Although many might address their most common writing error as something grammatical, I’ve found that I don’t often struggle with grammar in my papers. Instead, I usually struggle with being concise and laying my ideas out clearly. It’s mostly for this reason that I chose paper 3 as my significant writing project; I’m proud of the way I lay my ideas out throughout the essay. I’m most proud of the third paragraph:
“An abundance of empathetic fulfillment can also damage conversation and leave students with yet another disadvantage in the real world. A good example of this is “cancel culture”. As “cancel culture” has risen throughout the past decade, more and more students have become afraid to speak out on their inner beliefs. This can be damaging for a multitude of reasons, and it just so happens that Lukianoff and Haidt comment on this concept as well. The two note that this rise in sensitivity and its encouragement throughout college campuses “is creating a culture in which everyone must think twice before speaking up, lest they face charges of insensitivity, aggression, or worse” (Lukianoff and Haidt 263). This passage attests to the issue of inhibited discussion, and it even brings attention to the fact that otherwise innocent debate can now be deemed “insensitive” and “aggressive”. Why is this an issue, though? Upon first glance, it may seem as though this development is for the best. Why should we allow insensitive and aggressive commentary when it only serves to harm others’ emotional well-being? The answer is complex, but it’s important nonetheless. To put it plainly, discussion serves as the main catalyst for growth within the human race. As humans, we all host a multitude of unique and complex experiences. With these experiences also come distinct opinions and philosophies that serve as the basis for how we operate throughout life. Society functions via the cooperation of the human race, though, not through the prosperity of the individual. If we all function solely on our own beliefs, conflict will arise and solutions will not. Discussion therefore allows us to integrate our own beliefs with the beliefs of others to produce complex and pragmatic solutions. In other words, discussion is a big component in critical thinking. If discussion is inhibited, it’s safe to say this process will come to a halt. This is the other, larger implication of an overly empathetic learning environment. If we are to limit discussion to only agreeable, happy conversation points, we will no longer progress as a society. This is alarming, and it once again speaks to why colleges cannot foster overly empathetic and coddled learning environments. Should colleges then emphasize critical thinking at the cost of emotional well-being?”
Throughout this paragraph I discuss both my own view, the views of the authors I cite, and the views of others with respect to the main argument I’m trying to make. On top of this, I can’t help but think that I lay my ideas out in a well communicated, easy to read way. In my prior two papers, I definitely wasn’t able to this with such elegance.
