"Please don't use uppercase for emphasis." https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Fixed, but I really did want to yell.
University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
51–60 of 444 posts
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
I can't decide whether or not I'm playing devil's advocate with this question. In any case, please don't take it too seriously, but I think it might be interesting. Why did you not include a trigger warning about the discussion of rape in your comment?
Mentioning the word rape is not a discussion of rape.
The article links to another on teaching rape law to criminal-law students.[1] From that article:
One teacher I know was recently asked by a student not
to use the word “violate” in class—as in “Does this
conduct violate the law?”—because the word was
triggering.
[1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rap...
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
So student associations shouldn't be allowed to not allow certain people into their meetings if they're found to be abusive? Because that's the point of a safe space if you didn't know. It's not unlike support groups who can and will eject people who are known to be abusive or otherwise disclose information outside the support group without permission of all members. So, to say that safe spaces shouldn't be allowed i…
No, because the statement expressly says "freedom of expression does not mean the freedom to harass or threaten others."
Another example, corrupted people in power was often harassed and threaten by someone else, like musicians and poets, they harassed government for thousands of years. If you change definition of freedom you will empower political census to exploit and shutdown criticism, this is essential part of democracy, even ancient Romans did it. do not help ruin it
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#54They don't want students to have any spaces where they feel safe/accepted? That's weird.
> They don't want students to have any spaces where they feel safe/accepted? That's weird. Why would a student need a special space to feel safe/accepted? Doesn't the university already provide students basic safety?
You'd think that students should be able to feel safe at least somewhere on campus! But apparently they don't accept that.
I certainly understand and agree with the need for the university as a whole being a place where students with differing views and identities discuss and debate each other. But it is also necessary to the spirit of inquiry for like-minded people to be able to enjoy the freedom of association and speech. Just as I wouldn't want certain "safe spaces" to overtake the university as a whole, I wouldn't want them to be eliminated either.
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#55Earlier quoted context omitted.
"Mention of rape" and "discussion of rape in enough detail to cause discomfort" are not the same thing.
I'm sure we can find someone who is uncomfortable at the mere mention of the word. Not that we should necessarily accommodate such extremes, but how do you decide where to draw the line?
You guess and invite people to correct you if you're wrong? How is anything that requires judgement decided? Eventually there will be an accepted norm but at the beginning there never is.
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#56Earlier quoted context omitted.
> What I don't get about this is why trigger warnings and safe spaces always seem to get lumped together in discussions like this. Because they are involve quite similar problems (safe for whom and from what ? Warnings for which specific of the billions of potential PTSD triggers ?) and are typically advocated for together, by the same people, as linked demands, to serve similar broad purposes. > But trigger warnings…
I think you're making this way more complicated than it needs to be. The point of extending the courtesy of trigger warnings isn't that you will, with 100% certainty, prevent anyone from entering a state of psychological distress. That's obviously not attainable. But let's not let the perfect be the enemy of the good. There's really obvious stuff that instructors could warn about, but aren't. After I posted a similar…
I think that many of the arguments again safe spaces, trigger warnings, and actually most things are subject to the Nirvana Fallacy [1].
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#57Education, at its best, is dangerous. There's no way around that.
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#58Am I missing something, or doesn't safe space just = Library / Dorm room ? Maybe add some headphones so you can't hear anything....
[deleted]
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#59Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'd argue that it's equally as impossible to set up trigger warning policies. While some trigger warning like the ones you mentioned are valid, the term has been perverted to include all sorts of things[0] where you could get in trouble for talking in public about insects or needles. It's an impossible task to list out and educate people on everything that might possible trouble or offend. Once you open that door, th…
You don't need a trigger warning policy, necessarily. Just a culture that promotes being aware of common triggers. This notice goes in the opposite direction. >It's an impossible task to list out and educate people on everything that might possible trouble or offend. Once you open that door, there is no finite end to a list of triggers. It's not necessary to exhaust the full list. Analogously: it's impossible to list…
What is really needed is the common sense and personal decision to get help with issues which are distressing so that reminders of those issues doesn't cause anxiety, stress, or a break-down.
Re: University of Chicago: ‘We Do Not Support So-Called Trigger Warnings’
#60What I find rather interesting, is that throughout human history we never had a need for trigger warnings until now. We've had slavery, 2 world wars, famine, countless horrors inflicted on a countless number of people. Nobody asks for it.
Then I look to the third world there we have things like female genital mutilation, are the women who had that horror put upon them concerned with trigger warnings? Nope. Not as far as I can tell.
Why here, why now? Are modern first world citizens mentally weaker somehow? I posit that it these types of policies may do more harm than good long term.