After my first semester at Temple University I was left with a new and interesting learning experience. I engaged in discussions on controversial topics and was exposed to various reading and media material which opened me up to new perspectives. Topics on politics, abuse, death, religion, and ethics have been conversed on without restrictions. I have enjoyed this learning experience on the most part due to the professors announcing the topics to be discussed the first day of classes. I felt that being fresh out of high school such practice relieved the transition into a new academic environment. In her The New York Times piece "Why I Use Trigger Warnings" (9/9/15) Kate Manne supports the practice of trigger warnings in the curriculum, however,
…show more content…
While recognizing both sides of the argument, she casually points out such point as if it is as obvious as common knowledge. She writes that “criticisms of trigger warnings are often based on the idea that college is a time for intellectual growth and emotional development…they need to learn to engage rationally with ideas, arguments and views they find difficult, upsetting or even repulsive.” Manne agrees with this argument and mainly uses trigger warnings because of it. She describes the use of trigger warning as a tool to increase engagement of student who otherwise may to be able to perform on certain assignments. She also refers to an article in The Atlantic by Mr. Lukianoff and Professor Haidt in which the authors compare not having trigger warnings to exposure therapy. Manne points out that their argument is weak since psychotherapy is not the same as exposing someone to an anxiety arousing stimuli without any warning. She also points out that “there is no formula for” the use of trigger warnings and that professors should be trusted to make their own decisions based on their experiences. As Manne recognizes different sides of the arguments, she creates a balance of views as presented in her own opinion on the
While recognizing both sides of the argument, she casually points out such point as if it is as obvious as common knowledge. She writes that “criticisms of trigger warnings are often based on the idea that college is a time for intellectual growth and emotional development…they need to learn to engage rationally with ideas, arguments and views they find difficult, upsetting or even repulsive.” Manne agrees with this argument and mainly uses trigger warnings because of it. She describes the use of trigger warning as a tool to increase engagement of student who otherwise may to be able to perform on certain assignments. She also refers to an article in The Atlantic by Mr. Lukianoff and Professor Haidt in which the authors compare not having trigger warnings to exposure therapy. Manne points out that their argument is weak since psychotherapy is not the same as exposing someone to an anxiety arousing stimuli without any warning. She also points out that “there is no formula for” the use of trigger warnings and that professors should be trusted to make their own decisions based on their experiences. As Manne recognizes different sides of the arguments, she creates a balance of views as presented in her own opinion on the