First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
Post Reply Political correctness stifling quality of liberal arts education?
28528 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

Morbidhanson wrote:

I think it affects the quality of all education when the students themselves are so intolerant and so uppity that they're focusing on political correctness in school rather than education. Of course teachers should be professional and respectful, but that is secondary to the purpose of school. People complaining about political correctness when they've grown up without having experienced any hardships worth mentioning is silly. I think it's less about how they care about the minorities and the outcasts, more about how they want to feel like good people who are smart. Proper words are less important than proper actions and fruitful results.

This generation is soft, there's no doubt about that in my mind. It will come back to bite us later on if we don't condition ourselves to have the proper mindset early on.


In my experience (at least through high school), it's less that the students are all innately special snowflakes, and more that the parents can't bare to think their little angels might get their feelings a little hurt by some reality. There were plenty of long debates on religion or ethics in class, and the only ones complaining were the parents. The students were actually paying attention.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15

anleval wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

I think it affects the quality of all education when the students themselves are so intolerant and so uppity that they're focusing on political correctness in school rather than education. Of course teachers should be professional and respectful, but that is secondary to the purpose of school. People complaining about political correctness when they've grown up without having experienced any hardships worth mentioning is silly. I think it's less about how they care about the minorities and the outcasts, more about how they want to feel like good people who are smart. Proper words are less important than proper actions and fruitful results.

This generation is soft, there's no doubt about that in my mind. It will come back to bite us later on if we don't condition ourselves to have the proper mindset early on.


In my experience (at least through high school), it's less that the students are all innately special snowflakes, and more that the parents can't bare to think their little angels might get their feelings a little hurt by some reality. There were plenty of long debates on religion or ethics in class, and the only ones complaining were the parents. The students were actually paying attention.


From my experiences, students today are harder to keep in line than students from my generation when I was in the same grade. Perhaps it's just this area, perhaps not. I hope it is just my area. It seems that it's not just the parents being overprotective around here but also a shift in the general attitude of the students. They are less humble and less likely to listen without questioning or complaining even though they are like 10 years old. I have a good relationship with some of my old teachers and their testimony seems consistent with my observations.
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15
I suppose my contribution would be that while the OP is right in saying that uncomfortable, perhaps even offensive topics necessarily must be explored, and that dissenting, perhaps even offensive opinions necessarily must be heard/read, I have my doubts that students in tertiary institutions are genuinely unwilling to confront such material or opinions.

I'll double down by pointing out that academic conventions can transform into shouting matches, and that if a professor is truly afraid of being lashed out at by a student they need to toughen up and be more prepared to kick someone out of class for being disruptive.
51156 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
20 / M
Offline
Posted 6/8/15
You people need to stop giving the troll so much attention.
28528 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

Morbidhanson wrote:


anleval wrote:


Morbidhanson wrote:

I think it affects the quality of all education when the students themselves are so intolerant and so uppity that they're focusing on political correctness in school rather than education. Of course teachers should be professional and respectful, but that is secondary to the purpose of school. People complaining about political correctness when they've grown up without having experienced any hardships worth mentioning is silly. I think it's less about how they care about the minorities and the outcasts, more about how they want to feel like good people who are smart. Proper words are less important than proper actions and fruitful results.

This generation is soft, there's no doubt about that in my mind. It will come back to bite us later on if we don't condition ourselves to have the proper mindset early on.


In my experience (at least through high school), it's less that the students are all innately special snowflakes, and more that the parents can't bare to think their little angels might get their feelings a little hurt by some reality. There were plenty of long debates on religion or ethics in class, and the only ones complaining were the parents. The students were actually paying attention.


From my experiences, students today are harder to keep in line than students from my generation when I was in the same grade. Perhaps it's just this area, perhaps not. I hope it is just my area. It seems that it's not just the parents being overprotective around here but also a shift in the general attitude of the students. They are less humble and less likely to listen without questioning or complaining even though they are like 10 years old.


The 10 year olds will sit down and listen just fine. Once they get to being teenagers, after learning the same things every year, they start to notice the school system isn't taking them seriously, and their parents aren't willing to let them learn about anything that could hurt them. That's why I said they <i>actually</i> payed attention when the teacher got to talking about and discussing a more mature subject.
11660 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / M / Cali
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15
*cough cough*

Under the first amendment to the United States Constitution, I am allowed to say that I don't support gay marriage, and I love gay people.

*Response from "politically correct" tumblr teens*

Wow, you're a terrible person. Being gay isn't a choice! You're homophobic!

*My reaction*

..people don't think, do they?
27705 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M / TX
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15

ayesharocks wrote:


Not only is it not nice, but if you REALLY want to say it, then you shouldn't be white. White people cannot say this word at all due to the fact that the slave owners were white and only white. Colored people sorta can say it since colored people were not slave owners.


I would humbly disagree with 90% of your response.
I agree the word itself is not nice. You can't choose what color your born. In the Us yes whites were the majority of slave owners but I would point out who help capture them and sell them in the first place. I would recommend reading the following if it interest you
http://historynewsnetwork.org/article/41431



As for its ok for blacks to used the word because they did not own slaves. I would suggest reading this article, you won't see anyone teaching this in schools. As for the word itself if white or any other race can't use it then none should I believe if its not ok for one group then its not ok for any group.
http://www.theroot.com/articles/history/2013/03/black_slave_owners_did_they_exist.html

Finally please don't take any of this the wrong way I simply think that freedom means being able to used words that are hurtful even if I disagree with them.

As for the topic the PC crowd are quite thin skin and I will leave it at that.
17065 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / Fredericton, NB
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

BlueOni wrote:

I suppose my contribution would be that while the OP is right in saying that uncomfortable, perhaps even offensive topics necessarily must be explored, and that dissenting, perhaps even offensive opinions necessarily must be heard/read, I have my doubts that students in tertiary institutions are genuinely unwilling to confront such material or opinions.

I'll double down by pointing out that academic conventions can transform into shouting matches, and that if a professor is truly afraid of being lashed out at by a student they need to toughen up and be more prepared to kick someone out of class for being disruptive.


No doubt that most aren't genuinely unwilling to confront such material. I would think the professor is this such case's issue is that for professors not on tenure, so much as a few complaints, and the professor might not get rehired. The pool of applicants is so large that they can toss aside such professors rather easily. This is probably what led to this ones fear. One's with tenure are however, untouchable, but that's a whole different issue there.

That's certainly a valid point too, I've heard a few interesting stories from a friend of mine who was studying liberal arts at a nearby university. This one student and the professor occasionally got into 20 minute long arguing/shouting matches. I think the fear thing comes up again, that they might not get rehired if a student complains they were kicked out.
35017 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15

KnightOfZero1991 wrote:

No doubt that most aren't genuinely unwilling to confront such material. I would think the professor is this such case's issue is that for professors not on tenure, so much as a few complaints, and the professor might not get rehired. The pool of applicants is so large that they can toss aside such professors rather easily. This is probably what led to this ones fear. One's with tenure are however, untouchable, but that's a whole different issue there.

That's certainly a valid point too, I've heard a few interesting stories from a friend of mine who was studying liberal arts at a nearby university. This one student and the professor occasionally got into 20 minute long arguing/shouting matches. I think the fear thing comes up again, that they might not get rehired if a student complains they were kicked out.


Well, maybe. Student opinions are taken into account as tenure is offered, but they're but one weight on the scale. I should think that if complaints were to really be leveled against a professor the department chair would have good enough sense to look into the matter deeply, and if the professor in question truly did act appropriately there shouldn't be anything to fear.

Edit: Besides, failing to eject a disruptive student could create its own laundry list of problems during the tenuring process.
5613 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

deer wrote:


silversongwriter wrote:

No matter how PC you try to be, the only way to avoid offending people is to lie about yourself.

ex.
I support gay marriage, but think gays should not have civil rights protection. Since being in a same-sex relationship is a choice, I think it should be treated like one, same with smoking. You don't see smokers shouting discrimination when asked not to smoke in business's.

No matter what, gays will hate me, whether I hate them or not. Except for people like Outright Libertarians, the only LGBT organization I support


you're a fucking idiot. according to your dense logic heterosexual relationships are a choice also and they shouldn't have proper rights either


I don't think anyone has a "right" to the others private business's. It's pretty simple.

I think ALL public sector discrimination should be illegal. I think the private sector shouldn't be allowed to discriminate against things that aren't lifestyles, like your sex or race... However, I don't think a lifestyle choice should be protected.

Disagree, fine... but don't accuse me of being a bigot, otherwise you'd accuse everyone else who has a similar libertarian view of hate. (not a libertarian, I just agree with some of their stances)
17179 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
(´◔౪◔)✂❤
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

deer wrote:

using freedom of speech as an excuse to say your offensive spew is an old and tired way to go about things... plus you do know that "free speech" only protects the government from manhandling you if you have nasty opinions but you should know that what you say have consequences and your pissbaby ass wouldn't dare say what you say on the internet in person... if you said the n-word in person and you got kicked in the face i would have absolutely no sympathy for you
shaubaublaublah all I hear is "I'm a fascist, I hate freedumb"
5613 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15


deer wrote:

using freedom of speech as an excuse to say your offensive spew is an old and tired way to go about things... plus you do know that "free speech" only protects the government from manhandling you if you have nasty opinions but you should know that what you say have consequences and your pissbaby ass wouldn't dare say what you say on the internet in person... if you said the n-word in person and you got kicked in the face i would have absolutely no sympathy for you


The problem with that is that some people offend others unintentionally, and too much a fuss comes out of it. Like some soldiers who have used the word "fag" while joking with friends. Often times they face harsh punishment for what is really harmless and normal behavior. However, one soldier, who probably isn't even gay, but just an SJW scumbag, decides to report it.

Now soldiers using slurs to peoples face with the purpose of offending them.. that's much, much different and is simply hate speech.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 6/8/15 , edited 6/8/15
Personally I dont agree with alot of what he says but I do dislike the fact that people are know cutting out important texts like Mark Twain and Upton Sinclair (though people tend to forgot the jungle was literally communist propaganda) out of fear of complaints. I do think on some level we have to handle disturbing content and see the purpose behind it. For example I am an enormous fan of the early industrial group Throbbing Gristle a performance art group that used fascist imagery, abrasive music, and songs about incredibly dark topics (the Moors murders, War crimes, etc) to make a point about how contemporary English societies failure to deal with such topics and showing you how dark these topics were. I could go on a whole lecture about how I view Throbbing Gristle as critiquing the negative aspects of societal progress(loss of personal identity, etc.) a very British and how I contrast them with Big Black whose whole deal was critiquing the regressive aspects of society a very American fear but ill just leave it at that.

That being said while I think Groups like Throbbing Gristle, Big Black, Swans, Coil, and Whitehouse (though Im kinda on the fence about my opinion of them) are making a valid and progressive point with there use of shocking material I would say or force anyone who is uncomfortable with the material to listen to it.
27230 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
27 / M
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

megahobbit wrote:

Personally I dont agree with alot of what he says but I do dislike the fact that people are know cutting out important texts (Mark Twain) out of fear of complaints.


There are apparently also kids who are demanding trigger warnings to be on the books they read for school.
9551 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / M
Offline
Posted 6/8/15

Morbidhanson wrote:


megahobbit wrote:

Personally I dont agree with alot of what he says but I do dislike the fact that people are know cutting out important texts (Mark Twain) out of fear of complaints.


There are apparently also kids who are demanding trigger warnings to be on the books they read for school.


That I can see is acceptable for books dealing with subjects like rape but at Mark Twain. Thats a time thing and im off the opinion that diluting the racist elements that show up in his work is tantamount to pretending those racist things never happened. We have already become ignorant about how truly horrifying the United States treatment of African Americans was(look up human zoos thats how fucked up it is) and I feel that would be contributing to the whitewashing of history.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.