Cycloptichorn wrote:...
It is your argument that a problem exists in 'many' schools; you have been unable to provide evidence that this is so. Therefore, until such evidence can be shown, there is no reason to mandate any sort of diversity.
Even if foxfyer's proposition is proven true, there still may be "no reason to
mandate any sort of diversity." There may be better more effective solutions. One proposal made here was for a consumer's union kind of annual evaluation of diversity based on Horowitz's criteria.
Cycloptichorn wrote:... Haven't you figured out that you've lost yet? This is getting rather sad, the way you keep circling your wagons around nothing but anecdotal opinion and zero evidence. You do realize this is a debate forum, correct? Cycloptichorn
Foxfyer's proposition is that a majority of teachers in American classrooms are intolerant of political diversity. Foxfyer admits she does not possess conclusive evidence to prove this proposition, and is at this time actually undecided as to whether it is generally true or not.
However, Foxfyer has provided
some evidence to support her proposition. Some of her evidence includes Horowitz's testimony, some includes testimony from members of her own family, and some includes testimony from some of her acquaintenances. All such testimony constitutes
some evidence, but, as she readily admits, not
conclusive evidence.
I guess your proposition is that Foxfyer's proposition is not true. I
guess that is your proposition because I don't recall you actually stating your proposition. Furthermore, I don't recall you providing any evidence whatsoever to support your proposition.
Some folks who support a
negative proposition, claim they are excused from providing evidence for such a proposition because one cannot
prove a
negative proposition (I think one cannot
prove a
positive proposition either, but that's another discussion). However, one can provide
some evidence to support a
negative proposition.
Such evidence can be direct: for example, one can provide some evidence that pigs don't fly when not carried by something that does fly. This can be accomplished by pushing say a thousand pigs out the cargo doors of several airplanes flying at 10,000 feet. If none of those thousand fly, that constitutes
some evidence, but not
conclusive evidence, pigs don't fly when not carried by something that does fly.
Such evidence can be indirect: for example one can provide
some evidence that the earth is not flat by proving it is curved (I'm
an expert witness on that one).
So until you provide
some evidence to support your proposition, you Cyclo' need to answer your own question about yourself
Quote:Haven't you figured out that you've lost yet?
:wink: 
