and civility

"Are Americans Hostile To Knowledge?"

I don't know and f*ck you if you think I'm going to bother to research the subject.

I didn't know Laziness was a form of Hostility.

Larry Mohr

SAN-
How does someone successfully flag something as funny? I tried some time ago and, as your deserving FF post indicates, I'm not gonna try again till someone shows me.

FF for SAN!

That's just a small sample of what liberal teachers can do if they set their minds to it..

There's almost a two nation disconnect. We've got some of the brightest and the best doing great science and applying it and at the same time a large segment of our population believes science is evil and the Flintstones is reality TV.

Hubble and Huckabee. Only in America.

"This section of DiscoverTheNetworks examines the politicized atmosphere that has developed at American institutions of higher learning; the leftist campus and professional associations that have been established there; and the key players (professors, administrators, and organizational leaders) who shape the ideological agendas of those institutions and associations. It is generally accepted that the politicization of the American university began in the 1960s. Student radicals involved in the University of California's Free Speech Movement in 1964, the opening salvo in what became the student movement, criticized the Berkeley campus as a "multiversity" that worked too closely with other key American institutions such as the Defense Department. But after a tumultuous decade, many of them returned to school once the revolution they had sought proved to be stillborn, got graduate degrees, got academic positions, and set about giving the university an identity far different from the one it had acquired in the early post-war years; one that was truly political and at odds with much of American society. They are what writer Roger Kimball calls "tenured radicals," and they have made the contemporary university an institutional outpost of leftist thinking and organizing by reshaping disciplines, particularly in the humanities and social sciences, and by using control of the hiring process to constitute faculties whose views are uniformly Left, leading to the use of the classroom for purposes of indoctrination, not education."

Be careful what you wish for.

and we are hoping these children we're sending out to rule the world are going to be equipped to make their own bowl of cereal at the end of a hard day of p.c. gaming or some such nonsense?

thank you, Lord, for putting three honors students into our lives. and please, help u.s. see the err of our ways.

can i get an amen on that?

bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahaha!

"As liberal columnist Paul Krugman conceded in The New York Times, "It's a fact . . . that registered Republicans and self-proclaimed conservatives make up only a small minority of professors at elite universities.""

"For instance, a recent survey by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC) examined the phenomenon of political bias among faculty at 32 elite colleges and universities, where it found 1,397 professors who were registered Democrats and only 134 who were registered Republicans -- a ratio greater than 10 to 1. Another CSPC study found that at 10 major law schools in the U.S., 430 professors were registered Democrats and 53 were registered Republicans -- a ratio of more than 8 to 1. The same survey further revealed that at 9 major journalism schools, 120 professors were registered Democrats and 29 were registered Republicans -- a ratio of more than 4 to 1. A study released in late December 2005 by UC-Santa Clara economics professor Dan Klein found that social science professors are overwhelmingly Democratic, and that Democratic professors in those disciplines are more homogeneous in their thinking than Republicans."

"...and that Democratic professors in those disciplines are more homogeneous in their thinking than Republicans."

Just as Tammy Bruce wrote about in The New Thought Police.

Awesome book; sad commentary. We have a college professor in an "elite" school in my family and it's sickening.

If you have any doubt of the stupidity of America just watch cash cab.

Shows like that are fascinating.

Until the end when I have to ask myself, "Why did I just waste a half hour of my life?

Yeah I would seriously love to know if that CashCab driver actually knows all of that stuff or if He is somehow fed the answers.

Larry Mohr

Where do they poll these people? I doubt you could find 5 kids who don't know where Iraq is or what Pearl Harbor is associated with...

I think this shows the stupidity of the campus or big city public education more than that of the American public...

Bashing America anyway you can!!

All the good professors I've had didn't teach values. They taugh students to think for themsevles, and where iraq was on a god damned map.

Americans are getting dumb because they can, and they are human. We're still the worlds #1 superpower(for the moment) and being in 1st place leads to complacency.

That's all it is. Humans take the path of least resistance quite often, and if an average person doesn't have to learn something, they won't.

Remember...these "professors" were the ones smokin,' droppin acid, and shootin' up in the 60's

Don't exclude Chimpy. His snorting and boozing led to his becoming the verbally crippled whistle ass that he is today.

"For instance, a recent survey by the Center for the Study of Popular Culture (CSPC) examined the phenomenon of political bias among faculty at 32 elite colleges and universities, where it found 1,397 professors who were registered Democrats and only 134 who were registered Republicans....blah, blah, blah"

Posted by happyending

A study pulled out of the same asshole showed that 93.7% of evangelical Christians are Republicans who, without exception, voted twice for the most stupid and ignorant president of the United States that there has ever been.

"Humans take the path of least resistance quite often,..."

Bullshit! Children learn from their elders; siblings, parents, relatives, friends, teachers.

Garbage in, garbage out. So simple, even a liberal should be able to figure it out.

"A study pulled out of the same asshole showed that..."

Source, please.

"Don't exclude Chimpy. His snorting and boozing led to his becoming the verbally crippled whistle ass that he is today."

Is anyone here singing the praises of "Chimpy?" Do you have some kind of obssession or what?

"A study pulled out of the same asshole showed that 93.7% of evangelical Christians are Republicans..."

They aren't teaching your kids in colleges...that's for DAMN sure.

"Garbage in, garbage out. So simple, even a liberal should be able to figure it out."

Trust me...they CAN'T.

"Yeah I would seriously love to know if that CashCab driver actually knows all of that stuff or if He is somehow fed the answers."

Suck it Trebek!
-Sean Connery

"A study pulled out of the same asshole showed that..."

Source, please.

Posted by happyending

There is no source. That's what pulling something out of one's ass means. The source you didn't really quote(CSPC) is only slightly more valid as anyone with money, organization and an agenda can manufacture a "study" to say anything that fits that agenda. It's up to us ourselves to distinguish between objective, subjective and manufactured truth. Admittedly difficult but not impossible.

For instance, some conservatives have good ideas but the ideas of the clique that surrounded George W. Bush were almost uniformly bad ideas even though they were given a quasi-validity by being wrapped up in something called the Project for a New American Century.

My brief, close brush with teaching high school back in the early '80s taught me that out of 20 students, 19 were there to simply compare clothes and make sure that #20 didn't learn one damn thing. I imagine it's the same now, only with more firearms.

The gentleman I currently work for can not spell the simplest words or compose a complete sentence, yet becomes infuriated when I attempt to glean some modicum of clarity to his vague, childishly composed instructions. He actually threatened to fire me if I didn't "shut my smart mouth." I have also noticed in the past that my vocabulary occasionally seems to rankle some of my fellow poster here as well.

"The source you didn't really quote(CSPC) is only slightly more valid as anyone with money, organization and an agenda can manufacture a "study" to say anything that fits that agenda."

Slightly more valid? Then tell me, why even bother?

Slightly more valid? Then tell me, why even bother?

"Why even bother" with what? Us with it? Them with us? Their motives? Our credulousness?

They can do it. We can evaluate it against who they are and what their previous studies(if any) have said.

Suppose it's true that more academics hold views that are not conservative. So what? Some of them will have the intellectual honesty to separate their views from their teaching, some won't. Nearly all students, bright or not, can easily distinguish between the two. Nobody has better bullshit detectors than the young. That's why thinking and active young people are so overwhelmingly dismissive and disdainful of our current president and government and some of their would-be successors and why they are flocking to Obama in droves.

"Nearly all students, bright or not, can easily distinguish between the two."

Ha!, it's been a long time since you've been around academia, if at all. You can't have dissenting opinions, that's the point. Let me know if you'd like anecdotal evidence as these sorts of studies are obviously marginalized because they dodn't come from the ordained, left-wing group think.

Here's how it works in the real world; tune in sometime...

"...and that Democratic professors in those disciplines are more homogeneous in their thinking than Republicans."

"That's why thinking and active young people are so overwhelmingly dismissive and disdainful of our current president and government and some of their would-be successors and why they are flocking to Obama in droves."

Um, no. It's sort of like how Minnesotans voted in the Body. Gut reaction; no concern for qualifications whatsoever. Change was the operative character, just like Obama. Problem is, change for change sake is usually change for something equally as bad as what your trying to avoid or prevent.

Well said BIB!

Obviously Happyending has never been in a real university.

and English... and Spelling... and Grammar...

"Obviously Happyending has never been in a real university."

Obviously you can't handle the truth. Undergrad and grad degrees at the largest school in the midwest.

Now go back to watching Cash Cab...

Wisconsin isn't Texas A&M.

1 The Ohio State University (Columbus campus) Columbus, Ohio 52,586 [1]
2 University of Florida Gainesville, Florida 51,913 [2]
3 Arizona State University (Tempe campus) Tempe, Arizona 51,481 [3]
4 University of Minnesota (Twin Cities campus) Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota 50,880[4]
5 The University of Texas at Austin a[] Austin, Texas 50,201[5]
6 University of Central Florida a[] Orlando, Florida 48,497[6]
7 Texas A&M University a[] College Station, Texas

46,542[7]
8 Michigan State University East Lansing, Michigan 46,045[8]
9 Pennsylvania State University (University Park campus) University Park, Pennsylvania 43,252[9]
10 University of WisconsinMadison Madison, Wisconsin 42,041[10]

I have also noticed in the past that my vocabulary occasionally seems to rankle some of my fellow poster here as well. Posted by dutch46

As it well should. Most of these beggars can't afford a vowel.

As a deep water sailor I do allow myself to use some of the more colorful verbs. I'm often amused when someone says pardon my French when etymologically the four letter words are primarily Anglo-Saxon abbreviations of their Latin origin.

That said, it's always refreshing to hear from our Coastal Warrior. Not that I intend to become a groupie like Hans, but credit where credit is due.

I'll also weigh in on the tendency of business to hire ignoramuses to supervise their employees. It's a throw back to the feudal system where you simply gave a better cut of meat and a whip to the biggest brute and made him Boss.

Perhaps a closer analogy would be a work gang on a prison farm with the Trustees, naturally being the least trustful among the prisoners, are entrusted to run the show.

It's hard to be patient, yet in my life I've found that Ignorance is its own Reward.

Happy are you Sad because you can't argue with the professor in your family who teaches at the "elite" university? You can't make a point because he/she contradicts your logical fallacies with actual logic? Like your point above, "change for change [sic] sake is usually change for something equally as bad as what your [sic] trying to avoid or prevent," the logic (and spelling, and grammar, and construction..) is lacking. Pure conjecture and bias, the same things you'd have our teaching corps avoid.

When I was at an "elite" university, not soooo long ago, it was the height of the "PC" onslaught, and there was an incredible battle going on, among liberals, among conservatives, as to what could be construed as bias, cultural or otherwise, and what/how things should be taught. There was a dialogue and there was argument, and ultimately, the students made their choices based on what made sense to them.

Today, the kids at the elite schools, and the elite kids at the regular schools, are still going to make their own choices based on their critical analysis of the facts at hand. A skilled teacher will help enlighten them, help them to see for themselves what the Truth is. The rest of America--the average, disinterested, soon to be wage slaves--will probably not search much beyond what is spoon fed to them to pass a particular test and receive whatever paper they need to join the listless work force. And that's the issue, not in who does the teaching, but in what is being demanded from them. We have developed a culture that can't think because it doesn't know any facts--about history, science, literature, etc.--a culture so enfeebled it thinks Jeopardy is tough.

Too tough, apparently; now they've brought out the third graders.

"My brief, close brush with teaching high school back in the early '80s taught me that out of 20 students, 19 were there to simply compare clothes and make sure that #20 didn't learn one damn thing. I imagine it's the same now, only with more firearms."


As a current teacher, I can tell you that not much has changed. I'd imagine there's also less support at home and more general hostility towards educators (as evidenced here).

Happy Ending, all your research points to political bias at college campuses. As a high school teacher, I can tell you that in my experience, serial ignorance begins far earlier than the age of 18 (or 14, for that matter). It starts at home, and most educators are doing their damndest to work against it.

I think we should let the liberals teach liberal arts. I just wish they'd learn to do simple math.

"the logic (and spelling, and grammar, and construction..) is lacking."

Ummm, watever -- this iz a blog; thatz what spellchekerz and compilerz r 4.

"When I was at an "elite" university"

Uh huh.

"A skilled teacher will help enlighten them, help them to see for themselves what the Truth is."

Bullshit! Truth is nowhere to be found or even concerned with. That's the whole point. It's about promotion, group-think, indoctrination and intimidation. Most people are average for a reason, Einstein.

"...a culture so enfeebled it thinks Jeopardy is
tough."

Ha! Jeopardy is easy for you? What a loser. Back to Cash Cab for you too.

stupid flag:


"As liberal columnist Paul Krugman conceded in The New York Times, "It's a fact . . . that registered Republicans and self-proclaimed conservatives make up only a small minority of professors at elite universities.""


Posted by happyending at 2008-02-16 09:13 AM | Reply | Flag:


well, there ya have it!

libs teaching the next generation of breadwinners - can you say EVERYBODY LIMBO?!?

"Happy are you Sad because you can't argue with the professor in your family who teaches at the "elite" university? You can't make a point because he/she contradicts your logical fallacies with actual logic?"

Yes, when it comes to 18th century french history, he blows me away. And when the other one decides to impress me with his studies on the fermi exclusion principle, I'm pretty much toast. Other than that, I do ok.

Ha!, it's been a long time since you've been around academia, if at all.....Um, no. It's sort of like how Minnesotans voted in the Body. Gut reaction; no concern for qualifications whatsoever.....Problem is, change for change sake is usually change for something equally as bad as what your trying to avoid or prevent.

I left school at 16 for economic reasons. I did military service soon thereafter which taught me many valuable things, mostly non-academic. I developed an interest in math and have pursued that up to about 2nd year college level along the way -- some of that study has been physically at community colleges, some not. So I've only briefly been exposed to the upper strata of the educutional establishment and then only in the "hard science" area. I've not noticed any leaning away from conservatism or towards liberalism in my limited exposure there. Within other areas of academia it may well be true that conservative ideas are not common, anecdotally you get that impression; my exposure to such areas was mostly with the students of those "softer" disciplines, a lot of whom it struck me would have been better off in the regular workforce or the military but that's just my prejudices showing and I can't see how their teachers could be blamed for that.

People are people, I think I have a more relaxed view about them than you. There's nothing wrong with gut reactions when you are in the presence of toxicity of one sort or another. It's a survival mechanism, well developed in Minnesota it appears. Change for change's sake is obviously not a good thing which I suppose is why you put it that way. Change for survival's sake on the other hand makes lots of sense.

"Obviously you can't handle the truth. Undergrad and grad degrees at the largest school in the midwest."

Bullshit, your are nothing but a simple minded evangelical republican with zero critical thinking.

There is a good reason conservatives are scarce in universities. They don't support the mission of critical thinking found there, the same as the pacifist doesn't favor the military, or an athiest the clergy.

You mind is closed, you don't know how to find the truth.

Ha Ha, affirmative action for conservatives in universities.

Tell me arrogant dumbass, what was it that got Socrates in trouble?

I will never forget a number of years ago when the game show Family Feud was on. The question was: "Name a South American country."

Each contestant took a long time to give an answer and here were some of them.

Egypt, Mexico, Libya. . .

One contestant almost got a correct answer by saying Rio de Janeiro.

I also remember an episode of Wheel of Fortune in which the answer was Thomas Aquinas. In that particular game every letter had been turned, every vowel had been bought. All they had to do was say the answer, "Thomas Aquinas." None of them could pronounce it correctly. After the second round of simply trying to read the name, somebody stumbled upon the correct pronunciation and won!


Seriously what I find disturbing about people's ignoroance (in particular today's kids) is not that they are ignorant of certain things, it is their attitude toward their own ignorance.

They are either indifferent to it or worse are oddly proud of it--"Oh, I couldn't even tell you when the Civil War happened, ha, ha." Or worse yet have an arrogant ignorance--"I don't need to know all that crap!"

We live in a world in which the idols and heroes of kids are people who chase a ball around for a living, are famous for being famous, or brag through music that they put a cap in someone's ass.

"I can't really remember the names of the clubs that we went to." - Shaquille O'Neal, basketball player, on whether he had visited the Parthenon during his visit to Greece.


The people who are maginalized as social outcasts are the smart ones--the nerds.

Oh well,

Cheers

No doubt that the country is dumb. But first, the dumbing of America is a corporate plot. Keep 'em anesthetized with "reality" shows and sitcoms, and they won't question Bush, the war, poverty, lack of health care and global warming.

Secondly, and maybe more importantly, of course people who bother to think will be "liberal." Liberalism keeps the door open to a hope for things improving. Conservatives suggest that this is the best of all possible worlds, and if it's not, let's go back to a century that was.

I'd be incredibly disillusioned if a majority of college instructors, and for that matter a majority of folks who report the news - were NOT essentially "liberal" in their orientation. herm

So I've only briefly been exposed to the upper strata of the educutional establishment

That's because junior colleges hire instructors with master's or new PhDs, and in the universities the lower level courses are either taught by TAs, or if the professor gives the lectures the TAs run the lab.

It's senior level when you run into the Dons.

They can throttle the discussion or berate the thesis, and that does prevent or discourage a different mind set. So you get a B when you should have gotten an A and that can be hurtful to an aspiring scholar, though it is not insurmountable. It is by contrast the more liberal professors who will examine a low mark and give it a bye.

But it should surprise no one that an institution filled with Doctors of Philosophy would be more socially conscious and therefore attracted to the better planks in the Democratic Party's Platform, and then there's iconoclastic nature of the party as well. It draws freaks like excrement draws flies.

Universities are socialist, and hierarchical, with Tenure the goal. Publish or Perish provides the whip that drives the milieu, and good manners hide the vicious undercurrent of petty rivalries and turf wars. If your ego requires the title "Doctor" then you'd better be ready for some huge sucking up if your major is in the humanities.

Science is more about money. Snagging a grant or filing a patent fills the school's coffers so they can focus the assets on educational priorities like football.

If universities were "socialist," they wouldn't worry about money, would they? Oz needs to think through what he means by socialist a bit more, since socialist is usually the catch-all term for whatever you disagree with. Actually socialism no longer exists, outside Cuba perhaps, but as some queen of fiction is supposed to have said, the word means just exactly what you want it to mean, no more and no less. herm

Corporate plot? Reality shows? You are so provincial, Herm. Is your frame of reference for everything bad in your life the last 2 presidential terms?

Clue #1: it's been around a little bit longer, say, 40 years to be "conservative" (now that word has more than one meaning, so don't immediately disregard it).

"...and if it's not, let's go back to a century that was."

Can you say irony? What is the Clinton machine's entire hopes pinned on?

Clue #2: her husband's administration (i.e. the good 'ole days).

Ketchup, Herm.

Enjoy!

"taught by TAs, or if the professor gives the lectures the TAs run the lab."


Certainly wasn't my experience with the exception of first semester mechanics.

Happy earns himself a jibber-jabber babble flag. If you have a salient point to make, then please get around to making it, will ya? Devastate us with your Herculean intellect.

"This also leads to the phenomenon that academics don't know much about how markets work, since they have so little experience with them, living as they do in their subsidized ivory towers and protected by academic tenure."

This pretty much sums up my disrespect for the establishment (of course, from my limited involvement with the system).

"Devastate us with your Herculean intellect."

Who are you?

Later.

Ha Ha, affirmative action for conservatives in universities.

We could section off a small corner of the cafeteria for them to sit together in. Hang up framed photographs of Ronald Reagan which the other students could replace with ones of Richard Nixon and George W. Bush.

"www.mises.org"

Yawn. What else would you expect from these rightwing loons?

people who read the bible are ignorant.

"Corporate plot? Reality shows? You are so provincial, Herm. Is your frame of reference for everything bad in your life the last 2 presidential terms?"

Good lord man, I was born in the Hoover years - not in this country, but I felt his effects. I stayed awake during Eisenhower. I'd followed Nixon's dirty tricks since he ran for congress, so Watergate was no surprise. I was as appalled by Reagan as most thinking folks. So no, it's not just the last eight years. (I'm still trying to make something intelligible out of the rest of your post.) herm

Happy, I spent half a century in journalism and am Happyendingly retired. As for "71 percent of American economists believe the distribution of income in the US should be more equal," I infer that you don't. Maybe you need a little more journalism in your life. herm

"71 percent of American economists believe the distribution of income in the US should be more equal,"

Probably 71 percent or more of Americans believe that as well, so your point, whatever it is, is stupid.

But they love television.

Thanks Happy, you proved my argument pretty quickly:

Who needs to spell correctly or construct proper sentences, when we got spellcherz and compilerz to do it fo us. Can't be bothered to do it right myself...

I couldn't possibly have gone to one of those elite schools your odious relatives teach in. Ad hominem attacks are always better than proving your [lack of] argument.

"Truth is nowhere to be found or even concerned with." Well. What can I possibly add to that, except the pursuit of eons of explorers, scientists, poets and their ilk appears to have been for naught?

Your mind is shuttered, and apparently even the Truth can't set you free.

Do we really want our kids to learn that the world is 6000 years old, there's no such thing as evolution, greed is good, debt is good, government doesn't work, the Geneva Convention is "quaint", trickle down economics is not a pyramid scheme, the solution to all the violence is more guns, Roanald Reagan was anything but a bad actor, higher education should only be for the wealthy, not everyone should be allowed to vote, not everyone should be allowed to speak, the only thing that matters is the corporate bottom line, compassion is weakness, we are consumers not citizens, Christianity is the only true religion, global warming is a hoax, alternative energy is for pinheads, Fox News is real and you have no right to health care? Thank God for liberal teachers!!!!!

Do we really want our kids to learn that the world is 6000 years old, there's no such thing as evolution, greed is good, debt is good, government doesn't work, the Geneva Convention is "quaint", trickle down economics is not a pyramid scheme, the solution to all the violence is more guns, Roanald Reagan was anything but a bad actor, higher education should only be for the wealthy, not everyone should be allowed to vote, not everyone should be allowed to speak, the only thing that matters is the corporate bottom line, compassion is weakness, we are consumers not citizens, Christianity is the only true religion, global warming is a hoax, alternative energy is for pinheads, Fox News is real and you have no right to health care? Thank God for liberal teachers!!!!!

Interesting questions. The only one I would add is:

Do they teach about stereotyping?

Cheers

government doesn't work

Yes, they are very good at lying, collecting taxes, starting wars, killing, wrecking other countries, making laws, running jails, wasting money and running up deficits and debt. When they offer so much for free, they've eliminated the need to work. For those who do want to work, there is always a rewarding government job somewhere. Then you get to join the team into remaking the world as you want it to be.

Sure government works. But be careful what you wish for.

Quality universities challenge undergraduates as early as possible to participate in research.

Posted by Zatoichi

Your Point? The University of Arizona has a fine reputation, especially in Ag Econ when I attended. But in the humanities, the 101s & 102s few can escape, it's pretty common to have TAs involved to tutor or even teach. In Genetics we had post-Docs running lectures and tutorials. The idea is that the best way to learn is to teach, and quality schools use the post-graduates - some unmercifully - to expose their training to the undergrads. I never met a professor who wouldn't give you an appointment, and even worked side by side with them.

At the Ag School your advisor would have introduced you to practical and social activities. First year I documented mycorrhizal inoculation in potatoes, disposal of grass clippings through composting, and got more involved in the Native Plant Society.

I had formed a the Flagstaff Chapter and the state President introduced me to a horticulturalist who became my advisor. I'd already run a greenhouse, a tree company, and a nursery landscape business. But if you're going to be an agronomist you really need to broaden your skills and education, and a lot of that comes from knowing people.

The second year I gained some work in the mycorrhizal lab in the Department of Plant Pathology and documented growth increases in Pinus eldarica when inoculated with P. tinctorus, and even presented the finding to the Christmas Tree Growers Assn. Free Lunch on the Roast Beef circuit you might say.

My first lecture in Plant Science was instructive in an important way. The Professor stated that "To Learn, One must acknowledge His ignorance."

This was taken by some of the gals to mean that the boys were stupid.

I thought it was a point well taken, and somehow it made me feel right at home.

"but as some queen of fiction is supposed to have said, the word means just exactly what you want it to mean, no more and no less. herm"

That is Humpty Dumpty Herm in Through the Looking Glass, by Lewis Caroll.

I ran across that gem reading out on the flightline one midnight shift up under the wing of an F-101B Voodoo:

'You're holding it upside down!' Alice interrupted.

'To be sure I was!' Humpty Dumpty said gaily, as she turned it
round for him. 'I thought it looked a little queer. As I was
saying, that SEEMS to be done right--though I haven't time to
look it over thoroughly just now--and that shows that there are
three hundred and sixty-four days when you might get un-birthday
presents--'

'Certainly,' said Alice.

'And only ONE for birthday presents, you know. There's glory
for you!'

'I don't know what you mean by "glory,"' Alice said.

Humpty Dumpty smiled contemptuously. 'Of course you don't--
till I tell you. I meant "there's a nice knock-down argument for
you!"'

'But "glory" doesn't mean "a nice knock-down argument,"' Alice
objected.

'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful
tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor
less.'

'The question is,' said Alice, 'whether you CAN make words mean
so many different things.'

'The question is,' said Humpty Dumpty, 'which is to be master--
that's all.'

Alice was too much puzzled to say anything, so after a minute
Humpty Dumpty began again. 'They've a temper, some of them--
particularly verbs, they're the proudest--adjectives you can do
anything with, but not verbs--however, _I_ can manage the whole
lot of them! Impenetrability! That's what _I_ say!'

Some great stuff! Which is to be master --

"'When _I_ use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful
tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean--neither more nor
less.'"

That is so alacrity!

Thank you right wing talibaptist. This is just another one of your gifts to/on the United States.

Quality universities challenge undergraduates as early as possible to participate in research.

Perhaps this is not a problem in the hard sciences, but this can be a real problem in other disciplines.

In general scholars, like physicians, have become so specialized in their areas that they often suffer from tunnel vision (often focused hard on their own navels, I might add).

The English prof. 50 years ago.

"I specialize in Renaissance Literature."

The English prof. 35 years ago.

"I specialize in Shakespeare"

The English prof. 20 years ago.

"I specialize in women in Shakespeare."

The English prof. 10 years ago.

"I specialize in Ophelia."

The English prof. now.

I specialize in my personal hangups with Western culture as they are evinced in Shakespeare's exploitation of women in the figure of Ophelia (in Act II).

The English prof. in 10 years.

I specialize in my personal hangups.


Unsuspecting undergraduates who have yet to embrace the breadth of knowledge that a discipline holds have little sense of the big picture, and they are not likely to get if they are invited into the narrow specialized research of their prof. Star struck by their "awesome" prof. they think the academic world turns on their instructor's research and opinion.

If they go on, they become mere ciphers of their mentors and they have no depth of experience even in their chosen fields to question whether that is a good thing or not.

It is sad. But I think there is hope.

In 30 years time humanities departments, spear headed by English departments, will most likely deconstruct themselves out of existence.
From the ashes?

Maybe a new literary and critical Renaissance. Dare I hope?

Cheers

"they are not likely to get if they are invited. . ."

=

"they are not likely to get IT if they are invited. . ."



Cheers

Americans are hostile to knowledge?

Wot four eyed, brainiac, geekified, pointdexter of a nerd sed that? I'll tear him apart with my bare hands!

Grrrrr!

Hey, you know who else was distrustful of eduacation?

That's right, Pol Pot!

The dismal science?

Economics, like History, is mostly bunk.

Milton Friedman was a fraud, man.

American MSM certainly seems commited to the dumbing down of America. Watching American news programming vesus Canadian of British stuff makes this abundantly clear.

George Dumbya Bush has certainly done his part in the dumbing down program with his encouragement of home schooling. Hey Ma, I got an A in Creationism and bible Studies. Thanx! Also, the creation of for-profit Charter schools in which the teachers are paid less than at public schools.

Be Well.

/Last book Dumbya read was "My Pet Goat" and he didn't even finish it.
//More lefties than righties who are teachers? That's cos Global Warming Denial isn't a credit course.
///See also: God hates Stem cell Research 101.
////Galileo laffed anyway.

I don't no wHut yuz libruls is Talkin abbout. I ain't never had no priblems wiTh my gramur or my spellun. ANd Im a gradeate of the LarryMohr skuul of diCKshon & TypPINg.

"It's a fact . . . that registered Republicans and self-proclaimed conservatives make up only a small minority of professors at elite universities.""


Yep, the smarter people tend not to become Republicans....hmmm.

Hello Spud,

You're Back! Great!

Got tired of the Soup du Jour?

br />
How goes the Smart Patrol?

Smart Patrol, Mr Dna
he's been with the world
and i'm tired of the soup du jour
He's been with the world
i wanna end this prophylactic tour
afraid nobody around here
understands my potato
guess i'm only a spudboy
looking for a real tomato.

DEVO "Smart Patrol, Mr Dna"

Cheers

Susan Jacoby is on right now on PBS (5:37 p.m. PST) discussing this book. Such excellent and interesting points she is making in her interview. I may order her book.

I just learned by watching the interview that Congress passed a bill to renewed the draft in 1941 only six months prior to the start of WW II and it passed by only one vote. She has all kinds of interesting facts. I'm going back and finish watching the interview.

What a shocker that the woman who wrote the article looks like a boring, frigid, liberal bitch.

Don't get me wrong. I think Americans, generally, are stupid. But to go out and write a book about it? Talk about pompous.

Sort of reminds me of a teacher last week, who said to the class - "Does anyone here listen to NPR? Well, anyone intelligent does."

I am really surprised that anyone would see this as a Liberal problem. It's actually a free market problem. Stupid entertainment and media sells. Stupid people are easier marketing targets.

Works for me tho'. More stupid kids means it'll be easier for my 11 y/o kid when he grows up, seeing he can already read a map.

"I am really surprised that anyone would see this as a Liberal problem. It's actually a free market problem. Stupid entertainment and media sells."

It's a problem for liberals AND conservatives, but somehow only libs fess up to it. It IS a free market problem, as the bad always drives out the good (Gresham's law), and to conservatives the free market 's profit motive is the underlying cause of everything. We libs might make a case for responsibility, that if you run eighty hours a week of pure shit, maybe you ought to be required to run twenty hours of something that means something.

And watch the righties hit the ceiling at that governmental "control." herm

I don't no wHut yuz libruls is Talkin abbout. I ain't never had no priblems wiTh my gramur or my spellun. ANd Im a gradeate of the LarryMohr skuul of diCKshon & TypPINg.

Posted by OohRah at 2008-02-16 07:08 PM | Reply | Flag: Flag: (Choose)
FunnyNewsworthyOffensiveAbusiv
e



thets riaght oohrah...I can tells you that all of us here republikens are too stoopid to live, much less vote and think for thie here oursleves.......duh.......I gots two college degrees so I are a college graduaate and even I dont nos nuttin........

another stupid flag, please:

"people who read the bible are ignorant.

Posted by messiah at 2008-02-16 01:41 PM | Reply | Flag:"

but, people who understand it, are brilliant.

moosiah - you need a new game.

It should read: people who believe the Bible are ignorant. Apparently Messiah is too ignorant to know the difference.

Knowledge give one the ability to make calculated and prepared decisions.

It is easy to see why the current addmin. is running around lost. Either refusal to listen to or seemingly deliberate misinterpretation of knowledge, these bozo's have fallen back on the only position they could think of HUA.

It should read believing that your own set of assumptions are the only possible ones for establishing truth is ignorant.


Cheers

Always trying to muddle the differences between concrete reality and delusion, Grendel. Religion is like sex. If it feels good, do it. Just don't try to tell me that the absoluteness of reality is a false assumption.

This problem has its roots in our schools, which should be able to transcend TV. Unfortunately, fear of lawsuits, religious fanticism, politically correct bullshit, like self esteem theory has gotten in the way of learning much more than just geography. Reading, writing and arithmetic have sunk to new lows.

Always trying to muddle the differences between concrete reality and delusion, Grendel. Religion is like sex. If it feels good, do it. Just don't try to tell me that the absoluteness of reality is a false assumption.

Whatever, Ray

Either agree with my statement or don't.

But I can understand why you don't. It is threatening to your worldview.


Cheers

I just started working with a 19 year old who was home schooled, and, let me say, if anyone Con or Lib thinks that is a panacea or the Holy Grail, you got another think comin'. Dumber than a stump, as they say in the Northwest.

Religion is like sex. If it feels good, do it.

Posted by Ray


That is patently false.

Abstain from sexual intercourse until marriage.
Love thy neighbor.
Forgive, forgive and forgive.
Etc.

Using Catholicism as my point of reference, very little about religion involves feeling good. Living one's life in accordance to religious teachings is very hard. It's much easier to be narcisistic, carpe diem and all that.

"...very little about religion involves feeling good."

Maybe Jeff should consider changing religions. That's realistic unless you think a deity invented the religion. YOU did. WE the people did. With intention of making us feel good, at least feel better by giving us hoops to jump through before acting. I just know this will bring out the socialist-communist and pussy-wimp name-callers, but maybe we should live by what benefits the most people. herm

It should read believing that your own set of assumptions are the only possible ones for establishing truth is ignorant.
Either agree with my statement or don't.

Grendel - Couldn't you tell by my response?

The absoluteness of concrete reality is the only correct assumption for establishing what is possible, therefore true.

It may feel good to imagine there is something after life, but in the end, you'll end the same way as me. It's a medical fact, supported by a mountain of evidence. If you have a problem with that, take it up with that branch of science and see what kind of reaction you get.

That is patently false.

Abstain from sexual intercourse until marriage.
Love thy neighbor.
Forgive, forgive and forgive.
Etc.

Using Catholicism as my point of reference, very little about religion involves feeling good. Living one's life in accordance to religious teachings is very hard. It's much easier to be narcisistic, carpe diem and all that.

Veritas!

The reason why religion is in decline is not because of some great "awakening to reality" as some atheists would have you think. It is because religion requires sacrifice and self-discipline. This doesn't fit well with an "I want it all and I want it now" mentality that pervades our society.

If anything I would say that it is the argument of atheists that people adopt so they can rationalize and thereby feel good about their inflated egoism.

If religions fed people what Madison avenue does--that you deserve to have all of your wants and desire satisfied immediately, we would be the the most holy and faithful people on the planet, and the people of this country would be clamoring to repeal the first amendment.

Cheers

That is patently false.

Abstain from sexual intercourse until marriage.
Love thy neighbor.
Forgive, forgive and forgive.
Etc.

Not when one believes that the alternative is to spend an eternity in hell. In one way I see Christianity as a waste of time and energy preparing for death.

"What a hot cutie! www.youtube.com"

Surely cute. I could vamp on that for an hour, but apparently she feels that being a hot cutie is all she'll ever need. She may be right, if she stocks up enough goodies for when her time to be used for whatever hot cuties are used for is up. Gawd, I hope that made sense. herm

" In one way I see Christianity as a waste of time and energy preparing for death."

Not for death, my friend...but eternal life!! : )

Not when one believes that the alternative is to spend an eternity in hell. In one way I see Christianity as a waste of time and energy preparing for death.


You are seeing it backwardly.

It's not preparing for death. It's a blue-print as to how to conduct one's behavior in life so that one can enjoy heaven in the afterlife.

One still has to live their life, here and now. If anything, the promise of the afterlife is a motivating factor to live a better life now - as opposed to succumbing to narcisism.

It is because religion requires sacrifice and self-discipline.

Oh nonsense! Any population where sacrifice was widely practiced would extinguish itself. We are instinctly structured to avoid pain and seek pleasure for the reason that the survival of our specie requires it.

Any rational person would avoid self discipline when there is no practical purpose.

It's been 2,000 years since the Bible. It's about time societies grew away from the superstitions of old.

It's not preparing for death. It's a blue-print as to how to conduct one's behavior in life so that one can enjoy heaven in the afterlife.

C'mon Jeff. You are trying to put a positive spin on a fruitless undertaking.

One still has to live their life, here and now. If anything, the promise of the afterlife is a motivating factor to live a better life now - as opposed to succumbing to narcisism.

So now if one is not a Christian, he is a narcissist? This is silly.

If anything I would say that it is the argument of atheists that people adopt so they can rationalize and thereby feel good about their inflated egoism.

More silliness. What happened to respect for truth? Reality is to be understood. It cannot be invented, though that doesn't stop religionists from trying.

Hello Spud,

You're Back! Great!

Got tired of the Soup du Jour?

How can anyone get tired of soup?

"Soup is good food
Makes a great meal
Tell me how does it feel
To be shit out our ass
and thrown out in the cold
like a piece of trash?"

~Dead Kennedys

Luff luff luff the Devo reference.

Heard this one?...

BUTCHERS STEAL DOCTOR'S TOOLS
SOW PRETTY HEADS ON DOGS AND MULES
HI-FI SYSTEMS MEN IN PAIRS
TAPE BODIES FALLING DOWN THE STAIRS
FATHER-SON TEAMS SPLIT THE COST OF NIGHTTIME GIRLS BUT ALL IS LOST
TO DE-EVOLUTION SELF-EXECUTION
NO-SOLUTION
I'M A SPUDMAN I GOT EYES ALL AROUND
MARTIAN FEET TURN DIRT AND STONE
FOR BURIED TREASURE HUMAN BONE
MADISON MEN TATTOO ADS ON
TEN YEAR OLDS WITH SUCKER PADS ON
ROCKETS RUST ATTACK DECAY THINGS
FALL APART WHILE SPACEMEN PLAY
NOW DADDY ZERO DROPS HIS BROWN
GODOWNGODOWNGODOWN
TO DE-EVOLUTION SELF-EXECUTION
NO-SOLUTION
I'M A SPUDGUN I'D LIKE TO SHOOT'EM ALL!!

~Devo "I'm a Potato"

Sorry fer shoutin' there but sometimes ya gotta rawk out!

Great to be back Grendel.

Refreshed & re-energised.

Just caught some whack job alleged "Democratic Strategist" on the Clinton News Network trying to argue that Hillary's faux wins in Florida and Michigan should be seated at the Convention as such. Spud keeps a supply of foam bricks by the remote control for just such occasions. Yes, let's reward those who broke the rules (Hill and MI/FLA) and as an extra special bonus punish those who abided by them (Obama) /snark>

Who was that guy? Hillary's Godfather, her Sugar Daddy? Is she preparing to give him the hummer of his lifetime backstage or wot?!

Totally pissed as you can no doubt tell.

How you been keeping? Hope things are good wif you!

Be Well.

Oh nonsense! Any population where sacrifice was widely practiced would extinguish itself. We are instinctly structured to avoid pain and seek pleasure for the reason that the survival of our specie requires it.

Then why all of the rage against debt? It takes personal sacrifice and self-discipline to avoid debt.


Any rational person would avoid self discipline when there is no practical purpose.

So you are actually advocating narcisism?

Talk about a societal recipe for disaster.


It's been 2,000 years since the Bible. It's about time societies grew away from the superstitions of old.

But the teachings transcend time. Should we just chuck all of the wisdom gained from philosophers like Plato, or Aristotle? Those old-farts pre-date Christ, so I guess they should be rendered meaningless too.

Taken further, why bother even studying history? Your premise behind shit-canning the bible is that it's old and "supersticious", as if we can't learn anything productive from those who passed long before.

The absoluteness of concrete reality is the only correct assumption for establishing what is possible, therefore true.

Ray, as usual your argument falls apart because you fail to see that concrete reality is not set in, well,-- concrete.

You may start to realize this once you see that the term itself is an oxymoron.

Concrete reality is an idea and only an idea. In an atheistic world, of course, ideas didn't exist before human beings and can no longer exist after we are gone.

The foundation you build on is shifting sand dumped by humans not eternal concrete.

Trying to convine you of this is like trying to convince a fundamentalist Christian that the world is older than 6000 years.




Cheers and enjoy the afternoon. I am off to visit family. Be back later tonight.


Cheers

"Herm -- I understood. I certainly could forgive her ... But check this out: www.youtube.com Looks like the denizens of the USA have a low reputation when it comes to knowledge about the rest of the world."

Seen it before, T&C; never tire of it. This country elects Nixons, Reagans, Bushes as the world recoils in horror. I can forgive the braindead hot cutie, but her vote counts as much as mine.

I fear that civilized nations will decide that they cannot afford us as prima inter pares, and join forces to take us out. Sure, we can conquer an Iraq, an Afghanistan. a Grenada. But 100 nations aligned to wipe out this blight? herm

Concrete reality is an idea and only an idea. In an atheistic world, of course, ideas didn't exist before human beings and can no longer exist after we are gone

That's based on a couple of assumption.

First, that human being are the only sentient species in the galaxy.

Secondly, that human being actually actually ARE sentient beings and not just particularily clever bipedal cancer.

Iffy propositions given the current data.

Be Well.

Great to be back Grendel.

Refreshed & re-energised

Actually, I am thinking of taking a sabbatical from the DR.
Maybe, maybe not.

It's fun but it consumes time, and I find that my posts often don't progress the conversation much (perhaps this thread aside.)

Anyway, good to have you back, and if I may say I like your new, less affected "spud" language and style. It is distinctly your interesting voice, but without a lot of the tater talk. Less is definitely more in this case. (No offense intended.)

Cheers

Ray, as usual your argument falls apart because you fail to see that concrete reality is not set in, well,-- concrete.
Concrete reality is an idea and only an idea.

You can test the idea by jumping off the Golden Gate Bridge. It my understanding that the impact is like hitting concrete.

Trying to convine you of this is like trying to convince a fundamentalist Christian that the world is older than 6000 years.

According to he word of God, the world is 6,000 years old. Are you repudiating the word of God, Grendel?

And you've avoided my assertion that the absoluteness of death is a well established medical fact. It's not just my idea.

Look Grendel, you've spent a lifetime avoiding coming to terms with reality. I don't expect you to change.

Jeff

Then why all of the rage against debt? It takes personal sacrifice and self-discipline to avoid debt.

Yes it does. And now our nation has more debt than it can possibly pay off. That has nothing to do with religion. Surely you know that I am a strong advocate of gold and silver for that very reason, and an atheist.

Any rational person would avoid self discipline when there is no practical purpose.
So you are actually advocating narcisism?
Talk about a societal recipe for disaster.

No. I was thinking about the disciplines imposed by Christian dogma for no other reason that they promise an afterlife. Christian morality has proved to be no firewall against narcissism or hubris.

Taken further, why bother even studying history? Your premise behind shit-canning the bible is that it's old and "supersticious", as if we can't learn anything productive from those who passed long before.

It's not even a good moral guide, and the characters are terrible role models, including Jesus. Christians read into it what they want it to be. History serves to tell us where we came from and offers a guide to avoiding the mistakes others have made. But honestly, I don't see people learning from the mistakes of the past.

NOT HOSTILE - just an pathetic education system managed overall by liberals doing the best they can [which of course is not very good because they are liberals].

It's fun but it consumes time, and I find that my posts often don't progress the conversation much (perhaps this thread aside.)

Look at it this way. You are not likely to change a lot of minds hereabouts. Somedays the best you can do is to merely reconfirm your own beliefs to yerself or find new ways of expressing and understanding those aforementioned beliefs. Asides, in many instances here in blogworld the idea is that yer actually talking over the heads of the blogga folk you respond to in order to get yer message across to the more amenable, less fixed minds who are just playing along at home.

This goes triple fer Trolls, of course.

If nothing else we enliven the debate and that alone is worth sommat.

So sez Spud.

Be Well.

I'd like to see Grendel try to convince the medical profession that there are such things as a soul and life after death. All he does here is play with words.

It's funny, people here keep blaming the liberals and the "liberal education system", but most of these countries that are kicking our ass in education are way more liberal than the US. Possibly because they spend more time and effort providing a good education to EVERYONE, not just those families that pay more taxes.

Ray did you know the human body loses exactly 21 grams of total MASS upon death. O2 and other gasses in the body do not account for this loss either since they wiegh in at only about 0.003% of body wieght,

So let me see if I got this right. Books on anatomy have every cell accounted for down to their inner structure. But somewhere in that mix, there is 21 grams they haven't accounted for. And those 21 grams make up our soul without which we could not live. Now that's the kind of logic that is hostile to knowledge. Look up mitochondria.

Great movie though.

Ray,

My original statement that you are reacting to makes no claims about religion, life after death or God. Agreeing to it does not necessitate a belief in those things.

Whether one believes in God or not does not necessarily affect the validity of the statement.

Furthermore, you offer no argument against its validity. (Telling me to jump off a bridge is not a real argument by the way.)

In fact greater minds than yours and mine have wrestled with the question. There is no proof for objective reality.

If you insist on bringing in a religious dimension then I would merely add that although atheists, such as yourself, believe in one less god than monotheists, we all still make a similar profession of faith.

Religious people believe in God for which there is no absolute proof.

You believe in objective reality (the point of view of God by the way) for which there is no absolute proof.


I'd like to see Grendel try to convince the medical profession that there are such things as a soul and life after death. All he does here is play with words.

Play with words? You make me laugh. That's what arguments are. Language is precisely the shifting sand that you base your reality on. You think it is concrete, but language is a slippery eel at best.

Language is not concrete reality and all your understanding of the world is based on language. You cannot escape it.

Most people do not question language in this way. It seems foolish, useless and counter to what we know. Of course to express this objection to yourself you have to use language! (BTW in the Middle Ages most people would think questioning the existence of God as foolish, useless and counter to what we know.)

I would like to see you convince anybody of the reality of anything without resorting to playing with words. (Hint, that would require you to do without resorting to conscious thought.)

Hell, I will even be interested in you proving to me that conscious thought has an empirical concrete reality--and you can use words!

By the way the problem with language which you cannot escape is not a problem for me. I, of course, believe in the Logos.

(Hmm, you apparently do to, but just can't accept that you do. Fascinating.)

Cheers

"Objective reality" is a term that defines a method of applying the observed patterns of concrete reality as a frame of reference for determining truth. It's antithesis, "subjective reality," defines ones prejudices and common belief as a frame of reference for truth.

The scientific method yields practical results. What more proof do you want? The greatest minds in Christendom have not been able to prove the existence of anything outside of reality. It's all words founded on subjective reasoning.

Our thoughts emanate from from electric impulses in your nervous system. Our bodies also contain an immune system, muscular system, hormonal system, digestive system, etc. All systems combined make up who we are and how outside stimuli affect us. Your vocal chords produce vibratory pressures in the air. Our ears have transducers to convert those pressures into electric impulses. Our brain has neural networks that store our memories and translates incoming electrical impulses.

So language certainly is part of concrete reality, as well as ideas and thoughts. That we don't feel what goes on inside us doesn't mean they are not real. If you don't believe me, get a book on human anatomy.

Not bad, Ray. I have taken the liberty of adding the hidden assumptions.


"Objective reality" is a term that defines a method of applying the observed patterns of concrete reality as a frame of reference for determining truth. by resorting to methods and means which in themselves cannot be proven to be objectively real or true: these include language, memory and ideas (such as deductive reasoning itself which according to the rules of logic never results in an actual proof.)

Shifting sands.

Our brain has neural networks that store our memories and translates incoming electrical impulses.


I am not interested in electrical impulses.

I have experienced thought.
Show me a photograph of a thought itself.

If it has a concrete reality, this should be easy.

In principio erat Verbum et Verbum erat apud Deum et Deus erat Verbum.

Cheers

Utter bullshit. Maybe the people that sell the author weed, but to generalize like that is ridiculous.

I am not interested in electrical impulses.

That's one way to deny reality. The biological fact remains. Our bodies interpret electrical impulses as thoughts, ideas and visions. It's all described in books on anatomy.

Show me a photograph of a thought itself.

The photograph of thought is in your mind's eye.
Show me a photograph of God.

by resorting to methods and means which in themselves cannot be proven to be objectively real or true: these include language, memory and ideas (such as deductive reasoning itself which according to the rules of logic never results in an actual proof.)

Again, the proof is in the results.

Show me a photograph of a thought itself.

The photograph of thought is in your mind's eye.
Show me a photograph of God.

My point exactly.

Again, the proof is in the results.

The results of which in order to be understood or merely comprehended rely on language, memory and ideas.

Shifting sand. You think you escape it, but you don't.

Cheers and thanks for the conversation. Always enjoyable, my friend.