This is OK,
This is not,
Posted on 03/09/2016 11:28:29 AM PST by Academiadotorg
For some time now, sages and scholars have been alleging that so-called "trigger warnings" curtail vigorous debate on campus. It turns out that the allegation is more than mere hyperbole.
"In college debate, which, unlike high school debate, is mostly student-run, it is a common practice to give trigger warnings before discussing 'sensitive' topics, and if a debater requests it, the topic must be changed," Daniel Charnis wrote in a special supplement to The Chronicle of Higher Education. "In addition, each tournament designates an 'equity officer,' who is also a student debater, to ensure that all debaters are given equal opportunity to compete." Charnis, a freshman computer science-math major at Columbia, is on the university's debating team.
"Within the American Parliamentary Association, trigger warnings have become a popular way to preface a debate that could involve emotionally disturbing content," Leah Block wrote in that same supplement. Block is a sophomore English major at NYU, who is on that university's debate team.
The two faced off against each other in a debate over physician-assisted suicide. Block's side objected to the topic, in part, because of her experience with suicide, which she wrote about in The Chronicle.
Yet and still, such policies usually stem from worse case scenarios but quickly become a standard practice in which censorship is imposed for many varieties of offense.
#thetriggering is trending on Twitter right now and it’s hilarious.
“The two faced off against each other in a debate over physician-assisted suicide. Block’s side objected to the topic, in part, because of her experience with suicide, which she wrote about in The Chronicle.”
Stupid. A good debater would use their personal experience with a topic to their advantage, by personalizing their arguments for greater impact.
Apparently that gets a big “nuh uh”. See this post:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3406980/posts
Now those are “real” trigger warnings. LOL!
Just as long as everybody gets a participation trophy, it’ll be just fine. . .
Block's side objected to the topic, in part, because of her experience with suicide...
Apparently, Block is a failure at everything she tries.
Bump that...fun way to slap a snowflake up side their worthless heads...
Maybe she can get a participation trophy? Instead of the three monkeys - see, hear, speak, it could feature a monkey holding a pistol to its temple, a noose around the neck of the second, and finally, the last monkey downing a pill bottle?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, OR NOT:
This is OK,
This is not,
That’s the intent of them.
Funniest mag cover ever.
Wasn’t PJ O’Rourke efitor of NL then?
bump for later
“THAT EVERYONE ELSE is endowed by RANDOM CHANCE”
Regarding “random chance”... I was re-reading Heinlein’s “Stranger in a Strange Land” the other day and I happened on this great quote about “random chance”:
“No, he could not swallow the “just-happened” theory, popular as it was with men who called themselves scientists. Random chance was not a sufficient explanation of the Universe—random chance was not sufficient to explain random chance; the pot could not hold itself.”
And those were the thoughts of a cynical agnostic character :)
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
