Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

time.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 444 posts

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#171

Post by mcphage »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #141
Chathamization wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Universities ought to return to what they once were: free and open exchange of ideas. The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment (most people stop taking classes after getting a degree), and below that is probably education for employment (if I see someone with a degree taking a class just for the education, it's usually related to s…

>The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment Go to university and you should expect "free and open exchange of ideas", go to a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment".

> a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment"

For many occupations, a trade school will not provide that. If trade schools expand to provide credential for many more fields, then maybe this will be a valid response. Until then it's not.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#172

Post by wyldfire »

jbigelow76 wrote: post #141
Chathamization wrote: post #130

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Universities ought to return to what they once were: free and open exchange of ideas. The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment (most people stop taking classes after getting a degree), and below that is probably education for employment (if I see someone with a degree taking a class just for the education, it's usually related to s…

>The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment Go to university and you should expect "free and open exchange of ideas", go to a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment".

No such trade schools exist for many professions. Would that they did! In fact, some are rising to the challenge/seizing the opportunity for professions like software development.

Many/most professional jobs treat university degrees as non-negotiable entrance criteria. Some go to the enormous trouble to punish professionals who are otherwise productive but have "gotten by" with extensive experience instead of a degree once it's discovered that they never had one.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#173

Post by vidarh »

coddingtonbear wrote: post #71
zyxley wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Mention of rape" and "discussion of rape in enough detail to cause discomfort" are not the same thing.

That might be true, but there are a variety of cases where we've decided to stop using a word in general in order to avoid causing undue distress; "slave" (i/r/t "master" and "slave") in a computing context is now generally always phrased in another way, for example.

That just gives me an intense urge to use master/slave all over the place.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#174

Post by ZeroGravitas »

Jeema101 wrote: post #113
jordigh wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "A trigger warning is advance notice about subject material that may be difficult for certain students to read, hear or see." But that's not what trigger warnings are for... it's not just about mild discomfort. They're to prevent panic attacks . https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trauma_trigger Whether trigger warnings are effective or not is a different matter, but of course if you portray them as being about being off…

Avoidance in the form of 'trigger warnings' may actually worsen the underlying problem for people with PTSD because avoidance can strengthen the underlying fear. Successful treatment often actually involves confronting the fear, little by little, until it no longer causes discomfort: "Exposure therapy is a type of cognitive behavioral therapy[118] that involves assisting trauma survivors to re-experience distressing…

This argument is absurd and yet I see it often enough that I assume it is a standard political talking point.

I mean, are you really arguing that the clinical approach to trauma is to surprise the patient with the topic in the middle of important everyday tasks?

Obviously, trigger warning provide a useful tool for people to manage their own exposure to these panic attacks. If this was not the case then no-one would ever suffer from PTSD as it would be instantly self-healing!

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#175

Post by czep »

Chathamization wrote: post #130
judah wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Universities ought to return to what they once were: free and open exchange of ideas. Viewed in this light, the University of Chicago's rejection of political correctness is actually a softening of extremism: allowing for, rather than actively silencing, diverse political discourse. This is in stark contrast to neighbor Chicago school DePaul, who last month blocked[0] Jewish conservative minority voice Ben Shapiro fr…

> Universities ought to return to what they once were: free and open exchange of ideas. The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment (most people stop taking classes after getting a degree), and below that is probably education for employment (if I see someone with a degree taking a class just for the education, it's usually related to s…

> The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment

This is most certainly not the case at the University of Chicago. If you want a degree, even a prestigious one, there are far easier options (even in Chicago... See that school in Evanston ;)

Students choose the U of C because they want to be challenged by ideas, they want to spend four miserable years pummeling their brains with the totality of human endeavor, at 1000 pages per week, lest they never have such chance again in their lives.

The degree itself matters to me very little, but the way that school changed my life will stay with me always.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#176

Post by wyldfire »

Chathamization wrote: post #166
jbigelow76 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment Go to university and you should expect "free and open exchange of ideas", go to a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment".

> Go to university and you should expect "free and open exchange of ideas", go to a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment". Sure, theoretically. In the real world, not so much. Want to be a lawyer high up in a corporate firm? Get a research position doing the kind of work PhD's do? Good luck going down that path by going to a trade school. Heck, look at the example of Susan Finley. After 46 succ…

> Want to be a lawyer ...

Perfect example! Law is one career where you can learn everything you need to know by reading books (ok, maybe all of them are that way..). Yet legislators (many lawyers themselves) in several states have introduced new laws to limit licensure only to those who have degrees. This would've excluded notables like Lincoln, Jefferson, Darrow, Marshall.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#177

Post by secabeen »

superuser2 wrote: post #78

It's important to acknowledge that the term "safe space" means different things to different people. To the Yale protestors (who were widely supported at UChicago) the entirety of university housing at Yale was meant to be a "safe space," so it was incumbent on the university to fire professors who voiced unwelcome opinions in that space. To many of the people who are angry about this letter, "safe space" means a sup…

I think you are right. Here is the page from the Chicago LGBTQ student group on how they implement and create safe spaces for students: https://lgbtq.uchicago.edu/page/safe-space

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#178

Post by AnimalMuppet »

Swizec wrote: post #14

This is a really hard topic to think about. On the one hand, I worry that we're moving towards a mind-police driven society where we actively discourage people from saying anything that goes against the grain of society. Be it by activist groups, or algorithms optimizing for clicks and user retention. On the other hand, it is important to be courteous to each other and not upset people needlessly. Discussions should…

On the third hand? Now you've triggered my alien phobia!

Seriously, though, reasonable people should behave reasonably, and a lot of the problems go away. But we aren't talking about reasonable people; we're talking about college kids. I remember myself as I was then, and I was a jerk. I was much more concerned with winning (in whatever form) than being reasonable or nice or considerate. So... yeah, the administration probably needs some guidelines rather than relying on the reasonableness of the students.

I said "needs some guidelines", but that isn't actually what Chicago is doing here. They're stating that they follow some values, and that you shouldn't go there if you can't go along with those values. This is a better approach, because values are actually a better guide than rules (somebody can always find a set of circumstances that the rules don't cover, especially if they want to).

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#179

Post by unethical_ban »

Chathamization wrote: post #166
jbigelow76 wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The problem with this is that's not why most people go to universities. The top reason is probably credentials for employment Go to university and you should expect "free and open exchange of ideas", go to a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment".

> Go to university and you should expect "free and open exchange of ideas", go to a trade school if all you want is "credentials for employment". Sure, theoretically. In the real world, not so much. Want to be a lawyer high up in a corporate firm? Get a research position doing the kind of work PhD's do? Good luck going down that path by going to a trade school. Heck, look at the example of Susan Finley. After 46 succ…

Look at the way things could be, and ask "Why not?"

I'm not going to reject the ideal of college as a place to expand intellect because one common use is as a trade school.

Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’

#180

Post by aninhumer »

wyager wrote: post #149
jordigh wrote: post #27

One thing that bugs me is that people think trigger warnings are to make sure people don't get offended. Being triggered is not the same thing as being offended. Being triggered is about having a fucking panic attack, hyperventilating, feeling like you're having a heart attack and you're about to die . Panic/anxiety attacks are not a silly little thing. They were portrayed somewhat accurately in Netflix's recent Jess…

Even if a meaningful percentage of the people clamoring for trigger warnings had a legitimate psychological condition like PTSD (which, based on my interactions with such people at a large university, they don't), making everyone else accommodate their emotional state is not a rational, mature approach. If you have a problem, seek to treat it; don't try to foist it on everyone else.

Whether it's a rational approach depends on how costly the change is to make, and how much it helps.

Banning people discussing certain topics in public throughout a university is obviously too costly. Adding a brief note at the start of an article/lecture/etc. saying you're going to be discussing something is perhaps not.

Post reply on HN