<p>JHS…you seem to know a lot about what total strangers think… Quite arrogant I would say.</p>
<p>I’m finding the liberal defensiveness coupled with the Ivy defensiveness on here very striking.</p>
<p>Ironic. Those arguing against my portrayal of the Ivy culture are furiously defending one of the most elitist fixtures in our society, one with a long history of racist admission practices and extraordinary endowments fueled by good old capitalistic avarice.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And so the obvious question to you, sewhappy, is this: Why on earth did you not discourage your child from matriculating at such a loathsome and dishonorable institution? Surely she had other, far better choices.</p>
<p>No, geeps, all I do is read what you write.</p>
<p>But, yes, I can be arrogant. And you can project yourself onto others.</p>
<p>Anyway, since you are quite certain you know everything you need to know, and I am fairly convinced you don’t, it doesn’t seem likely that we have much very interesting to say to one another.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>libertarians are fiscally conservative and socially liberal. i think through-and-through conservatives take a lot more flak for their socially conservative viewpoints, flak libertarians won’t receive. </p>
<p>even at very liberally-biased schools, there is usually a critical mass of fiscally conservative professors but a paucity of socially conservative professors. i don’t think this is a random accident or something that is engineered by social liberals hellbent on hegemony…</p>
<p>^ wjb - His choice completely. Imagine that. A conservative parent who lets their child choose their own college! Aren’t we all suppose to be hopeless control freaks insisting on abstinance pledges and worship sessions at the foot of Ronald Reagan statues? Oh, and we had no problem sending him some place with nice resources paid for through capitalistic avarice.</p>
<p>So much anger, and such a familiar voice…</p>
<p>Do I seem angry? I’m not. Actually enjoying this quite a bit. Have a nice day.</p>
<p>Lets see here. America’s finest colleges pride themselves with assembling the finest minds in the world are bastions of liberalism while red states are among those with the poorest educational systems. Hmmmmmm?</p>
<p>Yeah, sewhappy, for a cc “newbie,” you do seem to have a lot of pent-up acrimony. I, too, am reminded of someone who used to post quite a bit.</p>
<p>originaloog - I think your generalizations are inaccurate and probative of virtually nothing. The so-called “Red States” - many of which are in the South - do suffer from educational challenges, but really, those educational challenges pale in comparison to the problems in our big cities. There is nothing, and I mean nothing, more dismal than the education levels in Detroit, Baltimore, New Orleans, Memphis, LA Unified, and I could go on…All of these cities by any measure are bluer than blue. The point being is that generalizations of the type you make just don’t mean much. </p>
<p>Our biggest challenge as a nation is K-12 achievement in these troubled cities. America would be right at the top in terms of global achievement if these students performed to national norms. Lots of money spent - but no real results so far. The problems of course stem from factors outside of school - and very few have the fortitude to talk about the significant cultural negatives that are the driving reasons. </p>
<p>In any event, I think the point is once again not conservative vs. liberal. It is whether professors leave their politics at the door. And frankly, a great many of them don’t - and it hurts the educational process and only perpetuates the echo chamber in the halls of academe.</p>
<p>^ Best post I’ve seen on here Mam1959</p>
<p>Whatever4 and wjb - Are you guys cyber buddies or something? I feel a bit ganged up upon.</p>
<p>If there’s anger here it’s not emanating from moi!</p>
<p>I seem to have touched quite a sensitive nerve in daring to criticise an aspect of an Ivy college. Are you Ivy alumni? I’m not. Son is first of our clan to attend one. Is criticising an aspect of an Ivy college not allowed in your lexicon? If so, then I would define such a perspective as rigid, repressive, illiberal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The truth is, it’s natural for young people (high school/college age) to be more liberal than conservative. They have become accustomed to being GIVEN most things. They EXPECT to be given instead of earning. That’s why people become more conservative in their middle productive years. Where they have to work. Where they pay taxes. Where they see their money being used. Not every person becomes conservative in all things; especially political. But most people become much more conservative in much of their life. When you become a parent yourself, and watch your kids grow up, you become much more conservative in many of your decisions. Even though you might have done certain things as a kid, you don’t normally give that same free reign to your kids. Of course, when you get towards retirement age, you start to become more of a liberal again. Especially politically. Of course you’re looking at society GIVING you things again. It’s human nature.</p>
<p>Somewhere in this very long but interesting thread, I read some statements alluding to the concept of “relative truth”–that a conservative or religiously-minded student needs to attend a liberal institution so they can finally realize, contrary to what they may believe, that there can be more than one “truth”–that there are many truths and they are all relative. </p>
<p>If “truth” is relative, how can a professor teach, or for that matter, grade anything? To be overly simplistic, but to make a point, if 2+2 can equal 4 or 5, depending on your point of view, which answer is wrong? How would you grade the test? A truly open-minded professor would give credit to the student who presented well-thought and well-written ideas, but a biased one may grade in conformity of his own ideals. With no yardstick of “truth” against which to measure, grading becomes open terrority. So, naturally, since there is a predominant liberal bias among the faculty at most LAC’s, there is a greater chance for ideology to affect a student’s success.</p>
<p>To me, the concept of relative truth gives both professors and students license to pick and choose what they want to hear, whether it is right, wrong, true or false. “What’s true for you, may not be true for me.” Of course I understand that most subjects are not as straightforward as math, but I believe that the best way to learn about anything is with a focus on the discovery of truth. </p>
<p>If the starting premise is that there is no absolute truth, then one’s education will simply be focused on affirmation of what they want to believe. </p>
<p>And really, if all truth is relative, then the statement “all truth is relative” would have to be a relative statement. Of course, unless all truth is relative, except the truth that truth is relative. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>that explains why people come more fiscally conservative but why become more socially conservative? (yeah, one can’t always delineate between the two…) what about getting older makes one want to deny homosexuals the right to marry, eg?</p>
<p>It’s not that getting older meaning that one wants to deny homosexuals the right to marry. It’s the cohort - the older generation isn’t as comfortable with that as younger generations, but as younger generations age, they’ll maintain their beliefs. </p>
<p>Silly example, numbers made up: Let’s say you took Internet usage and found:
Age 18-30: 90% use the internet
Age 31-50: 80% use the internet
Age 51-80: 60% use the internet
Age 81+: 30% use the internet</p>
<p>That doesn’t mean that as people age, they become less likely to use the internet. It means that the cohort of those people who are 81+ today didn’t grow up with it. That doesn’t mean that tomorrow’s 81+ are going to stop using the internet as they age.</p>
<p>Even though one may not hear a professor’s political bent in his lectures, there are significant problems with assigned readings and textbooks. I’m currently reviewing a text for a policy course at a major state university. I specialize in the policy area and know the literature pretty well. A person reading that book would have absolutely no idea that large literatures exist casting doubt on the book’s conclusions. The course does not assign an equal and opposite book.</p>
<p>Faculties tend to hire people like them. Anyone who thinks that all points of view are adequately covered in most American university curricula is fooling himself. Especially now that Tides Foundation offshoots have started providing professors with course materials that push its agenda. Use our courses, the pitch goes, and reduce your workload. A seductive ploy.</p>
<p>excellent analogy pizzagirl. Also remember however that most people DO become more socially conservative as they get older; UNTIL they reach their retirement years. As I said earlier; while uber liberal when we are younger, we tend to realize as we get older and have our own kids, that we really DON’T want our kids to do all the same things we did growing up. There’s a lot of social conservative that we move towards. Not in everything; and not everyone goes extreme. But you WILL BECOME more conservative in your middle years. Not just fiscally, but also socially. Then, when you get past retirement age, your perspective on life changes yet even more. Fiscally you become more DEPENDENT on society. You’re more into the gimme stage. You’ve seen so much that less things SHOCK you. Your kids are grown and mature, so it doesn’t really bother you any more if they are socially “Liberal”. Basically, you’re a lot more tolerant of others. Obviously, a lot of this starts with money. If you were SMART enough to have a retirement plan where you don’t use the lame excuse of; “I’m on a fixed income”; then chances are you will stay more conservative. If you WEREN’T smart, and thought you would just rely on Social Security, Medicare, etc… then you become more liberal again as you NEED and EXPECT society to take care of you.</p>
<p>Fourier, an interesting and pertinent example. Do you think the professor using this text is representative of the faculty at this school? Is it your impression that if a student cited the contrary literature in a paper, he’d get a lesser grade? Do the class readings include articles or papers with the opposite point of view?</p>
<p>Even in subjects like math, the teacher can’t teach everything, so he will always have to pick and choose. Should he teach base 8 in arithmetic classes? Should he teach both the Bayesian and the frequentist viewpoints in statistics classes? And the problems are worse in the humanities, where a professor couldn’t begin to cover even a tiny portion of the scholarship in a particular area. I hope my son ends up with great professors who expose him to a wide variety of sources and teach him to research, interpret, reason and write; that’s the best they can do.</p>
<p>My son read the American point of view on Pearl Harbor in their textbooks, but his teacher sent them to the Internet to find some other opinions. It would be nice if textbooks presented every controversy, but ultimately a historian’s job is to interpret the facts. I always had pretty good luck gradewise disagreeing with my professors as long as I marshaled enough evidence to support my views.</p>