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

The Slow Death of the University

chronicle.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 134 posts

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#101

Post by derefr »

xienze wrote: post #94
derefr wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> When people are talking about "safe areas" to protect students from words spoken by a speaker, then criticism is dead. I understand what you're getting at, but some people really do have PTSD, and some speeches really do contain things like graphic recountings of abuse. Should those people just not attend university? (I'm actually undecided.)

> I understand what you're getting at, but some people really do have PTSD, and some speeches really do contain things like graphic recountings of abuse. Should those people just not attend university? Perhaps don't attend that speech then? Life at a university doesn't involve dodging "pro rape" speeches blasted over the PA system multiple times a day. The recent article about the "safe spaces" full of coloring books…

My argument is that whether the idea of a "safe space" is warranted, and who should be allowed to make use of such a space, are different questions.

A "safe space" might have valid medical reasons to exist—in fact, it would likely be a concept quite easily unified with that of a counselling office.

But, for it to have the correct incentive structure, it would probably require you to get a note from a real honest-to-god psychiatrist at the beginning of the year before you could make use of it. Otherwise you end up in the stupid rut of the "ignorant-but-unaware-of-it" people avoiding the very properties of an education designed to bash their narrow views open.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#102

Post by aklemm »

dhagz wrote: post #89
aklemm wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Working" by Studs Terkel comes to mind. http://www.amazon.com/Working-People-Talk-About-What/dp/1565... So many people have this question early in their careers, it really seems like something is wrong. Perhaps we need a serious/mandatory/formal job-shadowing program for teens and college students.

Like apprenticeships? Man, what an outdated idea. They did that in the Dark Ages, for goodness sake! /s We have a strong push towards internships, it seems odd that students aren't taking advantage of this hands-on experience in a field that interests them. Of course, missing out on a paid job for the (most likely unpaid) internship is probably a factor.

Well, an apprenticeship is far more of a commitment than what is needed here. Rather young people are looking for a survey of what specific careers really look like. Might be impossible, but job-shadowing might be the best answer. I shadowed a judge for a morning as a high schooler, and it was tremendously enlightening, but it could have been a lot better if he did it frequently and if I had a chance to shadow other professions for longer periods.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#103

Post by A_COMPUTER »

derefr wrote: post #79
protomyth wrote: post #46

"It would also seek to restore the honorable lineage of the university as one of the few arenas in modern society (another is the arts) in which prevailing ideologies can be submitted to some rigorous scrutiny." Then the battle is lost, because universities, at least in the USA, are the home of "free speech areas" and not letting people speak who a group disagrees with. When people are talking about "safe areas" to p…

> When people are talking about "safe areas" to protect students from words spoken by a speaker, then criticism is dead. I understand what you're getting at, but some people really do have PTSD, and some speeches really do contain things like graphic recountings of abuse. Should those people just not attend university? (I'm actually undecided.)

I guess I am in the minority because I think that the concepts are good and useful in a limited scope but that they're obviously being abused by a cynical group of people to shut up other people they disagree with. Like, you have people arguing with a straight face that Christina-Hoff Sommers even being on their campus makes them feel unsafe. The entire thing has turned into a bizarre group-performativity ritual that has nothing to do with protecting PTSD-sufferers. Trigger warnings are supposed to protect the most vulnerable people from being blindsided, safe spaces are supposed to be places where emphasis is on support. They are not general, universally-applicable concepts.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#104

Post by A_COMPUTER »

ams6110 wrote: post #98
derefr wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That's what I meant in my previous comment when I said 'if you don't like what someone is saying, walk away'. Ah. See, I figured that with something like a graduation speech, 'just walking away' might be a bit fraught: - First, you won't know what the content is until you're already there and hearing the things that could be PTSD-triggering, and by that point you already might be mentally "gone" and unable to escap…

Are we not really reaching here with the graduation speech examples? Every graduation speech I've heard has been little more than encouraging platitudes. Hardly likely to trigger PTSD. When was the last time graphic torture or rape was recounted in a graduation speech?

2003 Rockford College, Christopher Hedges, at the very least, using a graduation speech to talk about the Iraq war and American empire:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BAmkMndtH24

And check out this article for an ironic inversion of politics in the short span of 12 years:

http://www.alternet.org/story/15982/the_silencing_of_dissent...

So you have people on the right were shocked and triggered, screaming at the speaker and pulling the power on his microphone, and people on the left demanded that hard truths must be spoken so suck it up. But I wonder if today he could do this speech without giving trigger warnings for colonialism and war. I wonder if a university would even give him the freedom up front to do a speech without vetting the topic so it couldn't surprise anyone. Is this a price we're willing to pay?

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#105

Post by qu4z-2 »

ForHackernews wrote: post #49
marcosdumay wrote: post #23

What's it with humanities people that make them believe that only them, of all people, are able to do critical thinking? Anyway, the author is part of the problem. Just at the beginning of the article he states that humanities are only good for rich students to pass their time. Until the professors themselves stop thinking this way, no government will prioritize them. (And no, I don't agree that humanities are useles…

At the risk of being overly confrontational, the things that make humanities people believe that they are capable of critical thinking (in contrast to STEM types) are comments like yours. > Just at the beginning of the article he states that humanities are only good for rich students to pass their time Where in the article does the author state or imply this? The section beginning "When I first came to Oxford 30 year…

Thank you for this comment.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#106

Post by angersock »

derefr wrote: post #100
ams6110 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are we not really reaching here with the graduation speech examples? Every graduation speech I've heard has been little more than encouraging platitudes. Hardly likely to trigger PTSD. When was the last time graphic torture or rape was recounted in a graduation speech?

I guess I am reaching. But like I said, I'm looking for a "steelman argument"[1] in favor of the idea of a "safe zone"—a worst-case one-off emergency scenario where it might be warranted to have one. If we can agree that it's warranted in that case, then it becomes a matter of agreeing exactly when it becomes un warranted—which is a much more fact-based debate to have than one where one side just shouts "Freedom of S…

We see what you're trying to do--the problem is that the general "think of the one terrible case" has been tarnished rather heavily in the last decades by people talking about "well, what if it stopped 9/11", or "well, what if it stopped the OKC bombing" and so on and so forth.

The idea of "well, in this one specific extraordinary case it's totally reasonable" is kinda played out among anyone with half a brain, because it's been used to justify so much bullshit.

Also, the entire dichotomy of warranted/unwarranted is suspect, but that's a different rabbit hole altogether.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#107

Post by alextgordon »

kaonashi wrote: post #83
click170 wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When specifically did you gain the right to not be offended? As far as I'm aware, nobody has any such right. If you don't like what someone is saying, walk away.

> When specifically did you gain the right to not be offended That's an unbelievably dismissive view. What makes you think these areas are merely about exclusion from offense?

Universities exist for the benefit of society at large, not for the benefit of individuals.

If people are afraid or forbidden to speak their minds, then the university won't be able to function as a place to advance our understanding of the world.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#108

Post by xmjee »

protomyth wrote: post #46

"It would also seek to restore the honorable lineage of the university as one of the few arenas in modern society (another is the arts) in which prevailing ideologies can be submitted to some rigorous scrutiny." Then the battle is lost, because universities, at least in the USA, are the home of "free speech areas" and not letting people speak who a group disagrees with. When people are talking about "safe areas" to p…

University should be the one place where Crocker's rules apply to all participants BY VIRTUE OF THEIR SIGNING UP FOR UNIVERSITY.

http://sl4.org/crocker.html

If scientific facts (so-called "HateFacts", think Evolutionary Psychology) offend you, it's your problem really.

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#109

Post by 82xx »

reality_czech wrote: post #87
derefr wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not being offended , and not entering a dissociative fugue state and shaking and screaming and muttering for 30 minutes and quite disrupting the speech in the process, are very different things. PTSD is not Tumblr-fairy disease; it's the thing you get from being interned in a POW camp or locked in someone's sex dungeon for months/years. People do have a right to avoid reliving that sort of experience. Which, like I s…

Yes, they are very different things, which is why you are arguing against a strawman. You know perfectly well that letting someone voice his conservative political opinions is not going to trigger PTSD. Pretending to be offended in order to stop the debate is the left's version of invoking terrorism in ridiculous contexts. The biggest irony, which you probably can't even see, is that your own comment is an example of…

What is vile about burning a flag or condoning drug abuse? What does "condoning" mean to you?

Re: The Slow Death of the University

#110

Post by djulius »

jqm wrote: post #85

Some people think debt or decadence will be the end of the West. I personally believe it will be bureaucracy.

Couldn't agree more. For universities, it is the dictature of the accountants. Every penny spent must be checked by an almost infinite hierarchy of accountants/manager who have no experience of the core tasks of a university (teaching/research).

More precisely, I don't know if the hierarchy is finite or not, or if there is a termination problem in the process. Sometimes penny checking finishes, sometimes not.

Post reply on HN