41–50 of 707 posts
Yet another post for HN to one-up each other decrying the "PC culture" with plenty of "kids these days" rants, while completely avoiding taking the charitable position and putting ourselves in their shoes. The amount of hypocrisy that comes with the claims that these students should "learn to cope with uncomfortable ideas" is staggering. Guess what: these students are presenting us with an "uncomfortable idea" and th…
"If you’re more interested in playing the “hater” card than you are in confessing your own hate; if you want to arrogantly lecture, rather than humbly learn ..." I agree with the fundamental point about mistaking being offended (or made to feel guilty) for victimization, that being said: There is such a thing as opression and the sidelining of the concerns of groups within society that are already marginalized. This…
Yet another post for HN to one-up each other decrying the "PC culture" with plenty of "kids these days" rants, while completely avoiding taking the charitable position and putting ourselves in their shoes. The amount of hypocrisy that comes with the claims that these students should "learn to cope with uncomfortable ideas" is staggering. Guess what: these students are presenting us with an "uncomfortable idea" and th…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a strawman. Even the folks screaming at their residence hall master at Yale didn't assert an abstract "right not to be offended." Their beef was about an institution they pay money to not doing enough to police the conduct of other members of that institution. What's equally baffling is Ivy-league frat boys thinking that "free speech" entitles them to engage in conduct that would get them summarily booted out…
The REAL strawman is: "What's equally baffling is Ivy-league frat boys thinking that "free speech" entitles them to engage in conduct that would get them summarily booted out in the real world."
I find it baffling that there are people, in the real world, who somehow think that for unexplained reasons they have the right to not be offended or be made to feel uncomfortable. Somehow they believe that their feelings are the responsibility of everyone else.
Dr Piper's other public statements show that's very uncomfortable about and offended by many things - not least of which is majority support for gay marriage. Or any kind of homosexuality at all. He's so incredibly uncomfortable with both he'd rather they simply didn't exist. I have very little patience with anyone who runs the kind of moral racket that Dr Piper runs - which is making a career out of pretending to be…
You should try separating the opinion from the man and analyze the former without taking the shortcut of appealing to the authority of the latter.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's a strawman. Even the folks screaming at their residence hall master at Yale didn't assert an abstract "right not to be offended." Their beef was about an institution they pay money to not doing enough to police the conduct of other members of that institution. What's equally baffling is Ivy-league frat boys thinking that "free speech" entitles them to engage in conduct that would get them summarily booted out…
The REAL strawman is: "What's equally baffling is Ivy-league frat boys thinking that "free speech" entitles them to engage in conduct that would get them summarily booted out in the real world."
Definition of the strawman argument:
"A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument which was not advanced by that opponent." (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man)
The original article is put in a very specific context: a sermon about a very specific scripture on a theological university. It is not about Yale, it is not about free-speech. It is about the reaction of a self-centered student and how out of place he is; which I understand it is the point of lagadu, and it is why lagadu's comment is not a straw men argument.
The fact that the Yale argument is true has no relevance with the context of the original discussion.
"Oklahoma Wesleyan is not a “safe place”, but rather, a place to learn" Exactly, I don't get why people are trying to make universities, workplaces, clubs, or anywhere else "safe places". They should not be safe places, they should be places where you feel confronted, challenged and threatened by different ideas and points of view.
While I agree with your fundamental point, I'm pretty sure that Everett Piper's Oklahoma Wesleyan is a very safe space for a particular kind of hard-shell evangelical. You don't go to that kind of school to be "confronted, challenged and threatened," but to have your worldview confirmed.
However, you can can bet Piper's teachers would have their worldview being very challenged if an atheist or agnostic student started long discussions about the nature of their mission (http://www.okwu.edu/about/).
I find it baffling that there are people, in the real world, who somehow think that for unexplained reasons they have the right to not be offended or be made to feel uncomfortable. Somehow they believe that their feelings are the responsibility of everyone else.
While I sympathize with your viewpoint, perhaps I can shed some clarity on the other side. The concern is not feelings getting hurt, but rather physical security as a person of minority status. This is something that a white heterosexual middle-class male (such as myself) can probably never fully appreciate, but I try to sympathize. Imagine what it is like to be black in a country where just a few generations back yo…
Surely college students are capable of distinguishing between the threat of rape, and the discussion of relevant law in a classroom environment? So what is the safety issue here? Indeed, the end result will likely be a net lowering of safety in society as a whole, as a lack of expertise in rape law will make it harder to enforce and successfully prosecute.
[1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rap...
I think the world would be better if, before you're allowed to respond to someone being wrong, you have to first be able to express their position in a way that they agree represents their view. Because 'political correctness' isn't the cancer at the heart of social politics, it is straw-manning. On both sides of every issue. I'd be surprised, perhaps even amazed, if Dr Piper had represented the complaint in any way…
It feels ridiculous when you do it at first but it becomes an incredibly helpful tool.
"As an evangelical Christian university of The Wesleyan Church, Oklahoma Wesleyan University models a way of thought, a way of life, and a way of faith. It is a place of serious study, honest questions, and critical engagement, all in the context of a liberal arts community that honors the Primacy of Jesus Christ, the Priority of Scripture, the Pursuit of Truth, and the Practice of Wisdom." This sounds to me more lik…