Diversity of Everything but Thought

Quote:

We also wondered why you do not investigate the political coloration of, say, the Business School, whose new dean is an outspoken supporter of the president.

Excellent question asked by Professor William Harris. Anyone have an idea?

Quote:

The difficulty you experienced in thinking of good historians who are, in American terms, conservative, should have led you to ask why that was so. Is it possible that serious scholarly study of history tends to lead a person towards the left?

Another interesting point. Correlation does not prove causation.

0 Replies

That was Krugman's argument too and, with no extenuating circumstances added, it could be persuasive.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

And no, everybody, I have no more information on the questions used to conduct the studies than what has been posted here. I just know how research studies such as this are done.

Here's the link to the Santa Clara study. It looks like it's the same study mentioned by George Will in his mention of "another study." So it's nothing new.

Santa Clara study

It was easy to find.

0 Replies

I personally believe there is far more behind this recent attention paid to intellectualism in our universities than concern over the students. I believe that this is just another salvo in a cultural war of Oppression of Liberal thought in our society. I believe that the thesis has been shown, and admitted by the proponent of the thesis, to hold no water. Therefore, there is little left to discuss without the introduction of new information into the equation.

ICan: good suggestions, thanks; you are 100% correct that I should have stated that there is no persuasive or good argument being forwarded.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

But thank you Lola. If you and any other genuinely thinking favorite lefties concede that there is a disproportionate number of Democrats and/or left-leaning faculty on mainstream college campuses, we can move on from that point.

And I have conceded, as did Ican earlier, and as have others, that we (the pro bias crowd) have not yet provided a convincing case sufficient to prove that such disparity is a problem for a significant number of students.

If we can agree on that, we can move on from there too.

0 Replies

I think that the 'we' conceded that there were a preponderance of Liberals on campus a long time ago.

This doesn't say why, however; I think Lola's quote:

Quote:

The difficulty you experienced in thinking of good historians who are, in American terms, conservative, should have led you to ask why that was so. Is it possible that serious scholarly study of history tends to lead a person towards the left?

Provides an answer which some are not willing to admit has truth behind it; namely, higher education tends to make one more liberal in general.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

I went back looking for the source of those quotes of Ican you posted, KW, as I would like to see them in their full context. I gave up as it goes back too far. I think he could be asked politely whether he has read the book, and I am pretty sure he would give a straight forward answer.

...So on this one I give benefit of the doubt to both Horowitz and Ican with no suggestion that Ican categorically supports Horowitz's views on anything. Ican is more than capable of speaking for himself on that.

Foxfyre, you are correct.

For emphasis to those to whom you addressed your comments:
I did not read Horowitz's book, "The Art of Political War and Other Special Pursuits." I will not read this book until and unless someone, anyone, provides me persuasive evidence that Horowitz, in his book, recommends that the Republican leadership adopt the tactics which it has been alleged Horowitz described as the tactics of the current Democrat leadership.

0 Replies

Ican

I'm not sure that not reading a book will have the consequence of your being more educated. On the other hand, there are likely very many books that, read as opposed to not read, will produce salutory gains in education. I can recommend some. Please just let me know.

0 Replies

Shrug. Don't read it, then. No sweat off of my back.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Atkins wrote:

ican711nm wrote:
WITH WHOM DO YOU MORE CLOSELY IDENTIFY?

The castroites work to:
1. Establish different rules for different people;
2. Satisfy everyone’s needs;
3. Equalize everyone’s capabilities;
4. Allege the theories and solutions advocated by their opponents lack sufficient supporting evidence;
5. Vilify their opponents by false description of their opponent's position, or by vilifying the associates of their opponents.

The adamsites work to:
1. Establish the same rules for everyone;
2. Satisfy everyone’s wants;
3. Increase everyone’s capabilities;
4. Propose theories and solutions;
5. Compare the evidence supporting proposed theories and solutions to identify the better theory and solution.

Theory: The differences between castroites and adamsites are probably irreconcilable. Look at the evidence.

Are castroites real or imaginary?

It is my theory that both castroites and adamsites are real. Perhaps there exists in this forum some who identify with castroites or adamsites. If at least one person admits to identifying with the castroites then, since I identify with the adamsites, my theory will be validated.

0 Replies

Cyclop writes

Quote:

Provides an answer which some are not willing to admit has truth behind it; namely, higher education tends to make one more liberal in general.

I would agree with that Cyclop except for the fact that most of the conservatives here on A2K have degrees or at least some higher education. I found a study awhile back--damn if I can find it again but will look for it--that those who listen to conservative talk radio generally have more education than the general population as a whole.

I do think it is common for the young to be more liberal than those who are older though there are young conservative and old liberals. I think the results of elections over the last decade or so is pretty indicative that the majority of the country leans more right than left.

So are mainstream universities more liberal because liberals are better educated? There is no evidence anywhere to support that. Are they more liberal because of the old saw that "those who can do; those who can't teach?" There's no evidence for that either. Are they that way because conservatives are attracted to other pursuits as Krugman suggested? I haven't found anything to back that up.

Are they that way because the environment among university faculties is hostile to conservatives? We have some anecdotal testimony for that; no proof for that; but, with no more infomration available than has thus far been presented, that so far seems the most logical conclusion to me at this time. (I don't expect anybody else to necessarily agree with that.)

But regardless of the reasons, unless those liberal professors are dedicated to providing a balance of liberal and conservative thought with a minimum of prejudicial influence, I still believe students are being short changed and not getting a complete education.

0 Replies

ican711nm wrote:

Atkins wrote:
ican711nm wrote:
WITH WHOM DO YOU MORE CLOSELY IDENTIFY?

The castroites work to:
1. Establish different rules for different people;
2. Satisfy everyone's needs;
3. Equalize everyone's capabilities;
4. Allege the theories and solutions advocated by their opponents lack sufficient supporting evidence;
5. Vilify their opponents by false description of their opponent's position, or by vilifying the associates of their opponents.

The adamsites work to:
1. Establish the same rules for everyone;
2. Satisfy everyone's wants;
3. Increase everyone's capabilities;
4. Propose theories and solutions;
5. Compare the evidence supporting proposed theories and solutions to identify the better theory and solution.

Theory: The differences between castroites and adamsites are probably irreconcilable. Look at the evidence.

Are castroites real or imaginary?

It is my theory that both castroites and adamsites are real. Perhaps there exists in this forum some who identify with castroites or adamsites. If at least one person admits to identifying with the castroites then, since I identify with the adamsites, my theory will be validated.

Well, I'm a hatfield. If anyone identifies with a mccoys, then my theory will mean even less than it already does. But we'll commence to shooting each other and that's the whole point of it all, now isn't it?

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

Well, I'm a hatfield. If anyone identifies with a mccoys, then my theory will mean even less than it already does. But we'll commence to shooting each other and that's the whole point of it all, now isn't it?

Classic . . . i love it . . .

0 Replies

Freeduck writes

Quote:

Well, I'm a hatfield. If anyone identifies with a mccoys, then my theory will mean even less than it already does. But we'll commence to shooting each other and that's the whole point of it all, now isn't it?

Not on this thread it isn't. Remember that a Hatfield eventually married a McCoy and the two families lived happily forever after. That's what I hope for Ican's Castroites and Adamites and everybody who is a combination of both. We all have something to bring to the table if we'd just stop shooting at each other.

0 Replies

Can't we all just get along?

0 Replies

Well, adieu my friends, 204 pages about it for me. But for everyone else, have fun.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Ican

I'm not sure that not reading a book will have the consequence of your being more educated. On the other hand, there are likely very many books that, read as opposed to not read, will produce salutory gains in education. I can recommend some. Please just let me know.

Have you, Blatham, read the Horowitz book?

If so will you please transcribe that part that shows explicitly that Horowitz recommended that Republicans adopt the tactics Horowitz allegedly attributes to Democrats.

If not, then I recommend your next reading of contemporary American literature start with the book: "Think a Second Time" by Dennis Praeger.

Then, next I recommend you read: "John Adams" by David McCullough.

Then I urge you to read "American Soldier" by General Tommy Franks.

OK, your turn to recommend! Laughing

0 Replies

Fox

Quote:

So are mainstream universities more liberal because liberals are better educated? There is no evidence anywhere to support that.

You have it backwards.

Mainstream universities are more liberal for a few reasons, not the least of which being that an education tends to make one more liberal. You don't become educated because you already ARE a liberal, you become a liberal as you are more educated.

Of course there are exceptions to the rule; we don't live in a black-and-white world. But I can tell you that they don't call it the Liberal arts for no reason.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

Shrug. Don't read it, then. No sweat off of my back. Cycloptichorn

Perhaps none off your back, but I sense a bead or two off your brow. :wink:

0 Replies

Hey, man, I wouldn't ask anyone to read anything by that guy. Not even my enemies...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Diversity of Everything but Thought

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know