Diversity of Everything but Thought

revel wrote:

McGentrix wrote:
Hold the phone, are you suggesting that there ISN'T any liberal bias in the professorships of most university's and colleges? You're basing this on the fact that some people refuse to accept an op/ed as proof?

*egads!*

I never said that isn't any liberal bias in universities. I wouldn't personally know since I have not even stepped inside one much less attended one.

I am saying that the fact that this particular study gets its funding from a majority of conservative organizations with some very conservative people serving in these organizations adds another element to the debate which should be taken into consideration from reasonable people when discussing this particular study.

sort of like letting ken lay in on the energy policy decisions, isn't it ?

0 Replies

Fox, I agree that we will probably have to disagree.

A couple of points that I wish to make:

Correlation:

Correlative studies can possibly show a link between two events/conditions. I emphasize possibly because it is extremely difficult to eliminate all confounding variables.

Correlative studies do not show causation.

Easily convinced:

I would not expect anyone to be easily convinced on a matter as important as education.

Hard evidence:

I find it curious that you continue to insist that you have hard evidence. Hard evidence, almost by definition, would convince.

I grew frustrated that you and McG did not address the problems that some of us perceived in the items posted. Blindly re-posting the same items (different websites, perhaps, but the same info repackaged) came off to me as arrogant (you ignore our questions), inconsiderate (I have to take the time to read it), and insulting (I get the impression you think I'm too stupid to spot the repackaging). If I question your source, I would expect you to either address the point(s) or find a new source.

Edit: Soz beat me to the hard evidence rebuttal; consider this a ditto.

0 Replies

Actually, to adjust what I say above, funding sources are of interest to me -- but what is of more interest is the science. Double-blind, peer reviewed, replicable, that kind of thing.

0 Replies

DrewDad wrote:

Fox, I agree that we will probably have to disagree.

A couple of points that I wish to make:

Correlation:

Correlative studies can possibly show a link between two events/conditions. I emphasize possibly because it is extremely difficult to eliminate all confounding variables.

Correlative studies do not show causation.

Easily convinced:

I would not expect anyone to be easily convinced on a matter as important as education.

Hard evidence:

I find it curious that you continue to insist that you have hard evidence. Hard evidence, almost by definition, would convince.

I grew frustrated that you and McG did not address the problems that some of us perceived in the items posted. Blindly re-posting the same items (different websites, perhaps, but the same info repackaged) came off to me as arrogant (you ignore our questions), inconsiderate (I have to take the time to read it), and insulting (I get the impression you think I'm too stupid to spot the repackaging). If I question your source, I would expect you to either address the point(s) or find a new source.

Edit: Soz beat me to the hard evidence rebuttal; consider this a ditto.

I would expect that instead of merely scoffing at the sources we use and the results that they show that you would in turn find some evidence that either refutes it or perhaps suggests other reasons.

The problems you perceived do not matter. Your perception may be skewed for all I know. All I have seen is a lot of yammering about how we are wrong without data to back it up.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I would expect that instead of merely scoffing at the sources we use and the results that they show that you would in turn find some evidence that either refutes it or perhaps suggests other reasons.

The problems you perceived do not matter. Your perception may be skewed for all I know. All I have seen is a lot of yammering about how we are wrong without data to back it up.

Other reasons for what, McG. Other reasons why there aren't many Republicans in education? That's been tossed around. Other reasons why education is below par? Maybe it hasn't been shown that education is below par. The schools chosen for your studies were ivy league or in the top 25, does that suggest that liberal bias correlates to a superior education?

I have no desire or obligation to prove that there is no liberal bias in American Academia and no need to bring sources forward to prove it. My job, and my pleasure, pure and simple, is to expose and obliterate this liberal bias crap for the unsubstantiated, conspiracy claptrap that it is.

And I feel my job is done. But I am still disappointed, McG, that you would look at what I've written with regard to the studies presented as evidence and conclude that I would only accept a liberal source as an independent source. That just reeks.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I would expect that instead of merely scoffing at the sources we use and the results that they show that you would in turn find some evidence that either refutes it or perhaps suggests other reasons.

I did not start this thread, Foxfyre did. Presumably she wished to convince people of her viewpoint. I ask for proof; she does not provide it. I am not attempting to change her mind; she is attempting to change mine.

McGentrix wrote:

The problems you perceived do not matter. Your perception may be skewed for all I know. All I have seen is a lot of yammering about how we are wrong without data to back it up.

If the problems I perceive do not matter, then perhaps the problems you perceive do not matter. I definitely think your perception is skewed. All I have seen is a lot of opinions without data to back it up.

lol. Thanks for the laugh. Have a nice day.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

The problems you perceived do not matter.

Thanks for illustrating my point about arrogance, btw.

0 Replies

FreeDuck wrote:

McGentrix wrote:

I would expect that instead of merely scoffing at the sources we use and the results that they show that you would in turn find some evidence that either refutes it or perhaps suggests other reasons.

The problems you perceived do not matter. Your perception may be skewed for all I know. All I have seen is a lot of yammering about how we are wrong without data to back it up.

Other reasons for what, McG. Other reasons why there aren't many Republicans in education? That's been tossed around. Other reasons why education is below par? Maybe it hasn't been shown that education is below par. The schools chosen for your studies were ivy league or in the top 25, does that suggest that liberal bias correlates to a superior education?

I have no desire or obligation to prove that there is no liberal bias in American Academia and no need to bring sources forward to prove it. My job, and my pleasure, pure and simple, is to expose and obliterate this liberal bias crap for the unsubstantiated, conspiracy claptrap that it is.

And I feel my job is done. But I am still disappointed, McG, that you would look at what I've written with regard to the studies presented as evidence and conclude that I would only accept a liberal source as an independent source. That just reeks.

Were you to bring forth information, studies, opinion peices, whatever, stating the many of the problems related to higher education today are central to the fact that education has become too conservative and that has harmed students abilities to learn; I would not counter by saying you are lying and your studies prove nothing, I would counter with information, studies, opinion peices, whatever showing how I understood them to be. I would demonstrate that they are not too conservative by quoting the information showing how liberal professors are and how being conservative might be a good thing in today's educational environment. I would find studies refuting the points you are making. I would find anecdotes showing my side of the debate.

None of you have done that. Instead, you have ground you feet into the ground refusing to budge and have decided that Foxfyre is simply wrong and it's up to her to prove to you how wrong she is.

That's crap.

0 Replies

McG. I don't know what thread you've been reading. Can I suggest that you take stiff drink and go back and read it again?

0 Replies

The un-answered failure of the conservative's argument here is that, as has been pointed out by several posters, is that the 'sources' quoted as proof in this argument are two things:

1, opinion pieces, and

2, studies done showing that education quality has declined.

The opinion pieces are useful to display their side of the argument from a rhetorical point of view; I understand that they feel some of the writers can sum up the argument better than they can. But it's hardly proof, or evidence, or anything that an argument should be based on. So what is the argument based on?

It's based upon individual anecdotal reports, and studies done showing education has declined. Noone ever adresses the point that the rise of liberalism and the decline of education are independent statistics - and here's the important part - until proven otherwise. Thus, the studies done are irrelevant.

As the affirmative position is being held by those putting forth the argument (i.e., education is flawed b/c too much liberalism), the burden of proof lies upon them to show how these statistics are related. Empirical evidence would be appreciated; conjecture doesn't count, except for once again stating your opinion.

Noone is 'scoffing' at anyone's sources. Their sources are excellent opinion pieces, and studies that do not show what they are purporting they do show. Noone is saying they are bad sources; just irrelevant to the conversation until one can show how one is linked to the other.

But, I'm sure we'll get another opinion piece instead, or perhaps a registry of disgust followed by a hasty retreat from the position.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

Were you to bring forth information, studies, opinion peices, whatever, stating the many of the problems related to higher education today are central to the fact that education has become too conservative and that has harmed students abilities to learn; I would not counter by saying you are lying and your studies prove nothing, I would counter with information, studies, opinion peices, whatever showing how I understood them to be. I would demonstrate that they are not too conservative by quoting the information showing how liberal professors are and how being conservative might be a good thing in today's educational environment. I would find studies refuting the points you are making. I would find anecdotes showing my side of the debate.That's crap.

Some comments on this:

Must we all be McGentrix clones and argue exactly the way you do?

I'm sure it would be more convienient to attack our sources than defend your own.

I'm afraid that I'm not impressed that you don't like the way I argue.

Then again, arguing about how to argue is a nice way to deflect the argument.

0 Replies

McGentrix wrote:

I would expect that instead of merely scoffing at the sources we use and the results that they show that you would in turn find some evidence that either refutes it or perhaps suggests other reasons.

If the sources and the results are not worthy of credence, then what is left to refute?

There are basically two ways to refute a point: the first is to produce evidence that contradicts the point; the second is to show that the point, on its own terms, is without merit. The former is inductive, the latter is deductive. Both are equally valid.

You, however, seem to want everyone to argue only in the former manner. Yet if your position is inherently flawed, there is no reason to argue its merits. Indeed, that merely sets up a kind of strawman argument, where the participants are asked to assume something that isn't so -- in this case, that a flawed argument isn't flawed.

0 Replies

Foxfyre keeps saying that this discussion has nothing to do with religion, but the way I see it, it is all about religion because conservative ideology as expressed today is very intertwined with religion.

In looking at the summaries of the top ten conservative colleges in the link provided by joefromchicago, Top Ten, all had religion at their core.

Quote:

Hillsdale College
Hillsdale, Michigan
The mission statement sums up the college well. It explains: "The College considers itself a trustee of modern man's intellectual and spiritual inheritance from the Judeo-Christian faith and Greco-Roman culture, a heritage finding its clearest expression in the American experiment of self-government under law."

Grove City College
Grove City, Pennsylvania
As a liberal arts institution, its mission also states: "rejecting relativism and secularism, [Grove City College] fosters intellectual, moral, spiritual, and social development consistent with a commitment to Christian truth, morals, and freedom." The atmosphere created at Grove City College through its policies encourages "the spiritual, moral, intellectual, and character development" of its students and staff.

Franciscan University of Steubenville
Steubenville, Ohio
A factor that distinguishes Franciscan is the student body's devotion to activism on traditional religious values. When Democratic presidential candidate John Kerry hosted a rally near the campus, over four hundred students marched to protest his appearance. In addition, the college offers programs on the study of traditional religious values.

Indiana Wesleyan University
Marion, Indiana
The bachelor's degree curriculum at Indiana Wesleyan University (IWU) revolves around a core of several requirements, including studies in Biblical literature and World Civilization.... Lifestyle expectations at IWU promote a Christian atmosphere on campus. The primary values center around "Christ likeness," and include commitment, learning, serving, and stewardship.

Thomas Aquinas College
Santa Paula, California
The "great books" of history comprise the entire curriculum of Thomas Aquinas College, and all students graduate with a Bachelor of Arts in Liberal Arts. Books on many subjects are included in the program, including music, mathematics, and science as well as philosophy, language, and theology. Faculty members serve less as lecturers and more as facilitators using the Socratic method. Catholic faculty members publicly take the Oath of Fidelity and make a Profession of Faith at the beginning of their terms in office.

Harding University
Searcy, Arkansas
Harding University in Searcy, Arkansas is a robust Christian college with 5,500 students. Seventy-five areas of study, ten undergraduate degrees, ten pre-professional programs, and four master's degree programs encompass the academic offerings. As the largest private university in Arkansas, Harding offers a well-rounded intellectual experience in a Biblical context. The Honors College also offers in-depth and supplementary study for accelerated students.

College of the Ozarks
Point Lookout, Missouri
The College of the Ozarks is a unique Christian college with about 1,400 students, located in Point Lookout, Missouri. Dubbed as "Hard Work U." by The Wall Street Journal, it has a special work-study program in which students work in lieu of paying tuition.

In addition to the 34 majors, 38 minors, and eight pre-professional programs it offers, the College of the Ozarks has an extensive character education program. As soon as students arrive for freshman orientation, they begin character education programs and abide by a certain set of rules. There is a dress code, and students must sign an honor code that prohibits academic dishonesty.

Liberty University
Lynchburg, Virginia Patrick Henry College
Purcellville, Virginia
Founded in 2000, Patrick Henry offers five majors and is focused on Biblical values, a classical approach to education, and real-world experience through apprenticeships. Its mission statement, "For Christ and For Liberty," demonstrates the central goals of education at this small institution.

Christendom College
Front Royal, Virginia
Christendom College in the Shenandoah Valley of Virginia is a Catholic college with about 370 undergraduates. Seven majors and a master's degree in theological studies are offered. All undergraduate programs begin with a core curriculum that includes study of Catholic doctrine, as well as philosophy, mathematics, and science.

I have a question for those of you who are so convinced of this oppression of conservatives in our public institutions. Can any institution that does not promote religious concepts be satisfactory to conservatives?

0 Replies

blah blah blah

What are you going to do about it? That's what I want to know. Of course there are many liberal profs on campuses........and thank goodness for it. So now...........what to do?

0 Replies

Lola wrote:

blah blah blah

What are you going to do about it? That's what I want to know. Of course there are many liberal profs on campuses........and thank goodness for it. So now...........what to do?

I freely admit to not having read any posting but this one, and yet I cannot resist replying to this one:

Empower our kids.

When I was in college (back in The Day), we confronted professors who were entrenched within the Establishment, and bedamned our grades.

I encourage my kids and support their efforts in confronting the professors of the New Establishment.

Here is the delicious irony: Conservative kids on campus are the kindred of the radicals of the late 60's and early 70's.

In the Real World we are all faced with Life's pressures for conformity. In the Unreal and incredibly important world of Academia we should always resist any and all efforts for Group Think. Right now Group Think in Academia is skewed to the Left. What amounted to progressive thought in decades past has now become monolithic dreck. The only ones on American campuses who are living with the intoxication engendered by breaking the rules are the kids who ascribe to Conservative thought.

Put that in your chillum and smoke it!

0 Replies

If the remedy for the alleged problem is empowering kids like a movement for private volunteer people , I say more power to them.

0 Replies

Ditto.

0 Replies

So that's how you solve the problem? Treat the kids like, dare I say it, liberals? Encourage them to rebel from the 'establishment' Democratic system?

Priceless!

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Predictably, there seems to be quite a lack of hard evidence to hold up the Aff. side of the question.

We'll give it a day and see if any proponents of this supposed 'liberal bias' on campus can come up with some actual data. But I doubt it.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Cycloptichorn wrote:

So that's how you solve the problem? Treat the kids like, dare I say it, liberals? Encourage them to rebel from the 'establishment' Democratic system?

Priceless!

Cycloptichorn

I know nothing like a getting a bunch of kids and turning them into idealist.

Either way you look at it they are either wanting to handle it by the "big government" who happen to consist mostly of conservatives who are against the big government that they are in or they want to have a movement. Both actions are sort of liberal actions traditionally. Wonder why they are not considered "idealist" in a scornful way?

0 Replies

Diversity of Everything but Thought

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know