Read on Twitter
If you are in the privileged position of imparting knowledge/teaching, you should always be a referee, a moderator. You must encourage all sorts of views/debates , taking special care that you don’t reveal your biases. As we all have them.
Our young people come from a culture where they are usually talked down by parents/teachers rather than their views getting entertained. A consequence of that is that they are prone to talking aggressive far right/far left positions because they find comfort in the same.
A standard staple of my Jurisprudence course is a topic on Legal Feminism, a critique of legal structures from a feminist viewpoint. There is virtually always a kid, usually a sullen male who takes great pride in will quoting Jordan Peterson/Ben Shapiro “critique’ on feminists
There is a duty not treat that student with contempt and vilify his argument; as he likely to withdraw and not speak in class again. That is a loss to teaching and to learning.
It is important to engage that student. It is necessary to tell him that he’s doing himself on favours by ignoring factual positions on how legal systems have empirically failed women. He might then be encouraged to engage beyond their 8 minute Youtube video.
We were introduced to the Socratic method by @laalshah sahib in our LLB. We didn’t know squat about how to engage in a viewpoint due to our rudimentary views, but he challenged us with sustained questions, so much so that we (eventually) saw both sides of the argument.
The Socratic method works because more questions shall result in more nuance. However, views must never be forced long people . It’s even more essential for lawyers. The practice of law, be it corporate or constitutional is an ability to have a birds eye view of issues.
It is also significant to tease out views that people might find odious. You are unlikely to have these discussions elsewhere; you must have the freedom to engage, without self-censoring yourself. That is the whole point of learning.
If you do not tolerate individuals in panels that have a view distinct to yours, you are in an echo-chamber. This is magnified in social media as you will always follow like minded people. Strive to fight for a level playing field, one that engages all views, not just yours.
In elite private universities (my small sample size) your average student’s general knowledge is poor but they are very curious. A discussion on the PTM, Blasphemy Law, the status of Ahmedis from legal/jurisprudential POV in my class have been heated, fiery but respectful.
The positivist H.L.A Hart said on the subject of law making which is a euphemism for life “You must safeguard the sanctity of bad laws, in order to preserve a moral critique of those laws.” In other words bad view points need to be safeguarded so they can be criticised.
Too much of our engagement, particularly on social media is talking down/cancelling people. That is bad on its own but chronically terminal for younger folk, as they may act out of spite and cancel you. This is the duty we all owe.
