• Welcome to the Internet Infidels Discussion Board.

Academic insanity strikes again

 
 
 
What frightens me is that I don't think this is peak nonsense yet. I think there are still heights to be scaled (or depths plumbed) in the current campus madness.
 
Loren Pechtel said:
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/trigger-warnings-for-oxford-law-students-distressed-by-crime/

Law students can avoid lectures involving potentially upsetting crimes.

Sorry, you think you're not going to encounter the stuff when you use that law degree??? If you can't handle it in the classroom you don't belong in the field!
Click to expand...

Perhaps they're going into civil criminal law and thus won't ever need to be exposed to such information?

Kinda like me teasing a doctor after she told me she fainted at the sight of blood during her residency rotations. "But you're a doctor!" I said.

She replied, "I'm not a surgeon, am I?"
 
Well, as long as the material is still on the exam, I don't see an issue with them deciding to skip the class. It allows Oxford to get the full admissions price from the student without the risk of their becoming lawyers with important gaps in their knowledge later on.
 
BH said:
I think a lot of academia is blowing smoke.
Click to expand...

Oh my god, dude. I have an uncle who died of lung cancer, you know? Could you try to have a little bit of concern and respect for others before you shout out trigger warning like that so I can go and hide in my safe space before seeing it's?

It's called manners. :mad:
 
Loren Pechtel said:
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/trigger-warnings-for-oxford-law-students-distressed-by-crime/

Law students can avoid lectures involving potentially upsetting crimes.

Sorry, you think you're not going to encounter the stuff when you use that law degree??? If you can't handle it in the classroom you don't belong in the field!
Click to expand...

Not all lawyers are criminal lawyers. And many people do develop PTSD after extensively reading about and dealing with brutal crimes.

A serial killer hunter gets PTSD from his exposure to crimes.

From the link:Students speaking about the new regime to the Mail on Sunday said academics are now careful to give warning before they discuss rape and sexual assault – even though the crimes are a compulsory area of study.

So let's say you were raped as a child and are going into corporate or contract law, is it necessary to expose yourself to the rape trauma all over again if you know you will never practice criminal law?
 
credoconsolans said:
Loren Pechtel said:
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/trigger-warnings-for-oxford-law-students-distressed-by-crime/

Law students can avoid lectures involving potentially upsetting crimes.

Sorry, you think you're not going to encounter the stuff when you use that law degree??? If you can't handle it in the classroom you don't belong in the field!
Click to expand...

Perhaps they're going into civil criminal law and thus won't ever need to be exposed to such information?

Kinda like me teasing a doctor after she told me she fainted at the sight of blood during her residency rotations. "But you're a doctor!" I said.

She replied, "I'm not a surgeon, am I?"
Click to expand...

Except, this is a "compulsory" course. How many days in a "compulsory" courses was the doctor permitted to miss because the subject matter made them nauseous? And, this is nothing like a medical students' "residency." Rather this involves law students in law school and attending a "compulsory" class in law school. Medical residency is more parallel to law students interning in a particular field of law, whether public or private.
 
Nice Squirrel said:
Loren Pechtel said:
http://heatst.com/culture-wars/trigger-warnings-for-oxford-law-students-distressed-by-crime/

Law students can avoid lectures involving potentially upsetting crimes.

Sorry, you think you're not going to encounter the stuff when you use that law degree??? If you can't handle it in the classroom you don't belong in the field!
Click to expand...

Not all lawyers are criminal lawyers. And many people do develop PTSD after extensively reading about and dealing with brutal crimes.

A serial killer hunter gets PTSD from his exposure to crimes.

From the link:Students speaking about the new regime to the Mail on Sunday said academics are now careful to give warning before they discuss rape and sexual assault – even though the crimes are a compulsory area of study.

So let's say you were raped as a child and are going into corporate or contract law, is it necessary to expose yourself to the rape trauma all over again if you know you will never practice criminal law?
Click to expand...

Not all lawyers are criminal lawyers.
Click to expand...

Similarly, not all doctors are geneticists, neurosurgeons, or psychiatrists, and yet courses in genetics, neuroscience, and human behavior are required courses for some, maybe most, medical schools. There are some very good reasons why medical students, and lawyers, are exposed to subject matter they will never practice. Property is a required course and yet not all lawyers are estate lawyers, probate attorneys, attorneys practicing in the area of zoning laws, etcetera. Constitutional law is also a required course, and yet, not all lawyers will be constitutional lawyers or practice in the area of constitutional law.

This notion the law student may not practice in the area of law being covered in a course offered by the law school, and therefore, do not have to attend, or is not be expected to attend, all of the classes, is misplaced.

So let's say you were raped as a child and are going into corporate or contract law, is it necessary to expose yourself to the rape trauma all over again if you know you will never practice criminal law.
Click to expand...

Fair point, but the solution is not some broad and generalized approach of permitting students to excuse themselves from the class on a particular day because the material or subject matter for that day may be offend their delicate sensibilities.
 
Unless attendance was compulsory to begin with, this is another example of over-reaction. And before anyone says the course is compulsory, that does not mean attendance is compulsory. Students are required to know the material regardless of attendance. BTW, anyone who has been a student knows there is a distinct difference between attendance and paying attention. So why is this an issue?
 
It sounds from the article that the students are just being warned, not necessarily excused from the class sessions.
 
And then there's me, who thinks that all these fragile snowflakes need some LSD, some MDMA, and a record on loop of all the things that trigger them.

Then nail that stands out gets hammered down. The solution isn't to coddle irrational anxiety responses. It is to break those responses.
 
So a whole article is about nothing? Is this the Seinfeld of journalism?

And if the professors did give a warning that the subject of the lecture may be disturbing before giving the lecture, so what? It's done all the time on TV newscasts. Hell, it's even required here.
 
ZiprHead said:
So a whole article is about nothing? Is this the Seinfeld of journalism?

And if the professors did give a warning that the subject of the lecture may be disturbing before giving the lecture, so what? It's done all the time on TV newscasts. Hell, it's even required here.
Click to expand...

Also, it doesn't say the students aren't responsible for knowing the relevant law topics, just that they can skip the lecture if they don't feel comfortable sitting in class for it. Complete non-story.
 
Here in the U.S., criminal law and procedure is on the bar exam in every state. The argument from the lay point of view that if one doesn't plan on practicing in a certain area then they shouldn't have to take X course makes sense until you understand that to know criminal law is to truly understand the complexities behind intent and act, as well as the depths of the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 8th Amendments of the federal Constitution. And in contract law, which permeates nearly every area of the law, intent and action (performance) is often at issue.

For example, a breach of contract may be only that. But if the breach results in injury to a person, then you could be looking at a tort and a criminal act as well. So if you're going to do purely transactional law, you still need to know to an adequate degree, the elements of what constitutes a certain tortious act and if that act is also a criminal act. Each area of the law often intersects with several other areas so it's important to have at least a basic knowledge of as many fields as possible.

Anyway, in understanding act and intent, murder and rape are the most illustrative. But could a student skip those and still go on to be a good transactional lawyer? Yeah. But the critical analysis of the minutiae that you're presented with in criminal law can only be helpful. It certainly maximizes your ability to help a client.
 
pant, pant, pant. I got the diapers and safety pins. Where are the wusies?

No wusies? Still have to know cases?

Hey, I have a rail, some tar and feathers. Now all we need is a rope and Loren Pechtel and we can re-enact a scene from "Oh Brother ...":devil-smiley-029:
 
laughing dog said:
Unless attendance was compulsory to begin with, this is another example of over-reaction. And before anyone says the course is compulsory, that does not mean attendance is compulsory. Students are required to know the material regardless of attendance. BTW, anyone who has been a student knows there is a distinct difference between attendance and paying attention. So why is this an issue?
Click to expand...

I am not familiar with Oxford law school, but the law school I graduated from had an attendance policy. The policy included the potential of the professor dropping the student from a class on the basis of too many absences. A student dropped, as a result of too many absences, from one of the required (compulsory) classes received a grade of F in the course unless the successful petition for a W designation (Withdrawn). I suspect an attendance policy exists at many law schools, especially since many seek ABA approval to be ABA approved they must comply with, among other provisions, the requirement of having an attendance policy found in 311(f) of the ABA Standards for Approval of Law Schools.

I suspect, but admittedly may be incorrect, that Oxford law school has an attendance policy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom