Altstadt: For intellectual growth, embrace different ideas, welcome debate

Jacob Altstadt, Columnist

Last month, The Atlantic published an article on the prevalence of trigger warnings on college campuses. Of the many points and arguments the authors presented in the article, called “The Coddling of the American Mind,” one stuck out to me more than the others: their identification and condemnation of the oversensitivity of collegiate student bodies.

I think it goes without saying that the majority of students, including myself, at Northwestern have had at the very least a minor, if not major, run-in with another student taking offense to someone else’s remark. More often than not, the offended student claims emotional injury on the basis that whatever was said, purposefully or not, had harmed their mental well-being. And although I fully support the end of racism, discrimination, stereotypes and anything else that may degrade the humanity of a fellow human being, we, as Northwestern students, have something to gain from the realization that we may be oversensitive during these instances.

Obviously, any ill-willed speech with the blatant intention of hurting another person should be dealt with appropriately, but the oversensitivity issue lies in the situations where the speaker didn’t mean harm in what they were saying but had merely been offering their opinion. In these cases, I’ve found through my experiences that although the intentions may be different between that of a purposeful offender and an accidental one, they are dealt with in the same manner: harsh retaliation and condemnation of what was said.
Therein lies the problem: The act of being offended is played as a trump card in order to diminish anything someone else may say. But defining something as offensive when it differs from your beliefs implies one side of an argument is objectively incorrect, even though there are very few situations where this is actually the case.

At the core of intellectual growth — a primary goal of attending college — is the strengthening of our belief system by encountering views that differ from our own. This is outlined in the Socratic method, where students are constantly challenged by their peers and mentors to both open their mind to new ideas and strengthen their current beliefs by having to defend them in the presence of adversity. The action of defense within the debate fosters critical thinking and mental development. Just like the strain on muscles when lifting weights, the presence of resistance strengthens the brain in the long term, even though there may be some discomfort in the short term.

By taking offense to something rather than giving it actual thought, one may be avoiding this discomfort, but therefore also inherently avoiding intellectual growth. If an idea or statement causes us discomfort and our reaction is to simply avoid said statement, then we are doing ourselves a great disservice by shielding ourselves from those thoughts in favor of emotional comfort.

Not only do we hinder our intelligence, but we also infringe upon the intelligence of other students because they may become wary of voicing their own opinions for fear of unknowingly offending someone. This creates a culture where debate is frowned upon rather than encouraged, intellectual growth is discarded for superficial emotional well-being and we are expected to mindlessly agree with one another. Socrates is rolling in his grave.

As the new school year begins, I encourage students to continue looking out for one another when it comes to discriminatory and hurtful speech. At the same time, keep an open mind when encountering views that differ from yours. Learn to identify when something is actually offensive or not, and when facing an opposing opinion, rather than blindly taking offense from it, keep an open mind and use critical thinking to grow your intellect.

Jacob Altstadt is a McCormick junior. He can be reached at [email protected]. If you would like to respond publicly to this column, send a Letter to the Editor to [email protected].

The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of all staff members of The Daily Northwestern.