Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces & America’s Best University President

Student’s Name
Tutor
Course
Date
The Free Speech
In the recent past, increased student activism centered on the issue of exercising free speech and censorship in academics has been a fundamental source of discourse among scholars, educators, and the public. The argument on free speech is two-sided, especially in the context of higher learning institutions. Some students are easily offended by mere words that are deemed to be politically incorrect, which limits their capability to engage in hard-hitting debate. To facilitate an environment where these people might not feel offended, institutions such as the University of Chicago facilitate trigger warnings and safe space for the students. Arguably, although free speech is accepted in the communal setting and is enshrined in the national constitution, there is censorship employed to accommodate various people. The impact of this discourse on free speech shows how various people have different perceptions about social and political ideologies. The intent of this essay is to highlight the balance that exists between censorship and free speech in the institutions of higher learning.
In the modern day, the school setting is highly diverse not only on an ethnic basis, but also on ideologies. These differences are central to the conflicts that emerge in the context of free speech and censorship. While some people feel that they have to speak over anything and anywhere, some feel that there should be some limitations. In this light, Downes alludes that trigger warnings in the education system entail the need for the educator to clarify that the information presented in class entails offensive material such as graphic descriptions of sexual assault. The key focus of this censorship is to offer hints that the material offered in class is sensitive and might be difficult for the students. On the same note, a safe space alludes to a censorship approach that offers an area in the institution where the students can talk about their experiences, including experiencing trauma about something offensive or those who feel marginalized. These provisions are critical in that they offer an ethical solution to the challenges that emerge as a result of reckless communication in social gatherings and lectures. Subsequently, there is some sense in having these provisions that facilitate trigger warnings and safe space in the institution, which accommodate censorship in formal gatherings and free speech in informal meetings. Despite this, Downes states that the students that support the provision of safe space and trigger warnings are perceived to be small-minded, sensitive, and they are opposed to engaging in dialogue. The argument is challenged by the review by Stephens, stating “the aim of education is to make people think rather than spare them from discomfort.”
The idea of civility and mutual respect is fundamental, but it should not be the justification for preventing discussions that are deemed offensive, and some people disagree with them in the learning environment. The educational setting should facil...