| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 5/24 |
| 2005/2/27-3/1 [Politics/Domestic/California, Politics/Domestic] UID:36445 Activity:moderate |
2/27 Intellectual Diversity in the Ivory Tower:
http://www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001588
\_ summary: only 1 Stanford professor believes in astrology and only
1% believe in telepathy. There is no diversity in liberal colleges
and these elitist Democrats should go to hell. It's written by
Aaron Swartz. If only our Aaron Smith had written this...
\_ This summary is taken completely out of context, and entirely
misses the point. The article is a sarcastic spoof of a
supposedly neutral academic study that found only 30%
30%? I'd be SHOCKED if it was that high. _/
of Professors at elite colleges were politically conservative
and leaped to the clearly ridiculous conclusion, ``There is no
diversity in liberal colleges...,'' that you cite above.
Whatever your reason for posting such a weak summary (too caught
up in your own agenda, too simple to recognize subtle forms of
humor like sarcasm, not funny enough to carry the joke about
aaron@csua), you should get a clue. Please kindly refrain from
breeding until you do so. In the mean time, sign your posts so
I know who I'm insulting. -dans
\_ Say dans, before you start talking out your ass, might I
recommend actually _reading_ what the above piece is
satirizing? Hint: the link is at the top. "30%" is hardly
the same thing as "9 to 1". And unless you make the argument
of "well, the republicans are too stupid to listen to anyway",
which, I'd say, only further supports their point re
leftist brainwashing, I think there's definitely something
to think long and hard about there. -alexf, who, like
the authors of the PA weekly article, also votes largely
Democrat, and still thinks there's a major problem with
extreme political bias in academia
\_ Alex, you are a self-described libertarian. I would be
curious about your reasons for mostly voting Democrat
as opposed to Republican (Note: I think either are
reasonable for a libertarian. I have just been leaning
the other way myself, and I am curious for another point
of view that starts from mostly the same premises as me).
If you don't want to answer this here, but do want answer,
please send me a mail or something. -- ilyas
\_ I'm not alex but I don't think the Republicans are
giving "less government". They cut some taxes, fine.
But that just goes into the deficit. Meanwhile they
pump up spending. A lot. And increased federal gov't
power with Patriot Act provisions etc. And engaging
in a costly unnecessary war doesn't seem libertarian
to me.
\_ It's pretty much common knowledge no mainstream US
political party is a 'small government' party. Hence
my question. I am perfectly open to the possibility
that the DNC is more in line with libertarian ideals
than the RNC, I just haven't found that to be the
case in practice. -- ilyas
\_ Given that this is the case I don't choose between
them on that criteria but rather my personal trust
and assessment of them in other areas.
\_ I choose based on issues. *shrug* -- ilyas
\_ LOL, you realize that the post you're responding to is
a similarly sarcastic response to the original article,
don't you? I suppose that you yourself fail to understand
the subtle forms of sarcasm that you supposedly purport.
It's rather ironic that the troll got trolled.
\_ You do not seem to know what sarcasm means.
\_ And you most definitely do not know what ironic means.
Please refer to the appendix of Eggers' "A Heartbreaking
Work of Staggering Genius" for a thorough introduction.
-dans
\_ I'm pretty sure you've been trolled. I can't believe anyone
on the motd is as dense as pp appears to be. |
| 5/24 |
|
| www.aaronsw.com/weblog/001588 A shocking recent study has discovered that only 13% of Stanford profe ssors are Republicans. The authors compare this to the 51% of 2004 voter s who selected a Republican for President and argue this is evidence of discrimination and that academic Republicans are being eradicated by academic Democrats. Scary as this is, my preliminary research has discovered some even more s hocking facts. I have found that only 1% of Stanford professors believe in telepathy (defined as communication between minds without using the traditional five senses), compared with 36% of the general population. And less than half a percent believe people on this earth are sometimes possessed by the devil, compared with 49% of those outside the ivory t ower. And while 25% of Americans believe in astrology (the position of the stars and planets can affect peoples lives), I could only find one Stanford professor who would agree. Were I to disco ver that there were no blacks on the Stanford faculty, the Politically C orrect community would be all up in arms. But they have no problem squee zing out prospective faculty members whose views they disagree with. Sure, some might say, but the color of a persons skin is irrelevant to t heir duties as a professor while beliefs are at the core of the job. And to these critics, one can only say: you knowledge elitists have ignor ed the devastating critique of factual knowledge put together by the pos tmodernists! our beliefs about it are m erely local truths, cultural whims we could change at a moments notic e The only fair way to decide what gets taught is by what is believed! They continue to pretend their job is to investigate reality and belie ve things based on evidence, when everyone can see that these are mere ly absurd justifications for them to maintain their positions power and status over society. as has widely been conceded, their advanced search committees and hiring requirements are just ways to prevent nonconformists from challenging their orthodoxies. Wealthy businessmen mus t pool their resources to fight elitism. But they are bravely willing to sacrifice all credibility to protect our nations youth. Stanford: Allergic Reactions Comments Ive been following you for several years and I think this is the first e ssay into Swiftian satire Ive seen. Congratulations, maybe you have a sense of humor after all? h tml) which included a quote from Einstein that seemed deliciously releva nt: In the case of a Christian clergyman, the tragic-comical is found in thi s: that the Christian religion demands love from the faithful, even love for the enemy. This demand, because it is indeed superhuman, he is unab le to fulfill. Thus intolerance and hatred ring through the oily words o f the clergyman. The love, which on the Christian side is the basis for the conciliatory attempt towards Judaism is the same as the love of a ch ild for a cake. That means that it contains the hope that the object of the love will be eaten up (Robert N Goldman, Einsteins God, (Northva le, NJ: Jason Aronson) 1997, p 51). I gather that if you had your way Stanford should have Professors teac hing that things fall to the ground because they have a desire to be the re instead of the fact that Earth has mass and therefore its own gravit y Should we go back to believing that the Earth is the center of the ga laxy too? Societies, like their technologies will allways advance toward s progress leaving the vestiges of what was once quaint but ultimatly us eless behind. I would hope that an outstanding university such as Stanfo rd would be too busy in its research to try to manipulate the political landscape of the future. Besides, by sheer nature of educating their st udents in pure science and truth, Stanford by default will be creating m ore Democrats for the future and there is nothing that can stop that but hate and disinformation. Who cares if these professors dont believ e in telepathy, demons or life after death. In my country at least, reli gion and beliefs are generally kept seperate from professional learning such as universities. Rather than seeing this as a lack of intellectual diversity, you can see the correllation between intellect and the supern atural. As intellect increases (Well I am assuming these professors are intelligent, otherwise this whole argument is null), perhaps faith in ab normal phenomenom decreases. Im no professor myself, but I know that as I child I blindly believed in many supernatural powers, then as my inte llect increased through growth I started to question these forces, which eventually lead to my disbelief in probably all supernatural occurances . Clearly, this implies that Aarons writing is significantly over the head s of his audience, and as such swift action is indicated to address this problem before the disparity becomes intolerable. Exactly the same tactics used in this post could be used to argue that an absence of blacks or women in academia correlates with an absence of as trologers. There is no substance to this satire, only an appeal to left-wing prejudi ce. Blacks and women tend to get the s hort end of the stick in America. S o, African Americans are working their way up from slavery to academia, women are working their way up from untold ages of inequality to academi a Are the conservitives just too busy doing their taxes? Its really a shame that all these professor s believe things so far out of sync with the mainstream population. But maybe theyre just following the historical precedent of other academics . Remember back when the masses still believed the earth was flat and th e sun revolved around us? And then the really evil professors got posses sed by demons and all started believing the opposite generations later, all the masses got brainwashed by them to think its true. I say we bani sh all professors from this world and live like happy Amish. Name: Email: (used only to send you my reply, never publis hed or spammed) URL: Remember personal info? Yes No Comments: Note: I may edit or delete your comment. |