Everyone is supposed to go to college. Very few people find it personally and occupationally fulfilling to flip burgers for a living, so many opt for higher education. You get to leave the nest, meet new people, and have new experiences. The fallout from these experiences is exactly what this paper is going to talk about. Not everyone’s background is the same and some people are just dealt a bad hand, emotionally and psychologically. For these people, seeing and hearing things that most people would look at as being unpleasant, and coming from the minds of dead people that lived thousands of years, can bring trauma and embarrassment when mixed with the right circumstances. At Colombia University in New York, situations like these are being addressed by a call for “Trigger Warnings.” Trigger warnings, according to Dictionary.com are “a stated warning that the content of a text, video, etc., may upset or offend some people, especially those who have previously experienced a related trauma.” These kinds of warning have proponents and opponents on both sides …show more content…
There are some very good reasons why you might want to ditch the idea of using trigger warnings. The biggest issue being that if you are being triggered by something in a college level class, you don’t need the school to step up and take care of you, you should be going to therapy. The class reading by Sarah Roff told us that one of the hallmarks of PTSD is avoidance. For example, if you’ve had something so traumatic happen you that you get PTSD from it, you’ll go out of your way to avoid situations that remind you of that event. By offering a trigger warning, the school becomes complicit in fostering an environment that makes it easier to not seek treatment. On these grounds it becomes a moral issue. The world can be a terrible place and if you are in no shape to be looking at parts of it, you should take some time off until you are ready for
In Kate Manne’s article “Why I Use Trigger Warnings”, she argues that trigger warnings are an important feature to incorporate in an educator’s curriculum, but not as a safety cushion for millennials to fall on to avoid work and serious or uncomfortable topics. Using PTSD studies along with failed tests of exposure therapy for the foundation of her points, she explains that trigger warnings can help mentally prepare a student for what they are about to read instead of blindsiding them and throwing them into a potentially anxiety-induced state where they can’t focus. Manne also brings up how people can react when reading political or religious material in comparison towards reading possibly triggering material in order to differentiate between
First they explain how students have recently started expecting that their professors publish trigger warnings, alerts that students expect with anything that may cause distress, in the name of protecting students who may be reminded of trauma by being exposed to certain topics. While proving the fallacies in the concept of trigger warnings, Lukianoff and Haidt quote Harvard professor, Jeannie Suk 's essay about teaching rape law when students are determined to have protection from unpleasant ideas and demand trigger warnings. She says it is like trying to teach “a medical student who is training to be a surgeon but who fears that he 'll become distressed at the sight of blood (48).” This shows how the students’ desire for protection cause difficulties in teaching for
The authors of “Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, use ethos, logos, and pathos convey their negative stance regarding trigger warnings and the effect they on education. Lukianoff and Haidt’s use of rhetorical appeal throughout the article adds to the author’s credibility and the strength of the argument against increasing the use of trigger warnings in school material. The authors, Lukianoff and Haidt, rely heavily upon the use of logos, such as relations between conflicts surrounding trigger warnings and other historical conflicts impacting student ethics. Examples of the use of these logical appeals are the relation between the Columbine Massacre and the younger generations ideology. The author goes on to mention other societal turning points such
Although trigger warnings sound like a harmless idea to many, there is an extreme controversy about whether or not they should be used in college lectures. Many college professors have conflicting views about trigger warnings; some agree on using them while others are against it. This debate topic is particularly intriguing in Kate Manne’s article in the New York Times titled, “Why I Use Trigger
They should start discussions about rape and sexist cases because it’s going on in today’s society and for people to know it’s okay to talk about it if it ever happened to them. Colleges need to prepare students for the real word so they need to have real life discussions in class for the students that are growing up and entering the workforce. College campuses are going through the mircoagression theory and professors fear to talk about trigger warnings in class when both students and professors should have freedom of speech in classrooms. “One of my biggest concerns about trigger warnings,” Roff wrote, “is that they will apply not just to those who have experienced trauma, but to all students, creating an atmosphere in which they are encouraged to believe that there is something dangerous or damaging about discussing difficult aspects of our history.” (49). Professors try to avoid teaching material that will upset sensitive students, but instead they should start warning students about the materials they are going to teach and set boundaries so students can know what they are about to learn to prevent teachers from getting in trouble or risk getting fired from their
Teachers become afraid to challenges students values and beliefs, also creating a repressive area for debates. The article “On Trigger Warnings” by the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) states that “the presumption that need to be protected rather than challenged in a classroom is at once infantilizing and anti-intellectual”. Demanding trigger warnings make comfort more of a priority than learning. Faculty may feel like they need to warn students about the course material because some students might find it disconcerting, but the voluntary use of trigger warnings on syllabus could be counterproductive. Just because some material may cause one person to have trauma does not mean everyone will and by putting a trigger warning on the syllabus might cause others to expect something upsetting. This could cause students to not read assignments or it might provoke a response from students they otherwise would not have had. Trigger warnings also signal an expected response and discourage the reading experience and even eliminate spontaneity. Trigger warnings make students into victims and makes both teachers and students fearful to ask questions because it might make someone uncomfortable. The goal is to educate and challenge students, make students question things and debate on things that they normally do not think about. AAUP also says that “the call for trigger warnings comes
The author argues that the use of “trigger warnings” should not become a policy due to the student becoming uncomfortable over a certain lesson in class. The argument is effective in parts, but not as a whole. What about the students who actually are medically unable to deal with a lesson in class due to PTSD? This editorial really only showed the bad side of trigger warnings inside colleges classes instead of showing the pros and the cons like most would. Some people claim that the addition of trigger warnings would not affect a college student’s ability to complete the work. It would also be difficult to do well on parts of a test unless they have a friend who will attend class still and take notes for them. Over all, trigger warnings are not completely bad, but they can most definitely be taken advantage of by students who do not want to go to classes one
According to The Coddling of the American Mind, trigger warnings and microaggressions confine professors’ and well-educated adults’ unalienable right of speech; furthermore, they can impact one’s health. Protecting rights have a unison consensus; the authors unite them and the audience together to persuade the well-educated adults to protest the use of trigger warnings and microaggressions. While concluding that vindictive protectiveness is the reason for trigger warnings and microaggressions Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt state, “A campus culture devoted to policing speech and punishing speakers is likely to engender patterns of thought that are surprisingly similar to those long identified by cognitive behavioral therapists as causes of depression and anxiety.” (45) The word “policing” holds a negative connotation implying regulation, and no one wants their first amendment right of free speech stolen from them. Also the idea that trigger warnings and microaggressions may lead to depression and anxiety gives more logical reasoning to end trigger warnings and microaggressions in higher level education. When the authors specify the change that colleges should make, Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt write their idea of the purpose of college, “Rather than
In the article The Coddling of the American Mind by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt, the authors go into great detail of describing the effects of trigger warnings. Using real world examples, Lukianoff and Haidt describes how college students are oversensitive and carried along the school year. The authors explain how this is a negative thing for the college students going into the work force in the future.
It is a sad time in American history when one can easily recount recent school shootings in their own area. This ease stems from a sharp increase in the number of firearms brought into elementary and middle schools across the country, with an intense focus on the issue beginning after the shooting of 20 children from Sandy Hook Elementary in Connecticut. Most school shooters are male, white, and often upper middle class. They are also more, often than not, under some type of mental stress that is causing them to create this type of violence in our communities. In fact, many school shooters are never suspected of doing any harm to their peers and teachers until it is much too late.
Trigger warnings? Some may say necessary while others think of it as people being weak. Imagine sitting in a class and the topic at hand is the war. The professor without giving any warning decides to show a video of the gruesome war. Little did they know in their class sits a student who has just returned from the war and wanted to push their life forward. By not giving this warning, the student freaked out and caused a whole disruption. They managed to calm him down and tired to continue the lesson. Now would you be comfortable to continue the lesson after a huge disruption, or do you think that even a little warning in the beginning of class could have prevented this? Trigger warnings help even in the smallest ways. Trigger warnings are
Violence in the United States is a major problem, but our politicians only want to focus on gun violence, and some of them believe the solution to ending gun violence is by preventing law abiding citizens from exercising their second amendment rights. Guns are easier to commit a crime with than other weapons, or without a weapon at all, but with an estimated 270 million guns the hands of citizens (11 facts), if they were the problem we would know it by now. It is undeniable that guns are responsible for a high amount of crime, but we already have tens of thousands of gun laws in the United States (How many gun laws are there?), that haven’t been able to curb gun violence. If the current laws were working, then maybe there would be a reasonable
In light of recent tragic events, gun control is once again an important topic of conversation. Both left and right wing individuals attempt to sway society towards their sides of the argument. These debates almost always follow the occurrence of a major attack on innocent persons. The questions are always the same. How did the individual obtain a firearm? What measurements are in place to keep this from happening again? Why does the average person need to own an “assault rifle’’? Why don’t we just ban everyone in the country from owning guns? In order to get a better understanding of the topic of gun control, we will have to explore these major questions.
Over the years, the cost of college tuition has been one of the central issues limiting students, like me, from obtaining the best education that one could receive. Usually, this results in students settling for a school nearby rather than being able to have the choice to go to the best one in which they were accepted into, due to such skyrocket prices. Much of this problem or concern has to do with out-of-state tuition being much higher than in-state tuition, sometimes almost doubling the price of in-state tuition! Therefore, students are more pressured to remain in state rather than go to out-of-state schools that may offer a better education.
Global security is an extraordinarily imperative idea when it comes to public safety. The purpose of global security is to protect the interests of the public. When viewing this through the lens of public and private relationships, it is effortless to see how the two walk hand in hand when it comes to trying to achieve global security. Global security is a relevant concept because the people of the United States need to be protected at all costs. Along with protecting the public, the government also needs to protect the interests of itself. To achieve global security by way of protecting the public, the government works endlessly to ensure public safety.