Education in the USA

[Woodruff]

Indoctrination, or the level of indoctrination, depends on the school. I don't believe there is any overt and clearly defined goal to indoctrinate students.

I think it is the case where liberals found themselves in the majority at universities, and kept it that way. Being liberals, and generally superior people with their awesome degrees and titles, they see it as their responsibility to educate their students on the evils of capitalism, the free market, and America in general.

Also being liberals, they accept no counter argument to their ideology.

I honestly do not think it is a specific goal to indoctrinate. It just happens, a lot.

Having really ignorant, very low-information youth is part of the problem.

Public schools K - 12 is another story.

I value you as one of the smarter Conservatives on this forum Nobunga, but this post dissapoints me.

Take the high road dude. We have pleanty of others covering the liberals-are-evil-and-want-to-brain-wash-your-children mentality.

(if you want a serious response: as Woodruff mentions the underlined bit of your quote is in direct contrast to actual liberal idealogy, that is the whole point of being a liberal is to be open to everyones ideas - dont let people like Professor Bradley (PS posted a clip of him in the other thread, the eco-facist guy) fly the flag for us liberals, you wouldnt let the KKK be a adequate generalisation for Conservatives would you?)

We have a serious difference in opinions here. Liberals are hands down the champion of close mindedness.

How very open-minded of you, Phatscotty.

The evidence is their high level of foul attitude and name calling smear attacks any time presented with an idea that does not conform with their ideology.

I can't speak for anyone else, but the reason you get the "high level of foul attitude and name calling" is because you won't actually discuss issues.

Their favorite strategy is to ignore the issue at hand, and put all energy into making people hate those who disagree through misrepresentation and lies.

When did you become a liberal, Phatscotty?

Also, the KKK is a Democrat group, founded by Democrats, with a long history of fighting against Republicans, so of course the KKK is not an adequate generalization for Conservatives.

This is the sort of bullshit obsfucation I'm talking about. You relate the KKK to a Democratic group, as if that means they were liberal at that time. And you're trying to intimate that the KKK is not a conservative organization. That's absolute hogwash. Surely you know that, so I can only conclude that you're lying intentionally.

[Woodruff]

... Too bad, you have not been educated enough to really understand that hatred of disputing ideas is not a substitute for thought.

Typical, personal attack in lieu of argument. The classic liberal deflection.

What about my point regarding "classic liberalism"? Nothing?

I have no hatred for disputing ideas, only for the blind faith put in those ideas by people with very selective awareness.

Indeed. That's why I've seen you so often disagree strongly with Phatscotty methodologies in these fora. Oh, wait...

[Lootifer]

]
We have a serious difference in opinions here. Liberals are hands down the champion of close mindedness. The evidence is their high level of foul attitude and name calling smear attacks any time presented with an idea that does not conform with their ideology. Their favorite strategy is to ignore the issue at hand, and put all energy into making people hate those who disagree through misrepresentation and lies. Also, the KKK is a Democrat group, founded by Democrats, with a long history of fighting against Republicans, so of course the KKK is not an adequate generalization for Conservatives.

and like Bradley is an exception or something? This is the norm in our universities, and there are hundreds of examples that can be shown, and thousands more that we don't know about, impacting hundreds of thousands of students every year. I mean just look, university campus's are some of the most diverse places on the planet earth, so how is it so many students get swept up in anger and hate about "equality" and the lack of it? despite never having stepped foot into the real world...

Blergh, us vs. them mentality.... hoorey!

On youtube there are about half a dozen in-lecture videos about crazy "liberal" professors or teachers. Now dont get me wrong; I disagree completely with their sentiments, but they are not liberals. They might think they are but by personally attacking people based on their opinion they are breaking about the one and only rule of genuine liberalism.

And I dont care what political party the KKK supports. I was calling them an extreme conservative faction, much like someone who wants to legalize canibalism I would classes and extreme liberal. Its hard to argue they dont share a conservative view (even though 99.99% of conservatives dont agree with them) as they are essentially acting based on traditionalist ideals. But as I say I would be hugely incorrect to say that they are a valid representation of modern conservatism. Just like you are wrong to say these nutjob professors are representative of modern liberalism: They. Are. Not.

Now that aside you still havent shown me any clear evidence. Horowitzs' book was a good start but unfortunately that was firstly somewhat bias (he undeniably has a political agenda) so while its a valid data point it must be used with caution, and secondly his research involves looking at 12 (of what ~2600?) institutions, then looking at the obvious targets (i mean theyre called liberal arts FFS!) and finding out they have some bias reading material and course content? I dont know how much you know about scientific method, but, erm, that experiment is less than ideal.

Do you have any others?

Seriously if it was a huge problem this would be much more widely publicised (and would undoubtedly have been corrected). I mean half you're frickin population is conservative isn't it? They can protest right? Why the hell are they not protesting?!!? When you produce more than 1.6 million graduates each and every year I would hazard to guess that if there was a serious problem you would have slightly more than 1 website and a handful of idiot professors getting caught on camera.

[Lootifer]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

[thegreekdog]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

[Woodruff]

My co-teacher, who is a retired Lt Col, is a hard-core Fox-news-watching Mormon conservative. I am, as you have probably gleaned, of a far more liberal mindframe than that. So I am curious...how is it that my co-teacher and I can work in complete harmony with one another and advance our curriculum just as is expected by our Principal, Superintendent and the Air Force while maintaining a very close relationship in working together?

How is that possible?

It's because liberalism/conservatism really doesn't exist in the "teaching level" of education. We teach kids how to think for themselves, as much as we are allowed to via the curriculum (we still have to teach them the subjects of Aerospace Science and Leadership, after all). We teach kids how to effectively treat those they share the city with (through community service). We teach kids how to be responsible individuals, good friends, healthy people. None of that has any sort of a liberal or conservative bent to it.

My co-teacher and I are not at all unusual in this. Almost every teacher I know does this. I've been in their classrooms and seen it. I've been in my own kids' classrooms. I've been to AN ENORMOUS NUMBER of teacher training sessions.

People who believe liberalism/conservatism exists in education at the "teaching level" simply do not have very much wide-ranging experience in the public school system.

[Woodruff]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

I'm not sure what you mean by "they teach that way". How does a liberal teach differently than a conservative?

[Lootifer]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

Sorry I did see your post.

Personally I think the origin of this proportion of university staff being liberal is because high academia is based around critical thought. Critical thought is inherantly at odds with traditionalist ideals. Now dont get me wrong, I am certainly not saying conservatives cant think critically or anything like that. But fundamentally the definition of traditionalist thought is resisting change (which is more than fine, I have no problem with this idealogy), in order to think critically you have to actively question your own traditions (i.e. preconcieved notions). Surely this means that it is harder to be a conservative academic than a liberal one? An analogy would be its much harder for a woman to become a good physical labourer because they dont build muscle as effectively (i.e. it is certainly not preventative, just simply a slightly higher hurdle to overcome).

As with any advantage/disadvantage the population tends to take the path of least resistance: uneducated woman tend to work in admin, not shovelling shit; the final of the 100m at the olympics is 8-9 black dudes of caribbian descent, and people who ask questions of pre-concieved notions for a living tend to be liberal hippys?

[thegreekdog]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

I'm not sure what you mean by "they teach that way". How does a liberal teach differently than a conservative?

Sorry.. there should have been a "may" there. "They may teach that way." A liberal teacher may point out that one politician was great and another was not or require her students to sing an Obama song or take off an NRA t-shirt. A conservative teacher may teach creationism or that there were WMDs in Iraq.

I never felt that I was being taught a certain way in high school. College was a mixed bag. Political science professors tended toward liberalism. History professors were right down the middle. My professors in law school, by and large, were liberal and taught with a liberal bent. For example, teaching that the Constitution should be ignored.

[thegreekdog]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

Sorry I did see your post.

Personally I think the origin of this proportion of university staff being liberal is because high academia is based around critical thought. Critical thought is inherantly at odds with traditionalist ideals. Now dont get me wrong, I am certainly not saying conservatives cant think critically or anything like that. But fundamentally the definition of traditionalist thought is resisting change (which is more than fine, I have no problem with this idealogy), in order to think critically you have to actively question your own traditions (i.e. preconcieved notions). Surely this means that it is harder to be a conservative academic than a liberal one? An analogy would be its much harder for a woman to become a good physical labourer because they dont build muscle as effectively (i.e. it is certainly not preventative, just simply a slightly higher hurdle to overcome).

A little tongue-in-cheek, but I think high academics are liberal because intelligent liberals don't want to work in finance and didn't have the grades to get into law school or medical school, end up going there. For what it's worth (and purely saying this because I'm tired) - I absolutely detest rich and/or intellgensia-type liberals.

Seriously though, it depends on your definition of "liberal" as to whether I would agree with your premise. Think about the critical thinkers in this forum and then think about their political views. Not a big sample size, but it might help you with your theory.

[Woodruff]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

I'm not sure what you mean by "they teach that way". How does a liberal teach differently than a conservative?

Sorry.. there should have been a "may" there. "They may teach that way." A liberal teacher may point out that one politician was great and another was not or require her students to sing an Obama song or take off an NRA t-shirt. A conservative teacher may teach creationism or that there were WMDs in Iraq.

I never felt that I was being taught a certain way in high school. College was a mixed bag. Political science professors tended toward liberalism. History professors were right down the middle. My professors in law school, by and large, were liberal and taught with a liberal bent. For example, teaching that the Constitution should be ignored.

I don't recall ever having any idea what the political positions of ANY of my teachers or professors were. Granted, my college agenda was computer science, so maybe that's why. But I never picked up on any indication at all.

[Lootifer]

Bah, 50/50 split (or there abouts) by my calculation.

Alright, liberals are smart, but not quite smart enough works for me... Actually, maybe its because we're lazier rather than not quite smart enough. I know I am

[BigBallinStalin]

are fiscally liberal (i.e. more spending, especially on teachers' salaries)

Today I learned I am fiscally liberal. <evil smile>

Haha, almost everyone is fiscally liberal when they realize that their coffers can be padded by others (through coercion)*.

No doubt about it.

I know you're mostly joking, but it's a seriously perverse incentive created and reinforced by democratic institutions.

I agree. I'm not sure there's any way around it or even that we should want there to be...it is, after all, how a democratic society sort of sets its priorities (what the most people want).

Which can end in disaster (e.g. Greece, Cyrpus, Iceland) or in stagnation (e.g. Japan).

I'm thinking that the more robust political economies are better at dealing with such problems, and the more robust one's have some sufficient proportion of goods and capital away from government control.

[BigBallinStalin]

That said, there IS another set of motivations that actually do drive people. When folks truly are convinced of a common good that will supercede the personal.
During WWII, people really did save things to help support the war effort. Today, people really do donate millions to groups like the American Cancer society.
I would argue that this is the reason why so many people have vested so much in disuading folks from the reality of issues like global climate change... because if people learned and really believed they would act.

While that is true, there was still a personal incentive for most people. Concerning the war effort, it was obviously in everyone's interest here in the United States that the Nazis not be allowed to rule the world. And I would suggest that the vast majority of folks who donate to things like the American Cancer society do so because they know someone who has that particular disease/situation or they fear they may contract it.

Also, BBS kind of covered that with the "it makes me feel good" aspect as well.

Your points are valid, but the perception that people act most toward their own self interest primarily is wrong. People often think that is the case, but in many cases will do more for someone else than for themselves.

I heard a commentary/reference to a few studies on this not so long ago, but I am not sure I can dig it up again. I will try... Anyway, its a subject of a lot of study recently, because it has a lot to do with everything from how businesses operate to public policies.

So, what do you mean by "self-interest" and what do I mean by "self-interest"?

Generally, self-interest involves one's own personal motivations and opinions towards oneself and some immediate circle of others. That circle varies in circumference, but with the limit of one's reason, capacity of knowledge/awareness, and actual capabilities, nearly everyone is not at all "other-interested." Now, people may say, "we should help others," but (1) I hardly see the required acts for such a broad goal, and (2) it depends on what "others" means--e.g. one's friends and family, one's community, the Entire Nation(?), the Entire World(?). Those later two goals are usually always rhetorical and are hardly ever acted upon by alleged "other-interested" individuals. Only very few people meet that category, and yet they're still interested in particular groups in particular areas. So, most people are "self-interested."


Maybe this helps:
Tocqueville talks about "self-interest properly understood," which means a self-interest developed through one's deliberation. The scope of interest hinges on one's membership in associations (e.g. a mutual aid society, church, soccer club, family, friends, etc.), and this developed "art of association" lends oneself away from an (Tocquevillian) individualism and toward the more general interest. (Individualism is the retreat into caring about one's self, family, and friends--thus leaving the State to happily fill in the gaps of 'needed' services).

[BigBallinStalin]

My co-teacher, who is a retired Lt Col, is a hard-core Fox-news-watching Mormon conservative. I am, as you have probably gleaned, of a far more liberal mindframe than that. So I am curious...how is it that my co-teacher and I can work in complete harmony with one another and advance our curriculum just as is expected by our Principal, Superintendent and the Air Force while maintaining a very close relationship in working together?

How is that possible?

It's because liberalism/conservatism really doesn't exist in the "teaching level" of education. We teach kids how to think for themselves, as much as we are allowed to via the curriculum (we still have to teach them the subjects of Aerospace Science and Leadership, after all). We teach kids how to effectively treat those they share the city with (through community service). We teach kids how to be responsible individuals, good friends, healthy people. None of that has any sort of a liberal or conservative bent to it.

My co-teacher and I are not at all unusual in this. Almost every teacher I know does this. I've been in their classrooms and seen it. I've been in my own kids' classrooms. I've been to AN ENORMOUS NUMBER of teacher training sessions.

People who believe liberalism/conservatism exists in education at the "teaching level" simply do not have very much wide-ranging experience in the public school system.

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

]
We have a serious difference in opinions here. Liberals are hands down the champion of close mindedness. The evidence is their high level of foul attitude and name calling smear attacks any time presented with an idea that does not conform with their ideology. Their favorite strategy is to ignore the issue at hand, and put all energy into making people hate those who disagree through misrepresentation and lies. Also, the KKK is a Democrat group, founded by Democrats, with a long history of fighting against Republicans, so of course the KKK is not an adequate generalization for Conservatives.

and like Bradley is an exception or something? This is the norm in our universities, and there are hundreds of examples that can be shown, and thousands more that we don't know about, impacting hundreds of thousands of students every year. I mean just look, university campus's are some of the most diverse places on the planet earth, so how is it so many students get swept up in anger and hate about "equality" and the lack of it? despite never having stepped foot into the real world...

Blergh, us vs. them mentality.... hoorey!

On youtube there are about half a dozen in-lecture videos about crazy "liberal" professors or teachers. Now dont get me wrong; I disagree completely with their sentiments, but they are not liberals. They might think they are but by personally attacking people based on their opinion they are breaking about the one and only rule of genuine liberalism.

And I dont care what political party the KKK supports. I was calling them an extreme conservative faction, much like someone who wants to legalize canibalism I would classes and extreme liberal. Its hard to argue they dont share a conservative view (even though 99.99% of conservatives dont agree with them) as they are essentially acting based on traditionalist ideals. But as I say I would be hugely incorrect to say that they are a valid representation of modern conservatism. Just like you are wrong to say these nutjob professors are representative of modern liberalism: They. Are. Not.

Now that aside you still havent shown me any clear evidence. Horowitzs' book was a good start but unfortunately that was firstly somewhat bias (he undeniably has a political agenda) so while its a valid data point it must be used with caution, and secondly his research involves looking at 12 (of what ~2600?) institutions, then looking at the obvious targets (i mean theyre called liberal arts FFS!) and finding out they have some bias reading material and course content? I dont know how much you know about scientific method, but, erm, that experiment is less than ideal.

Do you have any others?

Seriously if it was a huge problem this would be much more widely publicised (and would undoubtedly have been corrected). I mean half you're frickin population is conservative isn't it? They can protest right? Why the hell are they not protesting?!!? When you produce more than 1.6 million graduates each and every year I would hazard to guess that if there was a serious problem you would have slightly more than 1 website and a handful of idiot professors getting caught on camera.

I knew you dirty liberals would say such things.

I can spot your liberal lies, you libelous liberal lunatics! You loquacious, loligagging louts! You ludicrous, lumbering lards of liberalism!

[Nobunaga]

... Too bad, you have not been educated enough to really understand that hatred of disputing ideas is not a substitute for thought.

Typical, personal attack in lieu of argument. The classic liberal deflection.

What about my point regarding "classic liberalism"? Nothing?

I have no hatred for disputing ideas, only for the blind faith put in those ideas by people with very selective awareness.

Indeed. That's why I've seen you so often disagree strongly with Phatscotty methodologies in these fora. Oh, wait...

Classic: (from Merriams) : typical <a classic example of chicanery> <a classic error>

I did not intend the use of the word as it would have been used with say, classical Greece. Why do I have to explain this? This thread is about education... maybe this misunderstanding reveals to us problems with our system of education in the US.

[Nobunaga]

... Too bad, you have not been educated enough to really understand that hatred of disputing ideas is not a substitute for thought.

Typical, personal attack in lieu of argument. The classic liberal deflection.

I have no hatred for disputing ideas, only for the blind faith put in those ideas by people with very selective awareness.

No comment on mine, and others', posts about what being a liberal actually means?

I too could call that a classic something or other...

Please do. I don't mind.

Do you identify yourself as liberal, Lootifer?

[Woodruff]

... Too bad, you have not been educated enough to really understand that hatred of disputing ideas is not a substitute for thought.

Typical, personal attack in lieu of argument. The classic liberal deflection.

What about my point regarding "classic liberalism"? Nothing?

I have no hatred for disputing ideas, only for the blind faith put in those ideas by people with very selective awareness.

Indeed. That's why I've seen you so often disagree strongly with Phatscotty methodologies in these fora. Oh, wait...

Classic: (from Merriams) : typical <a classic example of chicanery> <a classic error>

I did not intend the use of the word as it would have been used with say, classical Greece. Why do I have to explain this? This thread is about education... maybe this misunderstanding reveals to us problems with our system of education in the US.

Well, that's an interesting dodge, but were you going to entirely avoid the point then? Or did you just want to pretend that I'm speaking of some historical-but-long-dead-animal when I speak of a "classic liberal"?

[thegreekdog]

Another question:

If I lectured at a University knowing that I am a liberal, and quite a strong minded one at that. Would you see this as a problem?

If not, when might it be a problem?

No and never.

I'm going to post this again since it was ignored last time. If you did a poll of teachers and/or professors and asked them what political party they were affiliated with, would they say Democrats or Republicans? If they said Democrats, would the idea that 90% of teachers are teaching with a liberal slant be indoctrination? Of course not.

At my firm, for example, every single person i've met is either Republican or Libertarian. Does this mean we're indoctrinated? I don't believe that there is a plot by the government to teach liberal politics in schools or universities. I do believe that most teachers and professors are liberal and they teach that way. Isn't that a simpler answer than "vast left wing conspiracy?"

I'm not sure what you mean by "they teach that way". How does a liberal teach differently than a conservative?

Sorry.. there should have been a "may" there. "They may teach that way." A liberal teacher may point out that one politician was great and another was not or require her students to sing an Obama song or take off an NRA t-shirt. A conservative teacher may teach creationism or that there were WMDs in Iraq.

I never felt that I was being taught a certain way in high school. College was a mixed bag. Political science professors tended toward liberalism. History professors were right down the middle. My professors in law school, by and large, were liberal and taught with a liberal bent. For example, teaching that the Constitution should be ignored.

I don't recall ever having any idea what the political positions of ANY of my teachers or professors were. Granted, my college agenda was computer science, so maybe that's why. But I never picked up on any indication at all.

I think the subject matter being taught is also relevant. I majored in history and political science so there was more opportunity for my "War and Strategy" professor to go on about a strong military and my "Russian History" professor to go on about the joys of the Soviet Union and my "Political Science 101" professor to go on about how Bill Clinton was the greatest president in history. And then law school obviously lends itself to politically-charged subject matter.

[Woodruff]

I don't recall ever having any idea what the political positions of ANY of my teachers or professors were. Granted, my college agenda was computer science, so maybe that's why. But I never picked up on any indication at all.

I think the subject matter being taught is also relevant. I majored in history and political science so there was more opportunity for my "War and Strategy" professor to go on about a strong military and my "Russian History" professor to go on about the joys of the Soviet Union and my "Political Science 101" professor to go on about how Bill Clinton was the greatest president in history. And then law school obviously lends itself to politically-charged subject matter.

Yeah, that definitely makes sense.

[Lootifer]

... Too bad, you have not been educated enough to really understand that hatred of disputing ideas is not a substitute for thought.

Typical, personal attack in lieu of argument. The classic liberal deflection.

I have no hatred for disputing ideas, only for the blind faith put in those ideas by people with very selective awareness.

No comment on mine, and others', posts about what being a liberal actually means?

I too could call that a classic something or other...

Please do. I don't mind.

Do you identify yourself as liberal, Lootifer?

1) No. Treat others as you yourself would like to be treated.

2) Yessir.

[Lootifer]

I don't recall ever having any idea what the political positions of ANY of my teachers or professors were. Granted, my college agenda was computer science, so maybe that's why. But I never picked up on any indication at all.

I think the subject matter being taught is also relevant. I majored in history and political science so there was more opportunity for my "War and Strategy" professor to go on about a strong military and my "Russian History" professor to go on about the joys of the Soviet Union and my "Political Science 101" professor to go on about how Bill Clinton was the greatest president in history. And then law school obviously lends itself to politically-charged subject matter.

Yeah, that definitely makes sense.

Yeah and unsurprisingly one of the "leading" books on the matter (leading from the PS viewpoint) looks at bias in course content and reading lists in subject areas like feminism and other liberal arts.

HOLY SHIT PEOPLE, LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE SLIGHTLY LEFT LEANING; WTF!?!?!?!!?!... I mean really?

[BigBallinStalin]

I don't recall ever having any idea what the political positions of ANY of my teachers or professors were. Granted, my college agenda was computer science, so maybe that's why. But I never picked up on any indication at all.

I think the subject matter being taught is also relevant. I majored in history and political science so there was more opportunity for my "War and Strategy" professor to go on about a strong military and my "Russian History" professor to go on about the joys of the Soviet Union and my "Political Science 101" professor to go on about how Bill Clinton was the greatest president in history. And then law school obviously lends itself to politically-charged subject matter.

Yeah, that definitely makes sense.

Yeah and unsurprisingly one of the "leading" books on the matter (leading from the PS viewpoint) looks at bias in course content and reading lists in subject areas like feminism and other liberal arts.

HOLY SHIT PEOPLE, LIBERAL ARTS COLLEGES AROUND THE COUNTRY ARE SLIGHTLY LEFT LEANING; WTF!?!?!?!!?!... I mean really?

In the mids 1980s, it was roughly even. Then, 15 years later,it's not.

What explains the shift? Discriminatory practices? Individual preferences (more welfare liberals want to be professors relative to conservatives, classical liberals, etc.?)

[Lootifer]

No idea and I dont suppose it is knowable without a lot of work (which hasnt been done?).

I speculated earlier but really I have no idea.

What is more important, however, is the outcome due to this increase in liberal viewpoints in colleges. (what the Horowitz book attempts to argue - indoctrination).

Sure I have plenty of bias going on, but I still dont believe I have been given any particularly convincing evidence.

[BigBallinStalin]

No idea and I dont suppose it is knowable without a lot of work (which hasnt been done?).

I speculated earlier but really I have no idea.

What is more important, however, is the outcome due to this increase in liberal viewpoints in colleges. (what the Horowitz book attempts to argue - indoctrination).

Sure I have plenty of bias going on, but I still dont believe I have been given any particularly convincing evidence.

What'll PS come up with this time?