 |
|
Drake Tungsten
|
 |
Knee deep in alien womyn...
Oct 2001 time: 14:30
|
|
quote: As for why are most professors liberals- does it really take much of a brain? Most professors today grew up in the 60's and before, when liberal thought was in acendency. They fought against professors who were deeply conservative.
Academia is a dragging indicator. |
Agreed. This is also why the mainstream media is so overwhelmingly liberal.
Last edited by Drake Tungsten on 31-03-2005 at 05:50
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Agathon
|
 |
Leafs 4TW!! - CPA
Dec 2002 time: 00:30
|
|
The Summers thing was stupid... but there's stupid politics everywhere. Usually it's a storm in a teacup. Believe me, there were plenty of people outraged at the way Summers was treated.
But then again, a lot of women spent years suffering all sorts of crap like this -- so it's no wonder they get jumpy.
On a serious note, there is an underlying reason why conservative views do not get much time at university.
That is that the ideas that underpin them are antiquated.
A good example is what we could call the conservative notion of what it is to be a person. According to conservatives, we are creatures who are responsible for our actions, because we have free will. This underlies a great deal of conservative thinking on politics and economics (consider punishment for example).
The problem is that this is a vestigially religious view. People have always "held each other responsible" for doing things, and this has been a boon to humanity since it helps us get along with others and remove threats to community survival. That is all the concept of responsibility is for - it is a socially useful concept which enables us to sort out the malicious from the misguided and ignorant. There is a utility gain to any community that does so. It's just a way of separating useful from useless causes, it has nothing to do with free will.
But religion turned this metaphysical because to make sense of the idea that our lives are some grand moral game, we need free will. Unfortunately, the concept of free will is riddled with contradiction, but people didn't notice as long as our knowledge of the causes of human behaviour was fairly rudimentary.
But as science has progressed it has become more and more evident that our decisions just are brain processes and that there is no need for some magical "soul" or "free will" to explain our behaviour. Every day, the old picture of human nature is destroyed a little bit more.
With every passing moment the materialist explanation of human behaviour gains strength. As it gains strength we begin to learn that our very psychology is determined by these causes -- so when a liberal commentator says that a murderer murdered someone because of a bad upbringing, they are saying something that fits better with scientific explanation than a simple claim of "he chose to". This naturally suggests a different attitude towards what to do about crime amongst liberals.
Conservatism is also largely supported by the idea that we are rational and free creatures. But the whole move of modernity has been away from this. From Freud onwards we have discovered that we aren't particularly rational or enlightened, and from science we have discovered that our freedom, if it exists at all, is largely an illusion. Conservatives are at war with modernity -- we can see this clearly in the Schiavo case, stem cells, abortion and so on.
In the case of abortion, it is clear that a fetus is not a person in the biological sense. It lacks all the material features that make a person a person. But the religious still believe in souls, even though such things are the equivalent of fairies. The liberals have science on their side, the conservatives faith.
Indeed Conservatism is common amongst the religious because they share so many fundamental concepts. The problem is that these concepts are like a lot of the ones I deal with in Greek philosophy -- they have no contemporary application because they rest on errors. That is why conservatism has no real place in the university. The world view that informs it is fundamentally at odds with what is being discovered in universities as those institutions fulfil their function of trying to discover the truth.
That is why there are so few conservatives on campus. Most of the ones that are there are inevitably socially liberal. When you are confronted by people who will constantly push the latest evidence in your face it becomes hard to maintain conservative views and be taken seriously.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Drake Tungsten
|
 |
Knee deep in alien womyn...
Oct 2001 time: 14:30
|
|
I fail to see how he was being an ass. He provided possible explanations to a legitimate question in a rather academic and non-offensive way, IMO at least. I'm not alone in that opinion, either.
edit: Summers' remarks, for those who don't know what we're talking about...
Last edited by Drake Tungsten on 31-03-2005 at 07:34
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Kuciwalker
|
 |
of Schmooism
Feb 2001 time: 00:30
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Agathon
quote: What if those researchers make a discovery that supports the idea that there are some intrinsic gender-based differences in scientific aptitude? |
Then it will be subjected to peer review. Of course the bar will be set fairly high as the political consequences of such a conclusion would be immense. |
Politics has no place in science.
Last edited by Kuciwalker on 31-03-2005 at 07:54
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:30. Apolyton Time is 00:30. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|