement, the term “microaggression” has risen to the forefront of university campuses. These small actions or choice of words, which appear to have no …show more content…
Vindictive protectiveness is stopping students from learning anything in the four years or more that they spend in college. If they aren’t allowed to speak their mind there is no room for growth. The only thing they are learning is that speech should be under strict control by authorities. Thus teaching them that there really is no freedom of speech under the first
Writing can be an effective way in persuading an audience. Creating a connection to the audience is a difficult task, but if rhetorical writing is used correctly, one's writing can be impactful and effective. The authors, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, of "The Coddling of the American Mind" use rhetorical strategies to evoke interest, and to assist in bringing across meaning to the reader. Some of the effects used include data, quotes from ancient philosophers, and specific word connotation. The rhetorical strategies used by Haidt and Lukianoff are for the most part unsuccessful in convincing college administration that shielding students does more harm than good.
A Misleading Attacks on Tigger Warnings, and Safe Spaces In the article “Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces and Free Speech, too” by Sophie Downes, published in the New York Times. Downes argument in the letter sent out by Dean Ellison by the University of Chicago. The letter states that trigger warnings and safe spaces were an issue from deterring students from having free speech so therefore would not be supported by the University of Chicago campus anymore.
Following this public speech qualified as disruptive, vulgar and obscene, according to the school’s rules, Fraser will be suspended for two days and his name will be removed from a graduation ceremony speakers’ list. Based on these aforementioned facts, Fraser’s father, supported the American Civil Liberty Union (ACLU) will file a lawsuit against the school for violating the First Amendment right to freedom of speech of his son, Matthew Fraser, and will ask for a monetary reparation against the prejudice. As a consequence of this lawsuit, the issue will be discussed, first, before a Federal District Court. Over there, the judge will give a verdict favorable to Fraser on the ground that the
" Common speech forms are changing, and school authorities are often a generation or two behind these changes. The speech was not offensive to the great majority of students, nor would it turn anyone's head if heard in a public forum. Writing for the
Text 1 does this through repeated references of colleges and universities. The rhetorical questions in Text 1 are more likely to be directed to professors. For example, ‘What are we doing to our students if we encourage them to develop extra thin-skin just before they leave the cocoon of adult protection?’ However, the same can be The writer keeps referring back to campuses. Being involved in the observations of student’s behaviours in campuses, the writer had first-hand experience on trigger warnings.
Conservative students may decide to go to a liberal school. One student that has been in that environment and now is an English college professor named Aaron Hanlon at Colby College writes “Advice for My Conservative Students” published on February 16th 2017 in the New York Times and he claims that conservative students should understand what freedom of speech is and should not mistake disagreement with oppression. Hanlon starts off by stating personal experiences that relates him to conservative students that feel oppressed, giving conservative students relatable emotional appeals, and various sources and statistics for the reader to indulge in. He starts off by putting himself out there and saying that he has been a conservative student who
Have we, as a people, become so fearful to speak what is actually on our minds in the society that we live in? Are we scared that we may offend someone, and have our job taken away from us because of something we have said? In the article, “I'm a liberal professor, and my liberal students terrify me,” Edward Schlosser suggests that students are limiting how professor are able to lecture them. Schlosser is also worried that he may even have his job revoked from him if he slightly upset or offend any of his students. In our society, political correctness has reached an all-time high in the 21st century.
Though there are some exceptions, the young generation at large today has been brainwashed by politically correct culture. That culture shuns complex thought, and makes any dissent from the PC mainstream punishable by shunning, yelling, and attempts to silence. It runs rampant on college campuses, and Hofstra is no exception. Trigger warnings are unfortunately a major aspect of this culture, and there is little remedy other than to save the minds of those we can still sway. As best summarized by the American Association of University Professors, “The presumption that students need to be protected rather than challenged in a classroom is at once infantilizing and anti-intellectual”
In her article, she refers to college as a place to broaden knowledge, “It is, hopefully, a space where the student is challenged and sometimes frustrated and sometimes deeply upset, a place where the student's world expands and pushes them to reach the outer edges – not a place that contracts to meet the student exactly where they are” (Filipovic). From this previous statement, we can conclude that the unexpected in college challenges a student to push their knowledge; however, we should not adapt the learning process to meet students’ needs. A trigger warning serves as protection against a wide range of controversial categories. It is true multiple things could trigger an emotional response, even things as little as skulls, blood, or pregnancy. The discretion on whether a topic can send a student into emotional turmoil is unpredictable.
Students have grown too sensitive; they're used to being protected from reality by their over protective parents. They expect the same cushion against harm in college, but college is meant to challenge and change their way of thinking. Instead of students taking this challenge, we have to be cautious with what we say to make sure we don’t trigger upsetting emotions. This constant need to think twice not only affects the individual, but it affects the academic discourse present/offered in universities. Trigger warnings change the educational experience in the college classroom.
A Look Inside: “The Coddling of the American Mind” In the September 2015 issue of The Atlantic, the article, “The Coddling of the American Mind” co-written by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathon Haidt, was published. In this article, Lukianoff and Haidt make the argument that students of American colleges have become increasingly sensitive towards speech that could be deemed “offensive” or “triggering. And in an effort to appease students as well as avoid any possibility of a lawsuit being brought against them, colleges have become more willing to accommodate classes, by removing this type of speech from the curriculum.
In Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt’s article, The Coddling of the American Mind, both authors are ASSERTING that the general public uses the use of what they call trigger warnings entirely too much. Lukianoff and Haidt BELIEVE that the extended use of trigger warnings is leading to a degraded and fragile state of mind. As a social psychologist, Jonathan Haidt has made several observations concerning the overall elevated concern for the emotional well being created by the public and for the public. Co-author Greg Lukianoff also has some background credibility as CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. Together, both Lukianoff and Haidt have formed an article that poses the question of whether trigger warnings are causing
In the essay, University is Right to Crack Down on Speech and Behavior by Eric Posner argues that students today are more like children than adults and need protection. Posner would always refer back to the college student and how they are still kids not age wise but as their maturity. “The problem is that universities have been treating children like adults.” (Posner 185). The context of his argument is involved with the speed codes.
Dorothy Siegel’s argument in the essay “What Is Behind the Growth of Violence on College Campuses?” is persuasive. Siegel persuades the reader by presenting her points and validating them with facts and statistics. One of the strongest aspects of the argument is that contrary to popular belief, students are committing a majority of the crimes that take place on college campuses; the students “themselves may become the assailants”, not persons from outside of the campus. She further supported this by pointing out that students tend to know their attackers. Another strong aspect of her argument is that campus violence is due to substance abuse.
The idea of free speech on college campuses and the complications of it stem from those on campuses expressing views that don’t align with popular views. Implications for students who use the idea of free speech as a method for hateful actions and comments should be reprimanded, but the question remains as to whether schools should enforce tougher limitations. The freedom of speech on college campus expands to the freedoms of religion, assembly, press, and protest as well. Freedom of expression allows students to show their own political, social, and cultural views. Removing freedoms of speech and expression have consequences deeper than surface issues.