Yes exactly.

Also, if a certain subject "triggers" a person i would have thought that exposing yourself to that subject and facing it head on would be the best way to deal with it? Like surely learning how to not become "triggered" is a more healthy option mentally than running and hiding from it?

The way I look at this is...if you are studying (for example) criminal law or something, and you suffer PTSD (most people who yell triggered do not suffer this, they just want attention) as you were raped. And you have to do some work on rape...one, you should really know this would be part of the course. Two, warnings and such are all well and good but lets say you did get a job in the area you are studying. in real life there will be NO trigger warnings given, you really do just have to get on with it, as hard as that will be for someone with PTSD. So surely its better to learn how to deal with it at uni, before actually going into the workplace?

Its not a nice situation. However if you really are that traumatized and such from a topic, then it probably is not the career direction for you?

I don't understand your link between education and emotion? You can be professional and experienced in any field and still feel...

'free from moral limitations' why?... why should anyone expect to be free of moral limitations at uni as opposed to anywhere else?
Of course you should be exposed to it I haven't said you shouldn't, however should you have a need, then a warning prior is a perfect way of gaining the exposure without the anxiety.
It is unrealistic to suggest that a person studying to that level wouldn't be aware of the requirements of the role, that said the delivery of the information is key. These warnings may even serve to reduce the risk of anyone dropping out.

I think it depends really, complete avoidance results in repression but on the other hand going in too hard can be a disaster. Major example would be the victims of serious childhood abuse encountering not only case studies of similar things, but also having the psychological consequences laid out on front of them. If it's someone who still has some of that trauma "behind walls", chipping away at the wall before that person has extensively worked through their past with professional help is usually a very bad idea. The human mind is very good at protecting itself in basic ways but, to be honest, not brilliant at healing itself without conscious effort. Which is essentially what "triggering" is - the basic protections failing around an issue that hasn't been addressed fully, resulting in emotional distress.

But people know, in general, what their "wounds" are... And they know where these issues are likely to come up. Also people who HAVE fully worked through their issues will know it. It doesn't happen by accident or automatically.

So I would basically say... Even though it may seem harsh... If you know that you have trigger issues, then the sensible option is to not enter a course of academic study that is likely to "go there" without getting professional therapy first. Don't start one and then realise "Uh oh I don't think I can handle this...".

Well if we can all just 'get over' everything what is the need for psychologists such as the lecturer?...he's doing himself out of a damn job the wally!

I don't mean "get over it" just like that if it's something seriously traumatic like the example TS gave but if it is that serious then that person probably shouldn't be in a course that "triggers" them because they can't then complete all the course material involved.

Basically what TS said in his last post

I do take the potential for people to become emotionally distressed seriously, as I said in the post above, it's not really about that though. A University degree / lecture theatre is not the appropriate place for people to start engaging in mindful exposure to an issue. Yes, doing so is a big part of the recovery process, but frankly, that process should have been explored extensively long before considering higher education in the area.

As for why not having stumbling blocks / limitations in a university setting is important... I suppose that's partly personal opinion but I believe that Universities are - or at least should still be - primarily places where we seek to collectively improve understanding of the subjects themselves. They are for the pursuit and advancement of human knowledge. It may sound harsh but I can't stand the idea of that pursuit being capped, in any way, by the limitations of the individual. I don't think it's always an environment that's suitable for everyone. It CAN be, but that would be down to the individual preparing themselves before even applying... Not commencing, and then expecting to get prepared later.

So instead of issuing a warning it's just best they don't even try?
That's not very productive,no.. we are not willing to adjust, you can just foff, is that how it should be?

But after uni, there won't be any warnings. So how will they deal with it then? Is it not better to be realistic, and if the course is not for them they can switch, rather than 'protect' (sorry couldn't think of a better way to put that) these people and then throw them to the wolves after they have spent 4/5 years studying the subject? If they can't deal with the trigger stuff at uni, then they definitely cannot in the real world where its chance to be so much harsher.

Isn't it?.... where else are you going to get it then, I thought debate and education were in integral part of socialisation and formed the cornerstone of our critical thinking?...where better?

Survival of the fittest eh?... Hey, teenager do you need support! well, this is not the place for you.

There are, there are warnings before upsetting news items, on films, on soaps...

I think that is a far too Molly-coddling attitude and not beneficial to most ordinary well-balanced people of which it would be imagined most university students would be.

All universities would have student welfare departments for those that need extra help.

All this trigger nonsence is PC gone mad and detrimental to the over-all psychological health of people living in the real world. It creates a very needy and lazy society.

Sorry you lost me at this, I was interested but then the comprehension was lost. I don't recognise this as a valid term with which to express any opinion.

Yeah Brillo don't ruin what could have been a perfectly good point with daft phrases like "PC Gone Mad"!

There's a point in there somewhere. It should be assumed that, whilst it is a major issue and a large number of people ARE affected, the majority of students on a course will not have any related trigger issues and those students also have to be considered. That's where it gets a bit theoretical but, given that the usefulness of trigger warnings is also purely theoretical (to my knowledge, it has never been extensively studied), I think still valid;

Human beings are social animals. We constantly perceive invisible social cues from those around us and our behaviour and psychology adapts accordingly, and that needs to be taken into account before stating that you are about to approach a topic that "may" trigger anxiety ... ... ... because effectively what you are saying is "This definitely makes some people anxious!". The result of that, is that it immediately becomes MORE likely to make OTHERS anxious. It's a contentious issue but there is a theory - and one that I actually believe, personally - that anxiety can be "infectious". In the same way that seeing someone yawn makes you yawn... being told (and therefore becoming aware) that people around you are anxious kicks in a primordial instinct to also be anxious. In simple terms, it promotes on a subliminal level; "Other people are in a fight or flight state. Should I be in a fight or flight state?? Is there danger??"

Yes, but not at work?