At Cornell (at long last) A Stand for Academic Freedom and Against Wokeness

[JBG]

Finally, Cornell shows some spine at the wave of wokeness and "cancellation" of rival points of view. Should College Come With Trigger Warnings? At Cornell, It’s a ‘Hard No.’

(excerpt) Last month, a Cornell University sophomore, Claire Ting, was studying with friends when one of them became visibly upset and was unable to continue her work.For a Korean American literature class, the woman was reading “The Surrendered,” a novel by Chang-rae Lee about a Korean girl orphaned by the Korean War that includes a graphic rape scene. Ms. Ting’s friend had recently testified at a campus hearing against a student who she said sexually assaulted her, the woman said in an interview. Reading the passage so soon afterward left her feeling unmoored....

That day, she drafted a resolution urging instructors to provide warnings on the syllabus about “traumatic content” that might be discussed in class, including sexual assault, self-harm and transphobic violence.

Cornell's administration vetoed the Student resolution to require "trigger warnings" stating: "“We cannot accept this resolution as the actions it recommends would infringe on our core commitment to academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, and are at odds with the goals of a Cornell education,” Ms. Pollack wrote in a letter with the university provost, Michael I. Kotlikoff." My impression was that college students were expected to either be mature late adolescents or on their way to maturity. People who are mature or maturing need to learn to "roll with the punches" as long as those punches are verbal and not actual violence. To quote Justice Brandeis, in his concurring opinion in Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1926) (link):

Those who won our independence by revolution were not cowards. They did not fear political change. They did not exalt order at the cost of liberty. To courageous, selfreliant men, with confidence in the power of free and fearless reasoning applied through the processes of popular government, no danger flowing from speech can be deemed clear and present, unless the incidence of the evil apprehended is so imminent that it may befall before there is opportunity for full discussion. If there be time to expose through discussion the falsehood and fallacies, to avert the evil by the processes of education, the remedy to be applied is more speech, not enforced silence. Only an emergency can justify repression. Such must be the rule if authority is to be reconciled with freedom.5 Such, in my opinion, is the command of the Constitution. It is therefore always open to Americans to challenge a law abridging free speech and assembly by showing that there was no emergency justifying it.

I agree heartily with Justice Brandeis. 18-22 year olds should not need to be protected from hurtful literature.

Three years ago, Cornell was on the wrong track. Cornell's President posted and blasted the following message (link), excerpt below:

I want to make clear, both personally and on behalf of Cornell, that we will do all we can as a university to address this scourge of racism. We will address it directly in our educational programs, in our research and in our engagement and related activities, working through the ways we know best to push for a world that is equitable and kind; where people do not have to fear for their lives because of the color of their skin; and where everyone has the same opportunities to grow, thrive and enjoy their lives.

As an alumnus, Cornell 1979 and my father (Cornell Engineering 1947), I responded, in part, as follows:

I cannot agree with the self-flagellation of your letter and similar correspondence from clergy and academic leaders.....Remember, Mr. Floyd was killed by four Minneapolis police officers, not by Cornell University.

Just as Cornell did not put its knee of George Floyd's neck, Cornell is not a continuation of First Grade. I am proud that my Alma Mater is finally taking a stand. It is very much in the tradition of Cornell always being co-ed since founding, and always being open to people of color.

 

[JRTurner]

You wrote a letter in protest of eradicating racism at Cornell? Why?

 

[JBG]

You wrote a letter in protest of eradicating racism at Cornell? Why?

Maybe the rest of my letter explains better. Here's the rest of my letter (text in italics):

I cannot agree with the self-flagellation of your letter and similar correspondence from clergy and academic leaders.

This is eerily similar to the armed takeover of Willard Straight Fall in April 1969, see A campus takeover that symbolized an era of change. As those familiar with Cornell history know , the surrender to “demonstrator” demands caused many professors, particularly in Government, to resign. Any surrender or accommodation to violence has that result; constructive people of quality flee.No decent human being can stomach the brutal killing of George Floyd. However, there have been similarly brutal killings, of people of color far less flawed as citizens than Mr. Floyd. David Dorn, a black retired 77 year old police officer who was trying to protect a pawnshop from looters comes to mind. Where are the protests? After all he was also black. The minority communities wind up being far more severely injured than the "racists."

 

[JRTurner]

Maybe the rest of my letter explains better. Here's the rest of my letter (text in italics):

I cannot agree with the self-flagellation of your letter and similar correspondence from clergy and academic leaders.

This is eerily similar to the armed takeover of Willard Straight Fall in April 1969, see A campus takeover that symbolized an era of change. As those familiar with Cornell history know , the surrender to “demonstrator” demands caused many professors, particularly in Government, to resign. Any surrender or accommodation to violence has that result; constructive people of quality flee.No decent human being can stomach the brutal killing of George Floyd. However, there have been similarly brutal killings, of people of color far less flawed as citizens than Mr. Floyd. David Dorn, a black retired 77 year old police officer who was trying to protect a pawnshop from looters comes to mind. Where are the protests? After all he was also black. The minority communities wind up being far more severely injured than the "racists."

I don't understand.

If racism existed at Cornell, and a movement protesting racism in policing inspired them to eradicate racism at Cornell, why would that bother you?

Your letter seems to say you take issue with them eradicating racism because George Floyd was flawed before he was murdered.

 

[JBG]

I don't understand.

If racism existed at Cornell, and a movement protesting racism in policing inspired them to eradicate racism at Cornell, why would that bother you?

Your letter seems to say you take issue with them eradicating racism because George Floyd was flawed before he was murdered.

Why is race of primary concern? Those that elevate race as a factor in such a way are racists themselves.

 

[JRTurner]

Why is race of primary concern? Those that elevate race as a factor in such a way are racists themselves.

Would you prefer Cornell turned a blind eye to racism within their institution?

 

[Gateman_Wen]

Finally, Cornell shows some spine at the wave of wokeness and "cancellation" of rival points of view. Should College Come With Trigger Warnings? At Cornell, It’s a ‘Hard No.’

Cornell's administration vetoed the Student resolution to require "trigger warnings" stating: "“We cannot accept this resolution as the actions it recommends would infringe on our core commitment to academic freedom and freedom of inquiry, and are at odds with the goals of a Cornell education,” Ms. Pollack wrote in a letter with the university provost, Michael I. Kotlikoff." My impression was that college students were expected to either be mature late adolescents or on their way to maturity. People who are mature or maturing need to learn to "roll with the punches" as long as those punches are verbal and not actual violence. To quote Justice Brandeis, in his concurring opinion in Whitney v. California, 274 U.S. 357 (1926) (link):

I agree heartily with Justice Brandeis. 18-22 year olds should not need to be protected from hurtful literature.

Three years ago, Cornell was on the wrong track. Cornell's President posted and blasted the following message (link), excerpt below:

As an alumnus, Cornell 1979 and my father (Cornell Engineering 1947), I responded, in part, as follows:

Just as Cornell did not put its knee of George Floyd's neck, Cornell is not a continuation of First Grade. I am proud that my Alma Mater is finally taking a stand. It is very much in the tradition of Cornell always being co-ed since founding, and always being open to people of color.

So then you're against all the crap that they're doing in Floriduh schools, right?

 

[JBG]

So then you're against all the crap that they're doing in Floriduh schools, right?

So then you're against all the crap that they're doing in Floriduh schools, right?

Specifics? And at what level? Restrictions that are appropriate in Grade School settings may not be appropriate at Middle School. An example is the mislabeled "don't say gay" law. That is fine in the elementary school but not beyond. No teachers should encourage gender dysphoria for people under 18. College education, aside from actual encouragement of violence should be pretty much free of restrictions.

 

[bomberfox]

Warning this game contains explicit scenes of violence and gore. On practically every resident evil game doesnt prevent you from playing it lol.

Same with trigger warnings.

 

[Mr Person]

Would you prefer Cornell turned a blind eye to racism within their institution?

That is exactly what @JBG and everyone else who goes on like that wants. And they want it for all facets of American life.

 

[Rogue Valley]

Let me see if I understand this hot mess.

You claim to be Very Liberal, and yet you opposed combating racism at Cornell University?

Either you are not explaining yourself suffiiently enough, or you are a POE.

 

[JBG]

That is exactly what @JBG and everyone else who goes on like that wants. And they want it for all facets of American life.

Please don't put words in my mouth. What I want is simply not to stop speech and debate. I am not advocating any racist position.

Let me see if I understand this hot mess.

You claim to be Very Liberal, and yet you opposed combating racism at Cornell University?

Either you are not explaining yourself suffiiently enough, or you are a POE.

What is a "hot mess"? And what is a POE? And I'm not opposed to combating racism at my Alma Mater or anywhere. Heck Cornell opened as welcoming all races and both male and female genders. The other genders had not yet been invented. Book bans and shouting down speakers don't end racism; they push it into the sewers.

 

[j brown's body]

Republican legislators could take a lesson here as they ban books and speech from schools because they might make white kids feel ashamed.

 

[bomberfox]

Please don't put words in my mouth. What I want is simply not to stop speech and debate. I am not advocating any racist position.


What is a "hot mess"? And what is a POE? And I'm not opposed to combating racism at my Alma Mater or anywhere. Heck Cornell opened as welcoming all races and both male and female genders. The other genders had not yet been invented. Book bans and shouting down speakers don't end racism; they push it into the sewers.

Trigger warnings dont stop speech or debate.

 

[ashurbanipal]

Why is race of primary concern? Those that elevate race as a factor in such a way are racists themselves.

It rather sounds like you’re saying that taking notice of racism and deciding to do something about it is racist.

Weird. Surely that’s not what you mean…

 

[JBG]

It rather sounds like you’re saying that taking notice of racism and deciding to do something about it is racist.

Weird. Surely that’s not what you mean…

What I mean is the answer to racism isn’t more racism.

 

[ashurbanipal]

What I mean is the answer to racism isn’t more racism.

Well, I certainly agree with that proposition, but I don’t think a statement from the President of a university pledging to combat racism at their institution counts as more racism. It seems to be quite anti-racist, and it would be naive to think that there is no racism at Cornell…or any other university, college, company, office, or etc. pretty much anywhere in this country. Racism remains a fact of life, and we need to combat it.

 

[ashurbanipal]

Trigger warnings dont stop speech or debate.

I’m of two minds on this. The typical way trigger warnings are employed is that students who may be triggered are excused from that assigned reading/listening/viewing/attending lecture, and aren’t to be considered responsible for the material covered. So, for those students, it certainly does stop debate and thinking, at the very least.

As a general principle, we humans do some pretty bad stuff and letting students ignore that fact because it might make them uncomfortable is rather bad. It produces a very skewed view of reality. Even students who legitimately have encountered that bad stuff up close and personal (which is why they are triggered) are deprived an opportunity to push through to a rational consideration of the matter.

On the other hand (I’ve seen this mainly with rape survivors and combat veterans), the emotions may be so overwhelming that they are literally unable to focus or engage in meaningful thought. I had a combat vet in my intro to philosophy course who couldn’t sit through a couple of the ethics lectures because he had seen, and (worse) been ordered to perpetrate, some downright evil shit in Iraq, and he was in no place to face it. I excused him from that material…especially after hearing his story (which is pure nightmare fuel—I had trouble sleeping for a couple days after that discussion).

I think the answer has to be that we don’t make a blanket policy always inserting trigger warnings, but do make reasoned and reasonable exceptions for those students who can’t make it through the material in question. That said, I see obvious flaws with that idea…it’s something I’m still pondering.

 

[Argent]

Finally, Cornell shows some spine at the wave of wokeness and "cancellation" of rival points of view. Should College Come With Trigger Warnings? At Cornell, It’s a ‘Hard No.’

LOL, the irony. Cornel isn't against wokeness. It reclaimed its wokeness. Cancellation culture and trigger warning demands are anti woke, not woke. An education should prepare people to think outside of their comfort zones, challenge their thinking, develop their critical thinking skills, shake them up and spit them out better prepared to function in a multicultural experience in a wide open world. In order to succeed at that, students need to be exposed to things they might not like and that might hurt their feels. In other words, they're getting woked, LOL.

 

[JBG]

I’m of two minds on this. The typical way trigger warnings are employed is that students who may be triggered are excused from that assigned reading/listening/viewing/attending lecture, and aren’t to be considered responsible for the material covered. So, for those students, it certainly does stop debate and thinking, at the very least.

As a general principle, we humans do some pretty bad stuff and letting students ignore that fact because it might make them uncomfortable is rather bad. It produces a very skewed view of reality. Even students who legitimately have encountered that bad stuff up close and personal (which is why they are triggered) are deprived an opportunity to push through to a rational consideration of the matter.

I would assume that beyond the Freshman year (in many respects transitional from High School) these students should be expected to be adults. Adult life can have some "pretty bad stuff" such as relatives sickening and dying, peers flipping out, etc. I think they need to learn to deal with it.

On the other hand (I’ve seen this mainly with rape survivors and combat veterans), the emotions may be so overwhelming that they are literally unable to focus or engage in meaningful thought. I had a combat vet in my intro to philosophy course who couldn’t sit through a couple of the ethics lectures because he had seen, and (worse) been ordered to perpetrate, some downright evil shit in Iraq, and he was in no place to face it. I excused him from that material…especially after hearing his story (which is pure nightmare fuel—I had trouble sleeping for a couple days after that discussion).

Those people are badly in need of therapy before being thrown into a meat-grinder such as Cornell. And trust me, as an alum of the Class of 1979 it is.

I think the answer has to be that we don’t make a blanket policy always inserting trigger warnings, but do make reasoned and reasonable exceptions for those students who can’t make it through the material in question. That said, I see obvious flaws with that idea…it’s something I’m still pondering.

I'd be curious on your thoughts after pondering. Perhaps the way to go is to allow these students to take a break from school, get financial credit for the interrupted semester, and then resume. There is a strong possibility of "school fatigue" after going through two years of nursery school, then K-12. That's a lot of time to be doing the same thing, more or less without break.

 

[Lisa]

Cornell is one of the Ivies and its in Ithaca NY, one of the most liberal and woke cities in the USA. This is highly ironic.