<p>CGM,</p>
<p>No one here has called Berkeley a rat-hole. Though, someone did suggest that the “researchers” in this study treated it as one. </p>
<p>Lighten up! Life is good.</p>
<p>CGM,</p>
<p>No one here has called Berkeley a rat-hole. Though, someone did suggest that the “researchers” in this study treated it as one. </p>
<p>Lighten up! Life is good.</p>
<p>speaking as someone who has close friends on each side of the political fence, i find the study amusing and accurate despite its lack of heavy-weight status. i also find that the conservative people that i know are quicker to whine about politics and policies than liberals are, though i’ve gathered this through experience rather than what you might deem a sufficiently reliable study.</p>
<p>and whoever said that the professors conducting the studies should go back to teaching undergrads-have you ever heard of a research-intensive university? the professors involved are merely conducting social experiments, which is a part of their job.</p>
<p>I’m thinking that “study” belongs on the editorial page. And would belong there even if you switched the words liberal & conservative.</p>
<p>
But you’re the open-minded one…??? </p>
<p>Just isn’t true. I know liberals who HATE conservatives with passion. I also know liberals who put up with us. I’m a conservative who, like many conservatives I know, is happy that there are liberals. Have you ever heard the fable about the man with a four-coloured hat who walked down a street? People on the north side of him said he was wearing a red hat; people on the east, yellow… etc., etc. I do think my own perspective is valid - but I don’t use that to think that everyone else is completely, wholly wrong. </p>
<p>CGM: There are about 100 million or so conservatives in the US. Seek out the intellectual, compassionate, open-minded, ones who believe in human dignity. A lot of lousy people hide behind conservatism as an excuse for bigotry or liberalism as an excuse for a lack of morals - but don’t define people by those who exploit the best of them.</p>
<p>The most interesting thing about this is the recent speculation that the study was conducted on children of professors at the free day care center run by the University of California at Berkeley for the faculty. That that group is even less representitive than the rest of the city is an understatement.</p>
<p>I’m curious what “conservatism” means to someone like you, arieshthena. The old time conservatives have been against big government, big government programs, and for fiscally conservtive spending. Since all of that has flown out the window with this adminsitration, I am wondering what a current, compassionate conservative believes.</p>
<p>Or is it all about “moral values”?</p>
<p>Honest questions.</p>
<p>Those of you saying this was “bad science” are failing to recognize what the study was, and wasn’t.
In other words, this was basic data gathering. You gather the data, you see if any correlations appear from later data gathered from the same subjects, you form tentative hypotheses based on those correlations, and then you set about testing those hypotheses with further, more rigorous testing. This study was phase one, not phase two. A correlation was observed. It might be a coincidence, it might be due to some other factor, it might actually represent a valid social science fact.<br>
In this case I doubt that any phase 2 will occur based on the data and hypotheses arising from this study, given the political/financial realities of science in academia today.</p>
<p>Fair enough. The key thing is wasn’t was representative and what’s unscientific is drawing much in the way of conclusions from it.</p>
<p>Well, “conclusions” would be inappropriate; “hypotheses” would not. I mean, the whole point is that you have to identify the correlations which appear from the data. The article says there’s a
So you make the hypothesis that that correlation may not be random noise or due to some other, unidentified variable, and then base future studies to test that hypothesis. But just to say it’s meaningless on its face isn’t “scientific” - that amounts to rejecting the conclusions which follows the data because you don’t like the answer.</p>
<p>yes, what is an conservative…</p>
<p>please explain that to me</p>
<p>to me, a liberal is someone who cares about others, wants others to be able to be who they are, doesn’t use the bible as the constitution, is aware of the world, the enviroment, doesn’t walk lockstep with their leaders, who question, wonder, think for themselves, thinks that people have the right to live and make choices, to be gay or straight, to think about their fellow humans, don’t fully trust government, thinks that just having Faith in our leaders is not enough, believe in education and science</p>
<p>So, what are conservative values, and i am not talking morals, because that is what is thrown at us liberals</p>
<p>please conservatives have no more or less morals than conservatives</p>
<p>and to call a place a rathole, i read it, was a very poor choice of words</p>
<p>lets call Dartmouth a rathole if a survey is done there, shall we?</p>
<p>kluge-</p>
<p>You can’t gather any conclusions or hypothesis from such a miniscule sample size. It is statistically impossible. It is just a clear indication of worthless information.</p>
<p>Since none of the conservatives want to step up for the definition of their beliefs, I am wondering…are they the antithesis of what we liberals believe, as outlined so nicely by citygirlsmom above?</p>
<p>Conservatives are willing to accept that liberals have a right to their views. Liberals often don’t extend the same courtesy to their conservative neighbors.</p>
<p>(just a little tongue in cheek)</p>
<p>Interesting. I see no acceptance of liberal views by conservatives at all. In fact, talk radio and teevee is filled with conservative pundits who pretty much bash liberals 24/7. I have listened to the like of Bill O’Reilly, Ann Coulter, and Rush before.</p>
<p>I certainly don’t think they are really willing to accept that liberals have a right to their views. Nope.</p>
<p>They are not typical…look around at “normal” citizens. Even look at the members of this forum. ;)</p>
<p>Okay, here is a very quick summary of what I believe – I don’t claim to speak for all conservatives.</p>
<p>I believe in a strong national defense. I support the military, and that includes its leadership. I believe that our way of government is superior to most others, with regard to our constitution and bill of rights. I do not support handing over any ability to govern to any international body, including the UN or any International court.</p>
<p>I believe that the Founder’s intended the Constitution to be a timeless document, not one to bend with prevailing attitudes of any given time. </p>
<p>I support local and state decision making, typically over a large, centralized government. I support limited government entitlement programs, and I don’t feel that people who are capable of working should get a free pass. I believe in self-sufficiency.</p>
<p>I believe in limited taxes. I just don’t think that bureaucracies are the best way to distribute money. </p>
<p>I believe that everyone is entitled to their own point of view, and I seldom try to impose mine on anyone else.</p>
<p>I believe that life begins at conception, and that abortion should not be legal. (I don’t think that most conservatives are this opposed to abortion, though.)</p>
<p>I also belief in the scientific method and evolution. All of my siblings have science or engineering degrees, and we don’t drag our knuckles when we walk.</p>
<p>This is a quick list. You’ll notice that I do not offer any derogatory comments about liberal beliefs, though I continue to read a variety of negative comments about conservatives. I do not like name calling, or belligerent behavior.</p>
<p>I also don’t go around making nasty comments like, “lets call Dartmouth a rathole if a survey is done there, shall we?”</p>
<p>Ditto sjmom2329.</p>
<p>Does it concern any conservatives on this board that our consitutional protections have been tampered with throught the Patriot acts 1 and 2?</p>
<p>Does it bother you that wiretapping is illegal, according to all legal and constitutional experts that I have read, and yet it continues? </p>
<p>Do you really think our government is “small” at the moment?</p>
<p>Do you believe that the tax cuts, which have ballooned the deficit, are a good thing?</p>
<p>Even if you believe in strong national defense, do you believe that spending $3Trillion on a war (editorial comment: one which has turned into a civil war), when our children have no new textbooks or teachers, when 40 million people are uninsured, is a good expenditure of capital and tax money?</p>
<p>These aren’t meant to be hot seat questions, but I am truly curious as to how a real conservative makes sense of some of what is going on under the guise of conservatism in Washington.</p>
<p>BTW, my father, a died in the wool Republican of 50 years, is disgusted beyond belief with what has happened to his party.</p>
<p>Just trying to understand here. I am not trying to make any nasty comments at all.</p>
<p>Someone asked the question, “What do conservatives believe?” I don’t think the question was a contrast/compare conservative to Republican, or liberal to Democrat.</p>
<p>For the most part, as a conservative (by the way, I’m conservative in almost everything – I reuse and recycle) the Republican party more closely mirrors my belief system than the Democrats. I don’t view the Iraq war as something that this country entered frivolously, and I think that this will be viewed historically as a time when democracy fought for its life. I think the Patriot Act is an important weapon against terrorism, and I’m far more concerned about another 9/11 than I am about wiretapping. Civil liberties aren’t going to matter to me if there is another attack of that scale.</p>
<p>I strongly believe in a free market system, and I think capitalism provides motivation for success – CC exists because parents and kids see the value of working toward success through education. So the tax cuts are fine with me, although we don’t really benefit. I think it increases capital for investment, which strengthens the economy.</p>
<p>Scott: You don’t understand science. Here’s a couple of links to explanations of the scientific method: <a href=“http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html[/url]”>http://teacher.pas.rochester.edu/phy_labs/AppendixE/AppendixE.html</a>
<a href=“Department of Physics & Astronomy | College of Natural & Agricultural Sciences”>Department of Physics & Astronomy | College of Natural & Agricultural Sciences;
It’s worth taking the time to understand how this stuff works.</p>