We’ve written quite a bit about Trigger Warnings since before it became fashionable:

The fragile college student mind is getting more fragile by the day.

As if the normal run of political correctness were not enough, we now have “Trigger Warnings” — the notion that students need to be warned that the material they are about to read in class may “trigger” emotional upset….

Of course, how the trigger is defined says much about the theory behind the movement — it almost always serves left-wing critical race and gender theories ….

The Trigger Warning movement is all about enforcing a conformity of thought by forcing faculty and others to identify and warn about politically incorrect ideas.

The Trigger Warning in the Featured Image was displayed at Oberlin when Christina Hoff Sommers spoke:

Image credit: Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute

Image credit: Clare Boothe Luce Policy Institute

UT-Arlington Philosophy Prof. Keith Burgess-Jackson has come up with a Trigger Warning for his Philosophy of Religion class.

He writes:

I’ve decided to include a trigger warning in each course syllabus, beginning this fall. Here is the trigger warning for my upcoming Philosophy of Religion course. What do you think?

What do I think?

I think the precious, fragile souls demanding Trigger Warnings will demand that you put a Trigger Warning on this Trigger Warning.

Here we go:

Philosophy of religion is not for the faint-hearted, the close-minded, the thinskinned, the timid, the hypersensitive, the squeamish, the unintellectual (or antiintellectual), the developmentally arrested, the childish, or the easily offended. If you are traumatized (or even dismayed) by the idea of a punitive (retributive) god, or by the use of masculine pronouns (such as “He,” “Him,” or “His”) to refer to God, or by the mere possibility that God is male (rather than female, androgynous, or asexual), then this course is not for you. If you believe in God but are unwilling to entertain the possibility that your belief is false, then this course is not for you, since we will be examining (and taking seriously) arguments against the existence of God. If you disbelieve in God but are unwilling to entertain the possibility that your belief is false, then this course is not for you, since we will be examining (and taking seriously) arguments for the existence of God. If you are an adherent of a particular religion and believe it to be blasphemous, sinful, heretical, or immoral to think about, discuss, or take seriously other religions, then this course is not for you. If you believe that argumentation in particular or philosophy in general is coercive, masculine, belligerent, or militaristic, then this course is not for you. If you believe that morality is oppressive, sexist, or nothing more than a prop for capitalism or some other economic system, or that the making of moral judgments is “judgmental” (in the sense of being overly or gratuitously critical), then this course is not for you, for we will be examining (and taking seriously) an argument (the so-called Moral Argument) to the effect that the existence of morality (or the fact that we make moral judgments, or the fact that moral judgments or values are objective) supports, implies, or presupposesthe existence of God. If you are distressed or discomfited by the concept of evil, or by the possibility that there is evil in the world, or by the possibility that some people (or their actions) are evil, then this is not the course for you, because we will be asking whether (and, if so, how) the existence of evil (natural or moral) renders the existence of God either impossible or improbable. In short, this course, like any other philosophy course, is for thick-skinned, mature, open-minded, intellectually curious people.

What do you think?