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

291–300 of 444 posts

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

#291

Post by ebola1717 »

vertex-four wrote: post #226
rdtsc wrote: post #144

I remember someone a while back posted a lecture page from CMU. They support Trigger Warnings. And a few papers there had them. It was a database course, I can only imagine "master/slave" terminology. So I was wondering, how are Trigger Warning supposed to work? Can the student refuse to do the required reading and claim full credit because might be triggered, seems like it would open loophole. That was just CS stuff…

Allowing people to ensure that they're in a mental state to handle a topic before they handle it is reasonably important. Mind, in the case of master/slave, the term "trigger warning" is likely misused and a simple statement of "these used to be the standard terms for discussing this, now many people use leader/follower" is reasonable. Explaining historical context to things that may be upsetting can never be a bad t…

Yeah, it seems like CMU was overzealous in how it implemented this policy here. I would be surprised if a lot of students disagreed. It's annoying that people bring up examples like this to dismiss the concepts entirely, because obviously we can and should have a discussion on when they're useful.

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

#292

Post by ebola1717 »

bbctol wrote: post #146
pklausler wrote: post #68

Bad move, Chicago. If the kids don't learn how to use trigger warnings and safe spaces at school, how will they know how to use all of the trigger warnings and safe spaces in the real modern world after they graduate?

Yeah, schools try to emulate the real world as much as possible. That's why they also don't have professors, classes, or dormitories.

That's why the University of Chicago doesn't provide a private police force, and spend its own money to provide a bubble of affluence. You have to face the real harsh poverty and violence of the South Side, just like you would if you actually lived there!

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

#293

Post by dlandis »

mankash666 wrote: post #205

How did universities evolve from spaces meant to evoke controversial and provocative thought (like the birth of the free speech movement at UC Berkeley) to the "safe spaces" of today? If a university is meant to enrich you, one worthy lesson is the ability to "agree to disagree in a cordial fashion". If you disagree or feel threatened by a line of thought, make your voice heard. Receding into a safe space won't prepa…

I think young adults oftentimes mature at a later age nowadays. A 17 year old nowadays may really need safe spaces and may be very traumatized from being confronted by provocative ideas, just as a child would be. It's not really fair to put the burden on the child to simply not be affected; it is the responsibility of the parents and university to teach them how to handle emotions and disagree without shutting down. (I'm not refuting anything you said btw. )

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

#294

Post by stcredzero »

judah wrote: post #69
basseq wrote: post #22

This is tough . With the aspirations of "civility and mutual respect" along with "rigorous debate, discussion, and even disagreement", I would hope any truly egregious edge cases disappear. In the middle, I think people have the right to remove themselves from discussions—civil or otherwise—that they don't want to listen to or engage. But that right doesn't limit others' ability to have those selfsame discussions in…

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…

the University of Chicago's rejection of political correctness is actually a softening of extremism

How about an "arms limitation treaty" between the left and the right in the US? Both sides will give up most of their empirically unsupported, subjective, and intellectually dishonest tactics for muddying the waters and suppressing substantive debate. The left can give up trigger warnings while the right can stop denying climate science.

What we need in the US is a "Groupthink Potlatch." We should have a reality TV show alternative to the mainstream debates where two high profile contestants destroy their own side's intellectually dishonest bullshit. The winner is the one who gives away or destroys the most of their own side's intellectually dishonest bullshit.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potlatch

(Is that cultural appropriation? Heh.)

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

#295

Post by louprado »

My concern with all the attention given to college based safe spaces, trigger warnings, rape culture, social justice, weed culture, athletic program scandals, etc. is that practical minded children from working poor families will just assume college is an alcohol-fueled summer camp for rich kids and jocks that doesn't teach real world skills.

That's what I thought at 16 after seeing Animal House and having never visited a college campus. Fortunately someone insisted engineering is a practical degree that I should consider. But had that person not influenced me, I would have just went to Apex Tech which gives you a box of tools and a "diploma" in 6 weeks.

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

#296

Post by tomohawk »

Larrikin wrote: post #242
judah wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't believe so, no. DePaul claimed they blocked Shapiro from speaking due to "security concerns"[0]. In particular, students in favor of safe spaces and trigger warnings threatened to riot, block the doors, and prevent student access to the event. DePaul capitulated to this bullying by banning Shapiro. Related: California State University-Los Angeles planned on hosting Shapiro to speak, but demanded[1] the studen…

Do you believe that speakers of hate speech should be allowed on campus? I think theres a big difference between speakers you disagree with and the former. I'm a grad student at DePaul at the loop campus so I don't really follow much of what is going on with the undergrads at the main campus, but it seems to me that the administration is taking a hard stance because of people like Milo who are mostly there for shock…

That's a pretty strong accusation. If you're going to label someone as a hater, at least provide some references. Otherwise, you come across as the hater, with at least the appearance of making baseless claims.

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

#297

Post by Torgo »

rayiner wrote: post #268
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. That's an ideal that was never really true. Historically, a major function of universities has been being places where white male elites could congregate and maintain their power by excluding others: http://www.businessinsider.com/the-ivy-leagues-history-of-di... . I'm not a supporter of the movement to stamp out uncomfortable ide…

They will be even better when we don't infantilize minorities by acting like we need the degenerated versions of these concepts.

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

#298

Post by 1_2__3 »

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…

You are arguing for vocational institutions. They already exist, and they are not universities.

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

#299

Post by ebola1717 »

jackcosgrove wrote: post #287
ebola1717 wrote: post #281

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please show me an accredited University that has done that. This is not a view any university shares, for good reason.

Not exactly the same, but Northwestern U has an avowed Holocaust denier on its faculty who is protected by tenure. Institutions matter more than shared values sometimes.

Contingent on the fact that: "Butz has made clear that his opinions are his own and at no time has he discussed those views in class or made them part of his class curriculum." If he were to represent his opinions as the views of the University, or in the classroom, they would remove him.

To me, that seems not only consistent with the principle of a "safe space," but the definition of it.

NU also supports safe spaces: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-to-create-inclus...

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

#300

Post by stcredzero »

mcphage wrote: post #184
acbabis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Many news outlets will say "Warning, the following story contains graphic imagery," and people don't think this is unreasonable; nor do they expect more specific content warnings in the future. This tells me it's possible to be considerate of common triggers while still drawing the line somewhere

> This tells me it's possible to be considerate of common triggers while still drawing the line somewhere I agree it is, but right now it's very difficult to have the discussions necessary to draw those lines—supporters of trigger warnings only want to discuss the cases where they're clearly justified (fireworks & veterans) and pretend all uses are similarly valid, and critics of trigger warnings only want to discuss…

I agree it is, but right now it's very difficult to have the discussions necessary to draw those lines

When something is 1) subjective or very hard to measure and 2) used as an emotional bludgeon then then people are going to call "shenanigans" and even start to exhibit knee-jerk doubt about such things. Often, this is a tragedy, as the issues may well be both real and difficult to discuss.

The quality of such debate and discussion has been hurt by the "Eternal September" nature of online discussion. The internet gives everyone a voice, especially if you have time to waste. Hence, clueless Freshmen and middle-schoolers have disproportionately loud voices online.

Post reply on HN