Summary Of The Coddling Of The American Mind By Greg Lukianoff

Text 1, written by Greg Lukianoff is an article titled ‘The Coddling of the American Mind’ taken from a website called www.theatlantic.com in the form of written text. Published in September 2015, it is intended with the purpose to inform and expose the truth about trigger warnings. The writer’s intended audience may be students who witnessed the occurrence trigger warnings within their campus and working adults in colleges and universities. The context of Text 1 is the writer presenting his personal opinion on trigger warnings based on his experiences. Text 2, on the other hand, is an article titled ‘An Optimist’s Guide to Political Correctness’ by Megan Garber. Taken yet from the same website as Text 1, Text 2 might be written to appeal to

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. He later on elaborates on bits of specific topics relating to trigger warnings such as microaggressions, labelling and vindictive protectiveness. In spite of this, Text 2 appeals to a wider scope of audience; more likely older students and adults. The writer gave the allusion of Taylor Swift, who is a worldwide-known icon especially within teenagers. Text 2 points out that ’now we have Facebook and Twitter and Wordpress and Tumblr…that take our daily doings and transform them into media.’ Social media platforms like Facebook and Tumblr are recognisable to teenagers, which makes Text 2 a relatable piece to the younger

The tone of Text 1 is convincing, but not forceful. The writer makes his point by letting the audience fall in a trap of survey datas and persuasive historical evidence. Personally, I think Text 1 resembles an overfilled jar of water. Too much information is spilling out, and the audience gets lost along the journey towards the end of the article. The writer starts off by clarifying to the audience the meanings of ‘microaggression’ and ‘trigger warnings’. To support his points and further convince the audience, the writer inserted substantial evidence based on copious amounts of research and first-hand observations. Furthermore, Text 2 has an informal, more laid-back tone. In addition, the writer continues to be commanding and honest with her opinions. For example, ‘we can be too sentisive’ and ‘we can be too quick to dismiss otherwise valid arguments as coming from places of privilege’. The writer feels comfortable enough to be brutally honest to the audience. By using the repetition of ‘we’ to refer to the audience and herself, the writer places herself in the crowd and speaking on behalf of them in a commanding