COLLOQUY Responses
|
|
COLLOQUY Responses
|
 As usual, the "easy" cases -- outright intimidation, gratuitous "in-your-face" rudeness, etc. -- are the ones that receive the most publicity, but they're probably not the heart of the matter. It's the gray areas that will probably cause us the most consternation, both in terms of how to define them and what to do about them. I teach classes on social pathologies (AIDS, violence, substance abuse) in a public health context. We work long and hard to facilitate an atmosphere where students can feel free to express their opinions, openly and passionately, without fear of reprisal or being branded "incorrect" from any angle of the political/ideological spectrum. When things really get rolling, the students will drop their decorum and confront me with the same vigor, intensity, and fearlessness with which they may confront a peer. The ground rules are made clear: enthusiasm and heat are expected and encouraged, but I will broach no personal attacks, racist/sexist/etc. slurs, or intimidation. It's inevitable, however, that in the heat of argument, things will sometimes "slip out"; statements will be made that can be interpreted as intimidating, rude, or bigoted. Indeed, sometimes a student will recoil after making a particularly vitriolic statement, having come face-to-face with a prejudice, an intolerance, or an anger that he or she had never acknowledged before. When this occurs we stop the discussion, take a couple of breaths, and confront what just happened -- if an apology is called for, it's usually given willingly; if not, the student(s) and I can meet after class to discuss the matter further. The place where the "personal" meets the "political" is a treacherous intersection -- like the fabled Delta crossroads where bluesmen were once rumored to sell their souls to the devil for the chance to become musical geniuses, it's a place where all manner of heretofore unseen evils & dangers can accost even the most well-meaning of truth seekers. In our zeal to stamp out rudeness & incivility, we need to make sure that we don't forbid our students from exploring this dangerous but vital nexus -- passion, emotional commitment, even anger and confrontation can be essential components of debate, discovery, and enlightenment.
|
IN THIS DEBATE: The question Background Responses Join the debate IN THIS SECTION: Colloquy Letters to the editor Write to us Help |
|||
|
||||
previous response