andrewducker: (Default)
[personal profile] andrewducker
jack: (Default)
From: [personal profile] jack
I'm interested that he tried to put some numbers on it, but I feel like the questions would need to be more specific to actually come to any conclusions. Do most students have the same idea what counts as "hate speech"? Does it make a difference whether someone is permitted to speak to people who specifically invited them, or invited to speak at a sanctioned event? Are we lumping together "offensive" things which are catastrophically harmful with ones that are not?

I admit, that, *in abstract* my answer to "should we use disruptive tactics including violence to prevent offensive views being heard" is "probably not". But if I'm subjected to an endless parade of speakers saying "lets roll human rights back 100 years" then disrupting them is probably right. But that means that question doesn't really tell you what it says it tells you.

Date: 2017-09-22 07:02 pm (UTC)
calimac: (Default)
From: [personal profile] calimac
Uber says, "far from being open, London is closed to innovative companies."

If by "innovative" you mean "rogue, lawbreaking" - which Uber apparently does, that being what its innovations consist of - then yeah.

Date: 2017-09-23 08:30 am (UTC)
heron61: (Default)
From: [personal profile] heron61
For me, the key was reading this question:

If you had to choose one of the options below, which do you think it is more important for colleges to do?

Option 1: create a positive learning environment for all students by prohibiting certain speech or expression of viewpoints that are offensive or biased against certain groups of people

Option 2: create an open learning environment where students are exposed to all types of speech and viewpoints, even if it means allowing speech that is offensive or biased against certain groups of people?

Given that for all students who aren't cis het white males, there's a very real chance that this biased speech may not be singularly non-abstract, since it's directed at them, I'm completely understand preferring choice 1, and in fact am honestly puzzled as to why anyone who isn't a fairly dubious person thinks Option 2 is honestly a better learning environment for anyone who is at all likely to be on the wrong end of speech that is offensive or biased against certain groups of people.

In short, I'm deeply unimpressed with the author of the article and his alarmist panic about the survey results.

October 2017

1 2 3 4 5 6 7
8 9 10 11 12 13 14
15 16 1718192021

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated Oct. 18th, 2017 01:50 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios