In this article, “Teaching Trigger Warnings: What Pundits Don’t Understand About the Year’s Most Controversial Higher-Ed Debate” by Sarah Seltzer, the use of trigger warnings in colleges and universities is discussed. Trigger warnings aid students in effectively coping with harsh content that may induce individuals to feel anxiety, stress, panic, or a flashback. In this article, “Teaching Trigger Warnings,” Seltzer effectively employs ethos, pathos, and logos to make an effective argument in the discussion on trigger warnings.
Credibility is established straight away in this article, and effectively appeals to ethos. The story of a PhD student and aspiring teacher is told, expressing her experiences with trigger warnings. As Kyla Bender-Baird discusses her experiences as an undergraduate student, and then relates it to her experiences now as PhD student, the reader can appreciate this student’s experiences and how she applied them to her own methods of teaching. For example, Bender-Baird informs her students at the beginning of the semester in her syllabus, warning that discomfort may be a part of her class for some, and advising students to take care of their selves. In this way, she explicitly informs her students of possible circumstances that may occur, effectively warning them of upcoming distressing material.
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"“Teaching Trigger Warnings” by Sarah Seltzer – Rhetorical Analysis".
Furthermore, Seltzer incorporates the larger argument of trigger warnings, citing evidence from The New York Times, an instance at Columbia University, and other ongoing political implications. This further appeals to ethos, as it backs up the claims of trigger warnings with substantial evidence. For example, she incorporated the other side of the argument, including those who argue against trigger warnings because it “swaddles” or “coddles” students and maintains a hypersensitive atmosphere. Those who oppose trigger warnings also argue that the real world does not provide these kinds of safe words. Therefore, ethos is effectively established as the credibility of the sources and both sides of the argument are included in this article, rather than being biased and one-sided.
Pathos is also employed throughout this article, as the concept of trigger word relies on human emotion and allowing students to prepare their selves for any discomfort that may arise. Trigger warnings come from PTSD, or post-traumatic stress disorder, psychology. This refers to the ‘triggering’ of re experiencing particular events that have caused harm or trauma to those who have survived. The theory arose after the Vietnam War, as many soldiers had significant PTSD and surrounding issues. In this way, pathos is effectively employed throughout this article by involving human emotions, and the degree to which they are affected, in this study.
Pathos is perhaps the largest contributor, in comparison to ethos and logos, in this article, as it deals extensively with how trigger warnings can affect students’ mentality, as well as their overall experiences in the classroom and beyond. Furthermore, it applies how far reaching trigger words can be, as the ever increasing number of rapes occurring on campuses across the nation have created a large population of students who can be further influenced by disturbing, upsetting, or distressing material that is presented in class.
While several opposing views have been presented in this discussion, there are several interviews with teachers that help to educate the reader on how trigger words are used. As Heldman says, “This is not about your personal life [. . .] This actually helps to make the class more academic.” By using empathetic measures in classrooms, and therefore effectively employing pathos, teachers can perhaps have more insightful teachings and lessons with their students that allow for a deeper analysis of distressing or thought provoking material.
Logos is also at the heart of this article, as the author uses very effective reasoning to make her argument on the use of trigger words. The argument for trigger words is presented, as well as the many surrounding opposing views against trigger words. Additionally, the author also incorporates how important trigger words can be, if only for the mental preparation for students. Arguably, there is much value in mere acknowledgement through a trigger word, especially for students who are survivors of rape, war, or other mentally destabilizing events.
Logos is also employed through the interviews of professors and students, aiding in the effective argument of trigger words. For example, Haylin Belay was interviewed to ascertain more information on her experiences with trigger words, and she has found that professors have been more than accommodating in her requests, particularly if certain material may be distressful. Having a student that experiences the real benefit of trigger words aids in providing concrete reasoning as to why trigger words work for students.
Additionally, professors argue that such trigger words do not “infantilize” students, as some may believe, which further backs up the validity of the claims made in this article. In this way, students are not treated as children; rather, it treats students in a way that tells them they can handle it, and gives them the necessary time to develop a “self-care” plan of action if necessary.
Therefore, this article effectively employs logos, pathos, and ethos throughout the discussion and comprises the core of this investigation on trigger words. Through effective reasoning, credibility, and appealing to the reader’s emotions, a substantiated argument is made on the use of trigger words, how they are employed, and who can benefit from them. While there are several opposing views against the use of trigger words, it is arguable that they provide concrete relief for at least some students in coping with distressing or disturbing material in the classroom.
