USC prof no longer teaching after using Chinese word that sounds like racial slur

[Robin]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

No, it's a simple liberal overreaction, and the Chinese have never been racist? Their treatment of their own Muslim population and other Non Chinese. really?

Too many Professors are getting mugged by the PC agenda, and College at one time was a place where kids got confronted with a whole array of ideas, including the disturbing to help them develop into more well rounded adults as opposed to the Space Space inhabitants we see today.

I kind of remember the world as being a place where people had the basic intelligence and initiative to find out stuff for themselves.

But maybe we shouldn't expect college students to be able to do that kind of thing.

[Robin]

I learned about Nazi Germany by reading a number of books on the subject.

But I guess I am not well-rounded because I didn't have some college lecturer say it at me.

[Robin]

I was once reading an article by a senior academic in Ancient History and he said that the credit for modern science belongs to the Christian religion and that the Ancient Greeks would have found the concept of testing something illogical because they believed that knowledge had to be deduced from unchallenged axioms.

Now I don't know much about Ancient Greece, but I do know that he is wrong on this - there is no such thing as "What the Ancient Greeks Thought" because there was a large diversity of ideas and one of them was the idea of empiricism and in particular that something cannot be true if it contradicts observations.

So I am a little less than enthusiastic about the idea that I might be a more well-rounded person if I had college lecturers say things at me as opposed to going and doing the reading for myself.

[EHocking]

Originally Posted by Robin

I kind of remember the world as being a place where people had the basic intelligence and initiative to find out stuff for themselves.

But maybe we shouldn't expect college students to be able to do that kind of thing.

I'm anticipating college students to get to the point that their lecturer merely mentioning the word "trigger" in his course introduction will be enough to trigger the snowflakes that are entering tertiary eduction these days.

[Robin]

Well I don't know what the proportion of these kind of events are.

I recall the "puppy room" saga, where there was going to be a debate including someone who had controversial views on rape.

So they set up a safe space for students triggered by this including the now infamous videos of gambolling puppies.

So I go and research further into this, and it turns out that there were about 24 people in that room the entire day.

On the other hand the debate was crowded, standing room only.

When people tell this story they emphasise the puppy room, but usually leave out the crowded, standing room only debate, because that contradicts their narrative that students today are snowflakes who can't stand to hear any view they don't agree with.

So I wonder whether these examples we hear are the rule or the exception.

[Robin]

For the record, I think the incident in the OP is an absurd over-reaction too.

[Wudang]

2 years ago my 13 year old daughter was learning about Nazi Germany at school.
c.f https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guide...q6f/revision/1

Slightly amused to note that anyone saying that chinese word is the same as that english word is literally "tone deaf".

[RedStapler]

Originally Posted by rockysmith76

No, it's a simple liberal overreaction, and the Chinese have never been racist? Their treatment of their own Muslim population and other Non Chinese. really?

Too many Professors are getting mugged by the PC agenda, and College at one time was a place where kids got confronted with a whole array of ideas, including the disturbing to help them develop into more well rounded adults as opposed to the Space Space inhabitants we see today.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Modified

The "American History" course I took in college spent the first half of the quarter on the influence of the automobile, and the second half on five or so very specific topics - so one week each. One of them was the Battle of Manilla Bay. I can't remember the rest, but it was 32 years ago. That course expected analysis and understanding, unlike a typical high school course. Then I took two art history courses, which were much more high-school-like, with lots of memorizing of facts.

That's a shame. At my university, art history was geographically specific. My Asian Art history class, while broad, was also quite deep. It delved into the influence of religion on the development of art throughout the area, and how that changed over time. It also touched on the assimilation of pre-existing religions into the amalgam of artistic representations that differ by geography, including for example, the incorporation of pre-Buddhist concepts into Thai representations of Buddhist art, particularly with respect to Bodhisattva. It was a fascinating class... although it actually counted as an Art class, rather than a history class!

[Dr. Keith]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

US universities do. If you want a Bachelor's degree from an accredited university, there's a core educational requirement that covers a broad range of subjects, paired with the bulk of your studies being of degree-specific relevance. That standard doesn't apply to organizations classed as "colleges" but not universities, nor does it apply to organizations providing Associate degrees or technical certifications. Those organizations generally only require topic-specific classes.

I don't know what the standards are elsewhere in the world.

This is largely true, but there can also be differences between BAs, BSs, and other Bachelor degrees. For example, most BA programs require some foreign language credits while most BSs do not. BSs also tend to have fewer general credits than most BA programs.

Engineering BSs are also sometimes more particular about what will qualify for things like writing credits, typically requiring technical writing or something similar. Our engineering program even had their own pre-reqs in most of the sciences. Such that you took "physics for engineers", not just "physics" and it was taught by physics professors who resented being used as a tool by the engineering department. Always good fun.

[gypsyjackson]

Originally Posted by Wudang

2 years ago my 13 year old daughter was learning about Nazi Germany at school.
c.f https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guide...q6f/revision/1

Slightly amused to note that anyone saying that chinese word is the same as that english word is literally "tone deaf".

Well, if the tones had been different, the professor could have been saying ‘putrid pigeon’ (nei3 gē) or ‘neon clam’ (nèi gé).

[Roboramma]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

Pretty much agreed.

I was also troubled by the objection letter making the comment that people speaking chinese in america should know that a common word in their language is offensive and avoid using it.

Did they really say that? 那个 literally means "that". Imagine someone told you to stop using the word "that". Sorry, but that's insane.

[Wudang]

Originally Posted by gypsyjackson

Well, if the tones had been different, the professor could have been saying ‘putrid pigeon’ (nei3 gē) or ‘neon clam’ (nèi gé).

I've tried learning Cantonese a couple of times and I just cannot hear about half the tones.

[Emily's Cat]

Originally Posted by Roboramma

Did they really say that? 那个 literally means "that". Imagine someone told you to stop using the word "that". Sorry, but that's insane.

That's how I read it...

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/10/u...cli/index.html

Quote:

"In China, the common word is 'that' -- that, that, that, that," he said in the video, before using the equivalent Chinese term nei ge several times to demonstrate.

...

"This phrase, clearly and precisely before instruction is always identified as a phonetic homonym and a racial derogatory term, and should be carefully used, especially in the context of speaking Chinese within the social context of the United States," ​according to the letter, which accused Patton of negligence.

"The way we heard it in class was indicative of a much more hurtful word with tremendous implications for the Black community."

It really does seem ridiculous to me. The response from the school, and the corresponding response from the Chinese community, seem to indicate rampant cowardliness at play here.

Quote:

"Professor Greg Patton repeated several times a Chinese word that sounds very similar to a vile racial slur in English," said Garrett in the email. "Understandably, this caused great pain and upset among students, and for that I am deeply sorry. It is simply unacceptable for faculty to use words in class that can marginalize, hurt and harm the psychological safety of our students. We must and we will do better."

...

Some pointed out that labeling nei ge or its pronunciation as offensive, as the USC ​administration seemed to do, following the letter, only makes sense within an Anglophone bubble -- that doing so portrays the Chinese language as subject to English rules rather than independent and possessing its own contexts.

To me, it is NOT understandable that hearing a common word in a foreign language could cause great pain and upset among students, unless those students are several mentally disabled and emotionally stunted.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

[Wudang]

Originally Posted by Emily's Cat

That's how I read it...

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/09/10/u...cli/index.html



It really does seem ridiculous to me. The response from the school, and the corresponding response from the Chinese community, seem to indicate rampant cowardliness at play here.



To me, it is NOT understandable that hearing a common word in a foreign language could cause great pain and upset among students, unless those students are several mentally disabled and emotionally stunted.

But hey, that's just my opinion.

There’s an interesting bit near the end IIRC of Sokal and Bricmonts book where they talk about the left in the USA having gone from seeking improvement in the lives of the masses (words to that effect) and retreated to playing intellectual games of (where is that book?) one upmanship, sterile debates, or what one UK Labour MP called the ideological purity of opposition to the hard decisions of power.
If you keep finding these little battles in safe places you can feel you’ve achieved something maybe.
I’ll try to find the book.

[Ron Obvious]

Originally Posted by Wudang

There’s an interesting bit near the end IIRC of Sokal and Bricmonts book where they talk about the left in the USA having gone from seeking improvement in the lives of the masses (words to that effect) and retreated to playing intellectual games of (where is that book?) one upmanship, sterile debates, or what one UK Labour MP called the ideological purity of opposition to the hard decisions of power.
If you keep finding these little battles in safe places you can feel you’ve achieved something maybe.
I’ll try to find the book.

The "Woke" always turn on each other in a never-ending battle of escalating purity and victimhood points.

See Atheism+ and what happened there for an illustrative example of the results of paying attention to them.