We need to stop coddling ourselves

Going to a university and pursuing a degree has many benefits besides the piece of paper and (hopefully) the job you receive upon graduation. I would argue that one of the best parts of college is the chance to see new ideas and have your beliefs challenged.

The Internet is filed with easily accessible education materials such as MOOCs (Massive Open Online Courses) and teaching websites like Khan Academy. Even as I am attending USU I use these free online resources to supplement my learning. Colleges with a physical campus have something that these online resources don’t have though. College campuses provide a place for different ideas and cultures to coalesce. Even a considerably less diverse school such as USU is called home to students from all around the world with different backgrounds, beliefs, and political leanings. This is something that traditional places of education can provide better than any other type of educational program.

Unfortunately there is growing pressure to limit the free exchange of ideas on campuses and much of that pressure is coming from students themselves. It seems like I read a new story every week about students demanding protection from offense. A particularly startling example of this was the Yale Halloween costume controversy last year. Due to column limitations I can only provide an excruciatingly brief synopsis and so I strongly encourage you to read about it if you haven’t already. Yale’s Intercultural Affairs Committee issued an email which discouraged students from wearing costumes that were culturally insensitive. In response to some student’s complaints about the guidelines, a prominent faculty member (Erika Christakis) raised the question if students should instead have autonomy to decide what is appropriate. This resulted in a particularly agitated campus and led to Christakis resigning from her post.

Reading about the Yale story was very upsetting to me. Two sets of well-intentioned emails which should have promoted a vigorous and civil debate eroded into angry rhetoric. Christakis never endorsed the wearing of offensive costumes. Instead she proposed that students should engage with each other to determine offensive boundaries through mature acts of self-restraint and respectful discussion. If a student is offended they can ignore the offender and move on. If that student is particularly outgoing they could start up a dialog with offenders in an effort for better understanding between both parties. I find her intentions laudable and was appalled by the reaction she received.

Sadly, I see similarities here at USU. There is no shortage of ideas or beliefs that will offend others. What is offensive to two different people may be completely different. Repeatedly I see calls for the USU Stateman to censor the topics being published. Do we really want to try to snuff those opinions in an effort to protect individuals who may be offended or do we want to engage in productive discussion in an attempt to learn more about each other? If we decide to limit offenses how do we decide what is offensive? Who decides what is offensive? Is it desirable to exist in a world with no controversy?

I strongly believe that it is important to allow people to give offense. It strengthens our resolve and provides for a robust environment of different ideas. As we approach summer break I encourage students to think of what type of campus they want to have next year. I also encourage professors to consider if courses have become watered down in an attempt to avoid more controversial topics. Diversity and controversy are powerful tools for learning. It would be a shame to rob ourselves of them.

— chris.crook@aggiemail.usu.edu

Bio: After trying what feels like every program at USU Chris is now studying economics. He is indescribably jealous of those who could make up their minds and graduate next week.n