The Coddling of the American Mind

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

JimG

Guest
From the Atlantic:

“Something strange is happening at America’s colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.”

From this article:
theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

But: “according to the most-basic tenets of psychology, helping people with anxiety disorders avoid the things they fear is misguided.”

So the whole idea is counterproductive.
 
They are all looking for a huge pile of sand to stick their collective heads in.
Apparently that is more comforting to them than the traditional “stick fingers in ears and yell ‘can’t hear you, can’t hear you’”.

Too many of the youth of this country have drunk the liberal Kool-Aid and have become mush-for-brains.
 
JimG said:
From the Atlantic:

“Something strange is happening at America’s colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.”

From this article:
theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

But: “according to the most-basic tenets of psychology, helping people with anxiety disorders avoid the things they fear is misguided.”

So the whole idea is counterproductive.
Click to expand...
Oh no, that’s been going on for over 40 years. “Correct” - meaning bad - ideas are still heavily promoted but appear to be invisible because what was once bad/wrong is considered normative, with still more (ab)normative to come.

The manipulating of the so-called “American” (whatever that means) mind is still going on. Look up “engineering consent.” It’s totally directed.

Ed
 
The Department of Education has recently made the situation worse.
From the article:

"Since 2013, new pressure from the federal government has reinforced this trend. Federal antidiscrimination statutes regulate on-campus harassment and unequal treatment based on sex, race, religion, and national origin. Until recently, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights acknowledged that speech must be “objectively offensive” before it could be deemed actionable as sexual harassment—it would have to pass the “reasonable person” test. To be prohibited, the office wrote in 2003, allegedly harassing speech would have to go “beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols or thoughts that some person finds offensive.”

But in 2013, the Departments of Justice and Education greatly broadened the definition of sexual harassment to include verbal conduct that is simply “unwelcome.” Out of fear of federal investigations, universities are now applying that standard—defining unwelcome speech as harassment—not just to sex, but to race, religion, and veteran status as well. Everyone is supposed to rely upon his or her own subjective feelings to decide whether a comment by a professor or a fellow student is unwelcome, and therefore grounds for a harassment claim. Emotional reasoning is now accepted as evidence."

There is no defense against emotional reasoning. One is guilty by the mere fact of the accusation.
 
JimG said:
From the Atlantic:

“Something strange is happening at America’s colleges and universities. A movement is arising, undirected and driven largely by students, to scrub campuses clean of words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense.”

From this article:
theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/09/the-coddling-of-the-american-mind/399356/

But: “according to the most-basic tenets of psychology, helping people with anxiety disorders avoid the things they fear is misguided.”

So the whole idea is counterproductive.
Click to expand...
I might add:

The practice of measuring all personal opinions on religious matters against the ‘allegiance to nation’ yardstick. To the Catholic, the conduct of his nation is also to be held to scrutiny. Citizens today tend to be in the habit of palliating the crimes of their nations, then holding them up as models of collective good conduct.

Most evangelists are prone to this weakness.
 
JimG said:
The Department of Education has recently made the situation worse.
From the article:

"Since 2013, new pressure from the federal government has reinforced this trend. Federal antidiscrimination statutes regulate on-campus harassment and unequal treatment based on sex, race, religion, and national origin. Until recently, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights acknowledged that speech must be “objectively offensive” before it could be deemed actionable as sexual harassment—it would have to pass the “reasonable person” test. To be prohibited, the office wrote in 2003, allegedly harassing speech would have to go “beyond the mere expression of views, words, symbols or thoughts that some person finds offensive.”

But in 2013, the Departments of Justice and Education greatly broadened the definition of sexual harassment to include verbal conduct that is simply “unwelcome.” Out of fear of federal investigations, universities are now applying that standard—defining unwelcome speech as harassment—not just to sex, but to race, religion, and veteran status as well. Everyone is supposed to rely upon his or her own subjective feelings to decide whether a comment by a professor or a fellow student is unwelcome, and therefore grounds for a harassment claim. Emotional reasoning is now accepted as evidence."

There is no defense against emotional reasoning. One is guilty by the mere fact of the accusation.
Click to expand...
Thank you, Comrade. The only solution is not having a conversation with anyone in this setting.

“I’m offended that you’re offended.” “That offends me.” I’m filing a claim:rolleyes:

Ed

How does that song go? “Feelings. Oh, oh oh, feelings…” 😃
 
edwest2 said:
How does that song go? “Feelings. Oh, oh oh, feelings…” 😃
Click to expand...
Personally, I like my Filipino relatives’ karaoke version: “Peelings. Nutting more dan peelings. Trying to porget my, peelings of love…”
 
Instructors have a delicate task in matters like this. Certainly there is some material that’s designed to provoke a strong reaction and students. But there are also cases where subject material can genuinely damage students who come from certain circumstances.

For instance, I believe that the worries over racist language in Mark Twain’s “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” might be uncomfortable for students, and can be challenging emotionally. But that’s the point of the story. It’s meant to provoke those feelings and demonstrate an anti-slavery, anti-bigotry message. (At least that’s my understanding, that one of Twain’s purposes was to have an anti-slavery anti-bigotry effect.) The instructor should be skilled enough to guide students through the material, and deal with these feelings.

On the other hand, there is material out there that legitimately gives students panic and anxiety attacks. These students should be protected from these. But again, the instructor has to be able to write their class in a manner that these students can still interact with the material in a manner that’s safe for them.
 
Rhubarb said:
Instructors have a delicate task in matters like this. Certainly there is some material that’s designed to provoke a strong reaction and students. But there are also cases where subject material can genuinely damage students who come from certain circumstances.

For instance, I believe that the worries over racist language in Mark Twain’s “The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn” might be uncomfortable for students, and can be challenging emotionally. But that’s the point of the story. It’s meant to provoke those feelings and demonstrate an anti-slavery, anti-bigotry message. (At least that’s my understanding, that one of Twain’s purposes was to have an anti-slavery anti-bigotry effect.) The instructor should be skilled enough to guide students through the material, and deal with these feelings.

On the other hand, there is material out there that legitimately gives students panic and anxiety attacks. These students should be protected from these. But again, the instructor has to be able to write their class in a manner that these students can still interact with the material in a manner that’s safe for them.
Click to expand...
heterodoxacademy.org/2015/11/24/the-yale-problem-begins-in-high-school/

No. Kids (and the faculty) who want to be isolated from any thought, idea, concept or fact that contradicts or presents a challenge to their current world view need to go back to kindergarten. Play with the crayons and blocks, and re-learn the concepts of listening and taking turns.

College and university should be about improving the individual’s knowledge and ability to reason. There is a lot of ugliness in this world, there are a lot of intelligent folks with contrary opinions coming to quite reasonable but different conclusions than you might. It’s worth your time to listen, consider, and make a reasoned response. A dialogue. A discussion. Something that’s being discouraged and in fact eliminated even at the high school level.

College and university shouldn’t be about prolonging adolescence and simply reinforcing views, opinions, and intellectual maturity at the level of an 18 year old for the four years. Suspension of all development for four years (rather expensive years to the student and the state). Only allowing them to reinitiate growth of intellect after graduation.
 
But that’s not the point. When civility and dialogue are ignored and feelings put first, then what you get is what you see on too many internet forums. Feelings get typed. Actual thinking beforehand is optional. I’m concerned that a generation or two of people are being conditioned to no longer control their emotions.

At the faculty level, since these laws do exist, it should be realized this is a two-way street. It’s sad, but having dealt with students myself at the high school level, it may be mandatory to present a disclaimer/overview to the students when introducing them to certain books or subject matter first. The instructors need to role-play out some situations with other faculty to prepare them for dealing with students. It only took me a few classes to assess my students in terms of temperament, and who was interested in learning and who was just passing the time.

Ed
 
I’m not persuaded this is all about hurt feelings or hyper sensitivity. When I hear the protester types, they strike me as nothing other than totalitarians who would send dissenters from the “party line” to corrective labor camps or shoot them outright if they could.
 
I think one question that has to be asked is how representative this viewpoint is among college students. I agree that there are students who are professional rabble rousers and like to protest, but the majority I deal with seem to want to be more focused on completing their degrees and moving on with their lives.
 
stinkcat_14 said:
I think one question that has to be asked is how representative this viewpoint is among college students. I agree that there are students who are professional rabble rousers and like to protest, but the majority I deal with seem to want to be more focused on completing their degrees and moving on with their lives.
Click to expand...
I agree in part, but disagree in part.

I agree that the protest types are a minority. Of the majority, SOME are focused on completing their degrees and moving on with their lives. Some are more focused on drinking and chasing women. 🙂
 
Ridgerunner said:
I’m not persuaded this is all about hurt feelings or hyper sensitivity. When I hear the protester types, they strike me as nothing other than totalitarians who would send dissenters from the “party line” to corrective labor camps or shoot them outright if they could.
Click to expand...
Yes.

Ed

I recommend two days hard labor at the Poroshkova Labor Camp in Russian Federation. Diet of bread and cabbage soup. Repeat offenders are shot. I’m referring to the people who write such laws - aside from sexual harassment - this is pure lunacy.
 
edwest2 said:
Yes.

Ed

I recommend two days hard labor at the Poroshkova Labor Camp in Russian Federation. Diet of bread and cabbage soup. Repeat offenders are shot. I’m referring to the people who write such laws - aside from sexual harassment - this is pure lunacy.
Click to expand...
They don’t give cabbage away. How about nettle soup instead? Actually, it’s cheaper and easier to just boil pine needles and call it soup. Good source of Vitamin C. 🙂
 
edwest2 said:
But that’s not the point. When civility and dialogue are ignored and feelings put first, then what you get is what you see on too many internet forums. Feelings get typed. Actual thinking beforehand is optional. I’m concerned that a generation or two of people are being conditioned to no longer control their emotions.

At the faculty level, since these laws do exist, it should be realized this is a two-way street. It’s sad, but having dealt with students myself at the high school level, it may be mandatory to present a disclaimer/overview to the students when introducing them to certain books or subject matter first. The instructors need to role-play out some situations with other faculty to prepare them for dealing with students. It only took me a few classes to assess my students in terms of temperament, and who was interested in learning and who was just passing the time.

Ed
Click to expand...
👍
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top