Diversity of Everything but Thought

Or how about The Earth Is Only Six Thousand Years Old Theory. There are plenty of sources which will tell you that is the case.

There are members of Congress who have quoted those sources, I am sure.

Yet, I doubt there are many geology or astronomy journals which quote those sources at all.

Does this mean that the geology or astronomy journals quote the Earth Is Only Six Thousand Years Old think tanks too little?

Or that the members of Congress quote them too much?

0 Replies

Come to think of it, both the Bible and the Indiana Legislature have put the value of pi as 3.
Source

Since when did we ever consider elected officials the arbiters of objective truth, as this "study" does?

And if we don't consider the members of Congress as arbiters of truth, in fact if we find the concept laughable, why should it be a concern that the media differs from the members of Congress in which sources they quote on any issue?

0 Replies

Lash wrote:

DrewDad wrote:
Here's an item addressed in the "Academic Bill of Rights" that I take issue with:

Lash wrote:
Forcing students to express a certain point of view in assignments.

Now, I see this as a legitimate teaching technique. Don't they use this in law school all the time? Lawyers are taught how to argue either side! The ability to analyze a subject from all sides is a crucial ingredient in critical thinking.

OK. Now you ARE actually being intentionally obtuse. Learning to argue from varying sieds of an issue--and being told the professor's opinion is the correct side,and that you must use it as correct answer on a test are different things, as you well know.

Yes, they are indeed much different animals. And the "Academic Bill of Rights" would shoot both of them.

0 Replies

Quote:

a liberal bias will have to survive on its merits in the free market.

Much of the right wing media which has come into being over the last two or three decades remains quite outside of any free market mechanism. Most, perhaps all, conservative think tanks, the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, townhall, Accuracy in Media etc etc have always been money-losers. They are welfare recipients funded by a few very wealthy individuals and corporations who created and use them to forward a particularly extreme set of ideas.

There is little on the left which is comparable, Moveon being an example of something similar. But what else might one point to?

The 'mainstream media', on the other hand, is operating under free market mechanisms, so that would include the NY Times, Chicago Tribune, WSJ, Slate, Salon etc. etc.

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Quote:
a liberal bias will have to survive on its merits in the free market.

Much of the right wing media which has come into being over the last two or three decades remains quite outside of any free market mechanism. Most, perhaps all, conservative think tanks, the Washington Times, the Weekly Standard, townhall, Accuracy in Media etc etc have always been money-losers. They are welfare recipients funded by a few very wealthy individuals and corporations who created and use them to forward a particularly extreme set of ideas.

How is that "outside of any free market mechanism? Is it being supported by tax dollars? If it is not profitable to keep "The Weekly Standard" an ongoing venture, it would not be kept ongoing. That is how the free market works. It is obviously more profitable to keep the doors open than closed.

0 Replies

Cyclop writes

Quote:

I, along with others, also feel that you perhaps do not have a great understanding of what the actual college experience is like for students today, no matter how many anecdotes your friends and family have told you. I also feel that your, and others, accusations have much more to do with political motivation than any real concern for students.

Would you please explain your knowledge of my deficiency in knowledge of what the college experience is like for students today? Please cite your specific knowledge of 1) my relationship to any university and 2) your knowledge of my recent experience as a student andor any other capacity on a college university.

You are really big on insisting I back up my observations and opinions with facts. I am asking you to do the same.

Please include your rationale for your conclusion of my political motiivations.

0 Replies

"Feel" is kinda different from "know." Especially when paired with "perhaps."

0 Replies

Setanta writes

Quote:

However, knowing Fox's limitless capacity for believing that she has never been mistaken about anything at any time in her life, i have no doubt that she will continue to believe that she has effectively pidgeon-holed me. I do fervently hope that it gives her comfort to think as much.

Could you explain how the two statements (yours and mine) are not comparable?

Could you please list those things of which you wish me to admit I was wrong or mistaken along with compelling evidence of why your opinion is less mistaken than mine.

0 Replies

Quote:

How is that "outside of any free market mechanism? Is it being supported by tax dollars? If it is not profitable to keep "The Weekly Standard" an ongoing venture, it would not be kept ongoing. That is how the free market works. It is obviously more profitable to keep the doors open than closed.

"Profitable" in what manner? "Free market" in what sense? Thus Moveon would be another example of the free market in progress? Anything Soros might fund falls into the free market mechanism for you?

0 Replies

blatham wrote:

Quote:
How is that "outside of any free market mechanism? Is it being supported by tax dollars? If it is not profitable to keep "The Weekly Standard" an ongoing venture, it would not be kept ongoing. That is how the free market works. It is obviously more profitable to keep the doors open than closed.

"Profitable" in what manner?

It doesn't matter "in what manner," does it?

Quote:

"Free market" in what sense?

Let's go with this definition from dictionary.com:

free market
n.

An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions.

Quote:

Thus Moveon would be another example of the free market in progress? Anything Soros might fund falls into the free market mechanism for you?

Sure. Soros dropping all of his wealth into Air America as it tries to improve its meager ratings would be an excellent example of the free market at work.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Setanta writes

Quote:
However, knowing Fox's limitless capacity for believing that she has never been mistaken about anything at any time in her life, i have no doubt that she will continue to believe that she has effectively pidgeon-holed me. I do fervently hope that it gives her comfort to think as much.

Could you explain how the two statements (yours and mine) are not comparable?

Could you please list those things of which you wish me to admit I was wrong or mistaken along with compelling evidence of why your opinion is less mistaken than mine.

I really probably shouldn't bother, but sure, i'll go over it . . . again. You wrote: "Okay Setanta condenses his argument down to No. 1 on my list for the left." You wrote this in response to my post which read: " I see no points having been made in this thread, simply groundless accusations that universities and the broadcast media are dominated by "liberals." As not a shred of reliable evidence has been adduced in support of such a contention, there are no points to review." Your statement number one reads: "The left: 1) Mostly dismisses the existence of a disparity of diversity of thought on college campuses."

I had not dismissed the existence of a disparity of diversity of thought on college campuses (and by the way, this sentence fragment does not ellucidate precisely what it is that diversity of thought on college campuses is disparate with), i had pointed out that no proof had been adduced for this premise, and have elsewhere pointed out that the "evidence" offered has been anectdotal. The objections to the ludicrous graduate paper that Lash has offered in evidence have been stated long ago; the rest of what anyone has offered is anectdotal. To deny that something is proven is not ipso facto to say that it is disproven. I have not denied that lame statement embodied in your category number one, which one will have to assume, faute de mieux, is your working premise.

Because i deny that something is proven does not mean that i have stated that it is disproven. In this case, that allegation is doubly absurd: "The left . . . [m]ostly dismisses the existence of a disparity of diversity of thought on college campuses." With what is the disparity of diversity of thought contrasted here? A disparity of diversity of thought as compared to what? This is simply not logically, nor linguistically, a complete and coherent expression of thought.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Setanta writes

Quote:
However, knowing Fox's limitless capacity for believing that she has never been mistaken about anything at any time in her life, i have no doubt that she will continue to believe that she has effectively pidgeon-holed me. I do fervently hope that it gives her comfort to think as much.

Could you explain how the two statements (yours and mine) are not comparable?

Could you please list those things of which you wish me to admit I was wrong or mistaken along with compelling evidence of why your opinion is less mistaken than mine.

Fox, hijacking Brandon's method of arguing does not become you.

0 Replies

Sozobe writes

Quote:

"Feel" is kinda different from "know." Especially when paired with "perhaps."

Oh, then so long as we include "I feel" in the sentence, we can say anything about anybody?

0 Replies

Drewdad writes

Quote:

Fox, hijacking Brandon's method of arguing does not become you.

I had no idea Brandon utilized a very reasonable form of reasonably civil discourse in the face of the mostly liberal propensity for judgmentalism, assumption of unstated motives and/or intent, and back handed ad hominems. Good for him.

0 Replies

Ticomaya wrote:

blatham wrote:
Quote:
How is that "outside of any free market mechanism? Is it being supported by tax dollars? If it is not profitable to keep "The Weekly Standard" an ongoing venture, it would not be kept ongoing. That is how the free market works. It is obviously more profitable to keep the doors open than closed.

"Profitable" in what manner?

It doesn't matter "in what manner," does it?

Quote:
"Free market" in what sense?

Let's go with this definition from dictionary.com:

free market
n.

An economic market in which supply and demand are not regulated or are regulated with only minor restrictions.

Quote:
Thus Moveon would be another example of the free market in progress? Anything Soros might fund falls into the free market mechanism for you?

Sure. Soros dropping all of his wealth into Air America as it tries to improve its meager ratings would be an excellent example of the free market at work.

So, for your definition here, 'free market' would mean any enterprise which receives income from any source so long as it isn't tax dollars? Is that it? And if so, how do tax breaks fit in?

0 Replies

Substitute the word conservative in that statement, Fox, and face a mirror while repeating it, and you'll have gotten right the first thing you have proposed in the course of this thread.

0 Replies

I am awaiting with fevered brow your rebuttals for the points the conservatives have made in this thread Setanta. Unless I missed a post here and there, so far nobody has come up with any rebuttal other than insulting comments that conservatives don't know anything, haven't proved anyting, and most of us are some kind of deluded fanatic.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote

Quote:

1) Mostly dismisses the existence of a disparity of diversity of thought on college campuses."

Setanta wrote

Quote:

I see no points having been made in this thread, simply groundless accusations that universities and the broadcast media are dominated by "liberals." As not a shred of reliable evidence has been adduced in support of such a contention, there are no points to review. "

followed up with

Quote:

Do please, finish your post, DrewDad. I haven't the energy to reply to Fox's tour de force in self-congratulatory self-delusion, there, but i would be delighted if you would indulge me, and do so yourself.

Which if not quite over the edge of TOS is unnecessarily and exceedingly snotty.

However, I am going to concede that you have a technical point. I should have written No.1 as follows:

Quote:

1) Mostly dismisses the existence of a disparity of diversity of thought on major college campuses as a result of the strong dominance of left leaning//liberal/registered Democrat faculty on those campuses.

0 Replies

Anyone else put in mind of this scene?

http://arago4.tn.utwente.nl/stonedead/movies/holy-grail/thumbnails/04-call-it-a-draw.jpg

0 Replies

This:

Quote:

1) Mostly dismisses the existence of a disparity of diversity of thought on major college campuses as a result of the strong dominance of left leaning//liberal/registered Democrat faculty on those campuses

. . . is still not a complete, coherent thought. You have still not identified what it is that diversity of though on major college campuses is disparate with. For a disparity to be identified, one needs to see the distinction--hot or cold, light or dark, new or old, always or never, black or white.

You just keep yelling: "Black, black, black, black . . . "

So, i ask you once again: what is it that diversity of though on major college campuses is diparate with? Explain your use of the word disparity.

0 Replies

Diversity of Everything but Thought

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know