I Don 't Agree With Lukianoff And Haidt 's Position On Student Driven Movements Arising On Campuses

Many censorship occurs in schools today. As many are for the censoring of material, many are also against it. Behind each stand, are different opinions and reasons? The reasons to be against

One reason why schools should limit online speech is because it can hurt many people by cyberbullying and bullying. Evidence that supports this reason is that in Doc. A( Cyberbullying by Gender), it states that at least 25.1 % get bullied in a lifetime, and of that, many people have been hurt. This helps explain why schools should limit students’ speech because that means that at least ¼ of the community have been cyberbullied in a lifetime, so at least some of those people have been affected.

Freedom of speech is a fundamental American freedom and a human right, and there’s no place that this right should be more valued and protected than in colleges and universities. A college exists to educate and to advance a student 's knowledge. Colleges do so by acting as a “marketplace of ideas” where ideas compete. It is important to be able to compare your ideas with everyone else as it helps to open your mind to other people’s views and can give you a different perception on things. In the article “The Coddling of the American Mind,” Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukiankoff talked about how too many college students engage in “catastrophizing," which is in short, the overreaction to something. They also said that “smart people do, in fact, overreact to innocuous speech, make mountains out of molehills, and seek punishment for anyone whose words make anyone else feel uncomfortable.”(Haidt) Many colleges have the belief that prohibiting freedom of speech will resolve such issues. But instead, colleges should take a different approach on the matter by teaching students how to properly utilize their Freedom of Speech which will help to resolve future conflicts and misunderstandings.

In the article “The Shortening Leash”, which publishes in slate.com, Jessica Grose and Hanna Rosin describe the children today have much less freedom in the childhood than their parents and the possible reason why this happens. According to board surveys for asking about what parents did in their childhood and what they allow their own kids to do now indicate that childhood criterions have changed violently over a generation.

In the early 21st century there are many issues that arise within societies. Whether the issues are based on freedoms, rights, or power of government. The way we handle these situations is to look at the US Constitution for guidance as the country tries to figure out a solution. One issue that has been in the mainstream as of late, is freedom of speech, which is the First Amendment in the US Constitution. The controversy surrounding the first amendment comes from whether it should be instituted on college campuses or censored by professors and administrators. Ancient philosophers have written about similar issues surrounding censorship in societies and many differ in their beliefs. Plato and Thomas Hobbes would agree that creating an environment

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) made a statement “On Freedom of Expression and Campus Speech Codes,” 1994, which states, “In response to verbal assaults and use of hateful language some campuses have felt it necessary to forbid the expression of racist, sexist, homophobic, or ethnically demeaning speech, along with conduct or behavior that harasses…”

Some of the most concerning effects of trigger warnings pertain to the well-being of students and the academic freedom of professors. In “The Coddling of the American Mind” from The Atlantic, the authors describe how trigger warnings may affect students’ mental health saying, “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. The new protectiveness may be teaching students to think pathologically” (Lukianoff and Haidt). The implementation of trigger warnings has been seen as a call for censorship in the name of sensitivity. This suggestion of a change in curriculum is alarming college faculty members across the nation. Professors are fearful of offending students and damaging their reputations. In “Survey

At the beginning of the essay, Lukianoff and Haidt describe a movement that is arising in colleges. Driven largely by students, this movement is to remove words off of college campuses that might make someone feel offended or uncomfortable. Lukianoff and Haidt want to make sure that this movement does not continue. The credibility of the article is very notable by referring to the occupations Lukianoff and Haidt hold. Jonathan haidt is a social psychologist who studies American culture wars and Greg Lukianoff is a constitutional lawyer and the president and CEO of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education, which defends free speech and academic freedom on campus.

Censorship has happened everywhere and happens everyday especially inside schools. In city schools there have been conflicts over what students should or should not learn. Censors decide that they should protect students from materials and activities that are upsetting and issue the wrong ideas. These ideas are said to "weaken parental authority, challenge students political moral, or religious views, or brainwash them into other ways of thinking (Sherrow10)." By protecting them they mean targeting academics. Courses that deal with drug prevention, sex education, development of character, or clarification of

“The Coddling of the American Mind” by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt is a short work written to inform people on an epidemic that is affecting colleges and universities around America. The article talks about certain “words, ideas, and subjects that might cause discomfort or give offense” (Lukianoff) and how students are asking for them to not be said. Much is covered on the topic including specific examples of how people were persecuted for saying such things and various opinions on if this trend is for better or worse. I believe the article highlights a problem in the educational system and in order for improvement these topics need to be taught and discussed.

The consistent offensive behavior being aimed at multiple communities, has impacted students significantly. There were periods when people were scared to even walk alone on campus, due to threats and bullying.

“The Coalition against Censorship”, they state that censorship can be a crucial thing against teachers because it will limit teachers and leave them vulnerable from answering questions and responses. Teachers have academic freedom, or the freedom of teaching, researching, and to pursue knowledge (The Coalition against Censorship). Children are also affected by different First Amendment Rights in

If it is uncomfortable to read and discuss, so be it. Most things that matter deeply are.” -USA Today. Today Censorship also affects more than the children though. It really affects everyone equally. It allows the government to have too much control over what we learn and know. What if we lived in a dystopian society. For example, if you’ve ever seen the movie or read the book The Giver by Lois Lowry, the city kept everyone from learning about the world’s past and why they have to obey their rules and only their rules and do whatever job they assign them. Private groups and public authorities in various parts of the country are working to remove or limit access to reading materials, to censor content in schools, to label controversial views. Most people believe that free communication is essential to the preservation of a free society and a creative culture. Another touchy topic about they types of censorship we have is open religion. We have the Freedom of Religion. But many schools don’t allow religious practices, teachings, or even how they dress. What’s wrong with anyone expressing their religion and how they think of God peacefully and freely? America is

I believe that censorship of hate speech is necessary to a certain extent, for example hate speech that is violent toward others should be censored because if it is not that we are denying the students that the hate speech is directed toward an equal opportunity to an education. If the students are afraid to go to school that what good is school?

Many students, parents and teachers may think this is a bad thing but they don’t understand that censoring some things may have some benefits rather than being all bad.