You're listening to, atheistically speaking. The Hello and I to atheistically speaking this is episode 239 and I'm your

host Thomas Smith. All right here it is the very long waited and and also quite

long part three between Eli and James this focuses focus is on trigger warnings. I hope you've enjoyed

this debate and I will see you afterward.

But one thing we haven't even talked about is trigger warnings.

So I don't, I didn't, I do know what they are.

I was familiar with the concept going into it, but I decided this was a topic I actually

needed to look up to know more about if I was going to talk to you about it because I'm not

familiar with the relevant literature and so like I said I wanted to bring up in

particular I was talking about I mentioned the the problem with law school

law education and I mentioned the paper by Kim Champon and I'm saying her name

wrong I know I'm saying it wrong I'm having a hard time with that name. But it's called Crisis and Trigger

Warnings, Reflections on Legal Education and the Social Value of Law was

published in Chicago Kent Law Review 2015. Now I want to bring this

one up particularly because she's pointing at a particular problem and her solution is actually

trigger warnings so it's contrary to my point of view.

There are other law professors, Jenny Suk like I mentioned, Alan Derschwas at Harvard,

Eugene Volak at UCLA, that I'll bring up the same problem.

And this I know is something you're a little bit familiar with Eli, that rape law, you actually,

now I know you said at some point that if you knew that there were professors that were

shying away from teaching rape law in first year criminal law and it was documented

then you would recognize that as a major problem and that is exactly what these papers document is that this is actually

...