Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essays on academic freedom
Essays on academic freedom
Essays on academic freedom
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essays on academic freedom
In recent years, the topic of political correctness has made headlines throughout the country. It is not uncommon for the topic of political correctness on college campuses to be very controversial. In fact, the topic is becoming a widespread dilemma that is continuously unfolding for our generation because of the uncertainty of the question, “where should the line be drawn?”. Political correctness is defined as agreeing with the idea that people should be careful to not use language or behave in a way that could offend a particular group of people. As stated by Sam Wright, “It’s causing people to pause and think about how their words affect others when, in the past, they’ve never had reason to pause and think before speaking. Yes, sometimes …show more content…
people get carried away and cross the line. But the law gives us tools for dealing with this!”(Sam Wright). He is acknowledging that people should have a filter because many people get carried away with derogatory terms that they might not see as a problem. College campuses across the United States have been battling in what may begin to seem like a culture war. The topic of political correctness on colleges and universities spark debates about racism, religion, and sexual preferences, these are subjects that have shined a light on issues that we unfortunately still face in today’s society. To begin with, in the previous year, numerous amount of complaints from the University of Missouri have come to light as student gather to protest against racist encounters against African American students.
In midst of the students trying to voice their opinions about the issues to bring change and equality, the president of the university Tim Wolfe resigned on November 9th. The students who protested where asking for change in order to feel safe on their university. The president Tim Wolfe apparently fell into the same system of not trying to make a change on the campus after several serious racial complaints had been made. The protestors amplified their views by voicing their opinions on the lack administrative power to help stop the constant acts of racist remarks. Attending college should be an experience that will make a graduate feel accomplished and content with the memories they made along the way, it should not bring the burden of knowing that there is still a racist culture with the lack of humanity. Yet, there are people who call the protestors names, such as “winey babies” and believe that they are college liberals being extremely sensitive. In the following quote by Lindy West from her article, "'Political Correctness' Doesn't Hinder Free Speech, It Expands It, she explains her views about racially oppressed groups being called oversensitive for matters they believe is wrong and are fighting for a change, “The punchlines are punching back. But it’s much easier …show more content…
to ignore your complicity in oppressive systems if you can cast the people who have been legitimately harmed as “oversensitive” (Lindy West). Arguably, there is a point when people should begin to draw the line when almost everything said or done begins to become a problem. On an article written by Katherine Timf, she lists out instances where political correctness went overboard. For instance, there’s a guide called “The Bias Free Language Guide” that deliberate states that the use of the world American was very problematic because it causes offense to non-Americans who live in America and because it also excludes people from South America. Another outrageous politically correct instant was when it was declared sexist to dislike pumpkin spice lattes as stated by Min Cheng who wrote it on Swarthmore College’s student paper. Political correctness should be focused on real troubling issues with a bigger picture. With this in mind, the act of being politically correct on campus only encourages the student body to be mindful and considerate of racially and historically oppressed groups.
It will not hinder the freedom of speech because it allows for the avoidance of the act of hate to be channeled. Racism is an ongoing issue that needs to be stopped immediately because everyone should be treated equal and it should never be based on the color of one’s skin. “If you’re genuinely concerned about “free speech”, take a step back and look at what’s actually happening here: a bunch of college students, on the cusp of finding their voices, being publicly berated by high-profile writers in national publications because they don’t like what they have to say. Are you sure you know who’s silencing whom?”(Lindy West), this powerful quote is reaffirming the why student bodies are voicing their opinions through protest. There’s a bigger issue that is still among us so, don’t miss the forest for the trees. Political correctness should be focused on real troubling issues with a bigger picture as stated above, but it will ultimately offended people who agree with systematic racism, and free speech will not be interrupted in any
way.
In 1994 Renown College Professor Nikki Giovanni published a breath taking book that contains guidance to black college students on how to academically apply their selves in College, and she teaches them how to deal with the ignorance of white people from sharp tonged comebacks to gaining a Professors respect. Along the way The Article “Campus Racism 101” states Giovanni has acquired a tenure, she has a teaching position for life at the predominately white student body Virginia Tech. (Writing on the River 11) Nikki Giovanni’s “Campus Racism 101” gives advice to black students on how to succeed in College, appeals to Giovanni’s credibility, and appeals to the emotions of racism all in order to educate how black College students need to deal with ignorance on a College campus.
Although some like Conor Friedersdorf, of the Atlantic, categorized students as “intolerant bullies, (34)” meaning that the reasons for protests were not really reasons at all. Chang argues that the issues students are expressing need to be improved upon as if not, we will continue to go round and round in this vicious cycle. The addition of the apartheid in South Africa backs up Chang’s argument as there is a consensus of it being a serious issue. This explains why he included this piece of history and how it relates to college campuses. Encouraging critics to listen to students, just as Meyer did to those of color, is the only way to prevent today's youth from bring up the same issues in future years. Just as Chang predicted, the next school year brought protesters to hundreds of colleges and universities. What happened at Mizzou was just the beginning of a country wide movement for racial justice on campuses that hasn’t stopped
Finally what followed was a short question and answer section. Professor Ira Berlin was so excited about getting food at the following reception that he had to be reminded about the questioning section. How much compassion does that show I wondered? I observed that most of the questions Professor Berlin received were from African-American’s though their presence in the lecture was towards the bottom of the spectrum. The majority of questions that were being asked inferred the level of political correctness in the way in which Berlin addressed certain racial issues. It seemed as though the questions were rather insignificant and that the questioners knew the answers they’d receive before they asked them. After all, wasn’t everyone in that room that attended voluntarily there for the same general cause?
Political turmoil on campus began in 1968 when a Black Panther member, George Murray, was dismissed from school, and student militants called a strike. Using terrorist tactics, these groups intimidated and physically threatened students and professors if they crossed the picket line. Some of their demands included the formulation of an autonomous black studies department, promotion to full professor of a faculty member who had one year's experience, the firing of a white administrator, and the admission of all black students who applied for the next academic year.
College is full of new experiences, new people, and new communities, and many universities encourage the exchange of new ideas and diversity among students. This year, the University of Chicago sent out a letter to all of its incoming freshmen informing them that in keeping with their beliefs of freedom of expression and healthy discussion and debate, the school would not provide “safe spaces” or “trigger warnings”. Senior Sophie Downes found this letter to be misleading in many ways, including in the definitions of safe spaces and trigger warnings, as well as the issues it was addressing. Downes claims that the letter was misrepresenting the school, but also was using the letter as a sort
Charles R. Lawrence intended audience in his article “On Racist Speech” is college students and universities. His sense of tone is forthcoming. Lawerence word choice sets the tone by using the words conspicuous,dissenter, and bigot. The article gives examples of how universities do not protect minority college students. Lawrence states that universities should protect their students He also gives an example of how universities have tried to have rules to ban racist speech yet they have proven ineffective in stopping racial slurs. The regulations have not stopped the verbal brutality yet it has stopped the occurrences of physical fights. He mentions how students do not have any need to be hurt verbally.
We appealed to this topic personally because of everything we see nowadays starting off with the election, all the way to how people choose to express themselves these days. Freedom of speech is encouraged in this country, but can having full freedom of speech affect us more positive
In the editorial “Coddling of the American Mind,” Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt examine the political correctness on college campuses and how it may be hurting students’ mental health. They explain by allowing campuses to discuss words, ideas, and subjects that can cause discomfort or give offense can provide positive attributes like helping students to produce better arguments and more productive discussions over differences. Does Lukianoff and Haidt provide sufficient evidence about how college campuses should raise attention about the need to balance freedom of speech to help students in their future and education to lead the reader to agree with their argument? The answer is yes,
"Protecting Freedom of Expression on the Campus” by Derek Bok, published in Boston Globe in 1991, is an essay about what we should do when we are faced with expressions that are offensive to some people. The author discusses that although the First Amendment may protect our speech, but that does not mean it protects our speech if we use it immorally and inappropriately. The author claims that when people do things such as hanging the Confederate flag, “they would upset many fellow students and ignore the decent regard for the feelings of others” (70). The author discusses how this issue has approached Supreme Court and how the Supreme Court backs up the First Amendment and if it offends any groups, it does not affect the fact that everyone has his or her own freedom of speech. The author discusses how censorship may not be the way to go, because it might bring unwanted attention that would only make more devastating situations. The author believes the best solutions to these kind of situations would be to
Benjamin Franklin once said, “Without freedom of thought, there can be no such thing as wisdom; and no such thing as public liberty, without freedom of speech.” Indeed, free speech is a large block upon which this nation was first constructed, and remains a hard staple of America today; and in few places is that freedom more often utilized than on a college campus. However, there are limitations to our constitutional liberties on campus and they, most frequently, manifest themselves in the form of free speech zones, hate speech and poor university policy. Most school codes are designed to protect students, protect educators and to promote a stable, non-disruptive and non-threatening learning environment. However, students’ verbal freedom becomes limited via “free speech zones.” Free Speech Zones are areas allocated for the purpose of free speech on campus. These zones bypass our constitutional right to freedom of speech by dictating where and when something can be said, but not what can be said.
Charles R. Lawrence III adresses the matter in his essay “The Debate over Placing Limits on Racist Speech Must Not Ignore the Damage It Does to Its Victims,” by providing the perspective of those on the reciving end. He explains that “racial slurs are particularly undeserving of First Amendment protection because the perpetuator’s intention is not to discover truth or initiate dialoge, but to injure the victim” (628). This argument is justified because some people do take their freedom of speech as far as offending someone because of their race, cultural, and social beliefs. As Cinnamon Stillwell proved in her essay, “Mob Rule on College Campuses,” some students do become bullies when their beliefs are challenged. Stillwell illistrates a situation that occurred at Columbia University when conservative Jim Gilchrist was invited to speak but was unable to because rioting students did not allow him. Stillwell then goes on to say that “Apparently in their minds, niether Gilchrist nor anyone else with whom they disagree has the right to express their viewpoints” (623). This can be applied to both sides because both of them seem to believe that the opposing belief has no right to speak especially when it is controversial. Lawrence mentions that “whenever we decide that racist speech must be tolerated because of the
Unlike many other countries America has freedom of speech. Even in other countries in Europe people are not allowed to use “hate speech” and they can be sent to prison for it. Fortunately, the American constitution defends people’s freedom of speech, no matter how controversial it is. Political correctness diminishes people’s free speech. It may not be direct but even indirectly the knowledge that someone might have adverse consequences; such as losing a job as a result of their speech is unacceptable. People have the right to state their opinions without others infringing on them, it was the principle in which America was founded. The first amendment of the constitution of the United States declares that: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” (US Const. amend. I, sec. i). While the first amendment only affects congress’s control over free speech, it indicates that free speech is a right that people must have. Some people are of the opinion that if something can be found offensive
In the United States, free speech is protected by the First Amendment in which it states, “Congress shall make no laws respecting an establishment of religion … or abridging the freedom of speech.” Now, nearly 250 years into the future, the exact thing that the Founding Fathers were afraid of is starting to happen. Today, our freedom of speech is being threatened through different forces, such as the tyranny of the majority, the protection of the minority, and the stability of the society. Now, colleges and universities in the United States today are also trying to institute a code upon its students that would bar them from exercising their right to speak freely in the name of protecting minorities from getting bullied. This brings us into
...2009) political correctness build an inclusive society in which people from diverse backgrounds are offered equal opportunities. Another article that defend political correctness talk about the people who are against this movement don’t want to be polite or civil to the people different from them, the important thing to this people is to do what they want when they want even though they used hurtful word they don’t care(angry black woman 2007). This article end by saying political correctness is very important to the language and we need to fight for it so let’s make sure people use it. Allan Goldstein has the same opinion as the two authors before he said that ” political correctness is a small price to pay for keeping the peace between large groups of outraged people” he means people don’t like political correctness but we need it so the people can live peacely.
Race relations are always a scary or uncomfortable topic for people to discuss amongst groups of different ethnicities and racial identities. It is a long standing tradition in the United States to walk a fine line and use politically correct terms in the above mentioned setting but to feel perfectly comfortable to speak freely when in a setting surrounded by likeminded people who share similar political affiliations and race. This is the main reason discussions surrounding the idea of race are too often avoided in today’s school systems and in society in general. If we are to encourage our students and children to be free thinking future citizens of our global society, we must first become one ourselves. The only way to accomplish this