zappasguitar
Well-known member
Post after post after post from you. NONE with evidence to back up your allegations. Just rhetoric, hyperbole, derision, name-calling and outright BS.
Maybe it's YOU who is the elitist after all?
Last edited:
Anti intellectualism...
- Thread starter Jarod
- Start date
Maybe it's YOU who is the elitist after all?
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
No. I'm correct.
Elitist globalization and environmental hysteria is providing the fascist framework for a full-on democide perpetrated by a one world government..
Which part do you dispute?
:lol:
Lets see, both California & New York had major budget crisis this year. Both are high-taxed liberal blue states. With all those college-educated liberals running the place, you would think they would be smart enough to balance a budget.
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
The richest and most powerful people on earth. Bankers, Politicians, Royalty, Board Members of huge corporations.
These people exist. And they;re not nice.
The evidence is the idiotic memes perpetuated in our media and educational systems.
Last edited:
Sammy Jankis
Was it me?
The hard sciences are for the most part indisputable i guess. But those pursuits are used in a context decided by the social sciences crowds, the true propagandists.
and postmodern art is a tragedy. It's inhuman. Devoid of a meaningful human narrative. Nihilistic.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
Why don't they study white Africans?
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
They're not unemployed; they take jobs in other fields.
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
You didn't read the article at all, apparently, He took the polling data through a frequency distribution to get his primary chart. The frequency distribution chart does show that more Democrats go on to pursue graduate degrees, but that supports my other assertion that they dominate the teaching staffs at most colleges and universities.
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
lets be honest now, BAC......respond to my point.....if it wasn't for the inner city black vote and the labor union vote there wouldn't even BE a Democrat in office anywhere.....and you won't find many college educated Americans in either of those voting blocks.....and you don't really think that the rich folks in those Democratic states are Democrats do you?......
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Please, Oh enlightened one, explain to me how the hell it does that? Not that I'm denying the liberal influence in academia. As I've state earlier I can think of nothing more worthless then a conservative education. Even most conservatives see that or why would they keep sending their kids to liberal arts schools when they have such fine institutions a Bob Jones, Liberty College and Orell Roberts? (which most everyone consider academic jokes.)?
By the way, Where did you go to college?
Last edited:
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
Having been in Academia I don't think they give a shit about a Profs political leanings. In Academia it's publish or perish, get the grant money for your research or sink into oblvion. That's unfortunate in that inspired teaching is not given the emphasis it should be. I had distinguished conservative and liberal Profs in college and they sucked cause they were lousy teachers. I had great Profs, both liberal and conservative, who were inspired teachers that didn't gain tenure because they did not produce the body of work in research and publication. It's just the way the game is played in Academia
DamnYankee
Loyal to the end
The article explains itself better than I could, oh belligerent one. Conservatives send their kids to the schools their kids choose, mostly. I got my bachelor's at a well-known northeast University, where God himself blessed me my putting a supply sider in charge of my basic economic education, and went to graduate school at a second well-known northeast university.
zoombwaz
Radical Moderate Populist
There is something else to be considered here, as well. Let's start with a fact: one hallmark that almost all successful organizations share is that the boss is allowed to get bad news, and in the best organizations, he or she demands it. And what does this have to do with the topic at hand?
Everything.
I don't care how much native intelligence one has, how much raw talent at decision making one has, or how much "common sense" one has. The fact remains that nobody can make consistently good decisions based on faulty or downright false information, and if someone does occasionally make a good decision after receiving false information, it's coincidence and blind luck. It can be difficult to make a wise decision even with al the facts at hand and strong critical thinking ability in place, but it is extremely difficult, to the point of being virtually impossible to do so without both a knowledge of verifiable facts and critical thinking, and both are products of education.
Let's examine the much-vaunted "common sense" in regard to its contribution to the ability to think critically. Some of the most popular “common sense” arguments are also the most specious and most dangerous of arguments; dangerous because they are logical fallacies, and lead almost invariably to false conclusions and bad decisions, and ignorance of these fallacies is a recipe for disaster.
One of the most popular of these is the "post hoc ergo propter hoc" fallacy, which translates roughly to "coming after, therefore caused by." If B follows A closely in time and space, A caused B, right? Makes a lot of common sense doesn't it? Except that it's not so. It is a logically invalid argument. Unless you can show an empirically verifiable causal connection between A and B, you can't use that argument. In fact, many, if not most of the so-called common sense positions are crap, logically speaking. The bandwagon fallacy is committed by arguments that appeal to the growing popularity of an idea as a reason for accepting it as true. The genetic fallacy is committed when an idea is either accepted or rejected because of its source, rather than its merit. tTe equivocation fallacy is committed when a term is used in two or more different senses within a single argument. This fallacy, the circular reasoning fallacy, and the weak analogy fallacy are the favorites of the creationists and the religious right in general. tTe first can be seen in their use of two different senses of the word “theory” in arguing against the theory of evolution, and two different senses of the word “faith” in arguing that even agnostics have faith, the second in the argument that the Bible is the inerrant word of God because it says it is, while the third is the basis of the whole ID argument that since a watch has a designer, so must the universe. The slippery slope fallacy rest on the false premise that one thing MUST lead to another, and that if we take step A, we will be unable to stop steps B, C, D, etc. from occurring. The idea that national health care will inevitably lead to full-blown socialism or communism is the perfect example of this. The tu quoque fallacy is the “they did it first, so it’s okay that we do it” argument. Then there are the irrelevant appeals: to authority, tradition, popularity, consequences, etc. The preceding aren’t all the logical fallacies, but are a strong sampling of the invalid arguments that are considered “common sense” by many.
The point of that list was to show that the ability to reason logically, and by extension, the ability to think critically is not inherent, but must be taught, and is therefore a product of education, along with a body of objectively verifiable facts. This is not to say that an education precludes the possibility of getting one’s facts wrong, or constructing a lousy argument, or making a horrendously wrong decision (the Shrub comes to mind). However, being uneducated means one not only lacks the objective body of verifiable facts to draw on, but also lacks the ability for critical thinking required to sort through the bullshit.
The odds that an educated person, can be depended upon to make a good dcecision are pretty good. I include the self-educated in that group, but let's face it, there aren't a whole lot of people out there who possess a burning desire to know; who have both the high intelligence and self-discipline to be effectively self-educated. Those folks are few and far between and we call them geniuses. On the other hand, we have those people of average or even above average ability, who do not have the geniuses' gift for self-education, but who have not been through the imposed discipline of a formal education process. and yet fancy themselves as knowledgeable as those who have. Those folks are a dime a dozen, and we call them fools. The odds that they can be depended upon to make smart choices are slim and none, because know not and know not that they know not. Then we have the likes of Harry Truman, with no formal education past high school, but who obviously a) paid attention in high school, b) had the wisdom to recognize those things he lacked and c) surrounded himself with people who had that which he lacked and listened to their advice (Gen. George Marshall comes to mind).
Now, let's consider evil people. Does anybody doubt that these snakes exist? So how do they game the system to get what they want in money and power, without being denounced as the scum bags they are? Well, first they assemble a confederacy of dunces, whom they can convince
to vote against their own best interests, which isn't all that difficult initially, because...well, because they're dunces! What the hell else can i say? However, maintaining your troupe of twits in that state of delusional bliss peculiar to the willfully ignorant does require some insulation from those who would tempt the cretins to abandon their delusions of adequacy and walk into the light of reality, so you have to demonize those who have seen through your flimsy charade as "elitists" or "leftists" or "terrorist sympathisers" or "the blame America first crowd." Then you peddle the absurd notion to your peckerwood posse that those who have more education than they, who have a stronger grasp on a larger body of verifiable facts and have better developed critical thinking skills than they do, are somehow more susceptible to being fooled than they are. Yeah, that's it! That's the ticket! "Ignorance is strength."
It's been said that there's a sucker at every poker game, and if you're playing and haven't spotted the sucker in the first 15 minutes, you're it Well, if you buy that utter claptrap that the ignorant are less likely to be fooled than the educated, you're a bigger sucker than any over-matched schmuck sitting at a poker table, and this is no fucking game we'e involved in.
Topspin
Verified User
Topspin
Verified User
Topspin
Verified User
PostmodernProphet
fully immersed in faith..
Someone Help the preacher he is getting OWNED!!!
lol....I'm being "owned" by someone who's run away from the debate?.....hardly....perhaps you'd like to help him out by responding to my last post?......
TuTu Monroe
A Realist
I guess it slipped his mind the Democratic state of California is broke, broke, broke.
Mott the Hoople
Sweet Jane
So you are an advocate of reverse socialism?The article explains itself better than I could, oh belligerent one. Conservatives send their kids to the schools their kids choose, mostly. I got my bachelor's at a well-known northeast University, where God himself blessed me my putting a supply sider in charge of my basic economic education, and went to graduate school at a second well-known northeast university.