Sweet Jesus

[babe]

Or to simply be duped .. at an escalating rate.

This goes to the issue of what it means to be "educated". The important meaning of the Greek roots describes the condition of having been empowered to bring out the finer capacities of the human mind, not the condition of being authoritatively "told" what is true or right.

religionists and social engineers who sneer at "God" are similar in their predilection for just "telling", with the force of government as their "authority" people what to think. The same human nature that made "Freedom of Religion" a good idea, with government having no power to establish a religion, is what makes "social engineering" in the power of our government the curse of our times.

 

[franklin]

Okay, I was doing my pre-sleep reading when the notification of a response popped up. So I'll keep it short.

Perhaps higher education is still in a good shape, I have heard the arguments for both sides, and I'm not taking a position on the quality of higher education. I am talking about the culture of education. There is strong anti-education sentiment within the conservative movement (mostly). There is a large and vocal group that systematically attacks scholarly types and pursuits. Even on these very forums, I have several arguments a day where I have to convince a bunch of people that modern science is NOT a plot to steal their money.

This certainly was not the case a few decades ago, when intellect and education was held in high regard across much of mainstream culture. Are you telling me things have always been this way? Are you saying this is just a case of selective bias? I find that very hard to swallow.

I fully agree on how obnoxious the higher education attacks are. The way I see this is a much more diverse education program has provided us with enough radical wackos to raise suspicion. Politics has taken that suspicion & blown it out of proportion just as they do with everything else. At the end of the day, though, we're still sending our children to college at ever higher %'s, so I doubt people by and large care all that much what the vocal minority yells at them through a couple AM radio stations. When they're screaming indoctrination I'm telling them the data clearly shows education pays. Let 'em pick megaphone guy or dollar signs & see who is more influential. Michael Savage & Mark Levin aren't going to win that one.

FWIW, I went to UVU, in the heart of conservatism, & didn't get one drop of conservative political indoctrination. If anything, many professors leaned liberal (at least in their subject) & bit their tongue.

 

[default]

I respectfully disagree, but am not passionate about debating it .. so, moving on.

+1

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

Loud and influential elements in the Republican Party are indeed anti-science, and have other (shall we say 'quaint) views of eduction. (I'm looking at you Evangelicals.) Here, for example, are excerpts from the Texas Republican Party Platform. Judge for yourselves whether you think these ideas are the types that encourage real learning and real science.


Classroom Discipline –We recommend that local school boards and classroom teachers be given more authority to deal with disciplinary problems. Corporal punishment is effective and legal in Texas.

Controversial Theories – We support objective teaching and equal treatment of all sides of scientific theories. We believe theories such as life origins and environmental change should be taught as challengeable scientific theories subject to change as new data is produced. Teachers and students should be able to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of these theories openly and without fear of retribution or discrimination of any kind.

American Identity Patriotism and Loyalty – We believe the current teaching of a multicultural curriculum is divisive. We favor strengthening our common American identity and loyalty instead of political correctness that nurtures alienation among racial and ethnic groups. Students should pledge allegiance to the American and Texas flags daily to instill patriotism.

Sex Education – We recognize parental responsibility and authority regarding sex education. We believe that parents must be given an opportunity to review the material prior to giving their consent. We oppose any sex education other than abstinence until marriage.

Religious Freedom in Public Schools – We urge school administrators and officials to inform Texas school students specifically of their First Amendment rights to pray and engage in religious speech, individually or in groups, on school property without government interference. We urge the Legislature to end censorship of discussion of religion in our founding documents and encourage discussing those documents. (Editorial Comment: This assumes, of course, that the religious speech endorses Evangelical Christian views. This means that Mormon, Muslims, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Wicans, etc. keep their views to themselves.)

Traditional Principles in Education – We support school subjects with emphasis on the Judeo-Christian principles upon which America was founded and which form the basis of America’s legal, political and economic systems. We support curricula that are heavily weighted on original founding documents, including the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, and Founders’ writings.

And here's the real kicker.

Knowledge-Based Education – We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs that are simply a relabeling of Outcome-Based Education (OBE) (mastery learning) which focus on behavior modification and have the purpose of challenging the student’s fixed beliefs and undermining parental authority.

 

[Dr. Jones]

I didn't really understand the last paragraph, to be honest. I admit it sounds bad, though.

 

[Revolution 9]

I was listening to the radio on my way home from work this evening and I heard an interview with a Romney/Ryan supporter. She claimed that she supported Romney and Ryan in part because she didn't like that Obama took the work out of welfare. When the reporter told her that this was in fact not the case she replied. "Well I don't know exactly what is true and what isn't, but I trust Romney and Ryan more than I do Obama."
Are you freaking kidding me?! You've just had pointed out that you've been lied to, about an issue big enough that it was the first thing that came to mind when you were asked about why you are supporting who you are, and yet you trust Romney more. Why?!

I posit that this is what is wrong with American politics today. ****ing stupid people.

It began with the war on Obama from day 1. He's not American, he's a muslim, he's a communist, he wants to take your freedoms!
This machine has been pumping out hate 24/7 on Fox, blogs, and national radio. Brainwashing it easy...

 

[Siro]

I didn't really understand the last paragraph, to be honest. I admit it sounds bad, though.

I told you it wasn't absurd. And it has nothing to do with the GOP specifically. Like Franklin said, there's probably no crisis in education, yet. But the fact that elements in the conservative movement have engaged in a campaign of anti-education rhetoric for at least a decade is hard to dispute. They are pushing this idea that people should be weary of educators and their influence on children. And that parents should be the ones to decide which types of knowledge are valid. It is a mentality that the far right have had for a long long time. That is why the extremely conservative tend to home school their children; mainly to avoid exposing them to uncontrolled "secular" science and ideals. Elements in the conservative media have been, with some measure of success, attempting to push this mentality on more moderate conservatives. And it reflects in plenty of posts that I see here.

 

[Dr. Jones]

Gotcha, good stuff. I promote to my children to listen to all information, to check the credentials of those providing an opinion, do your own research, be willing to be proven wrong once you form an opinion, and don't let anyone tell you what to think that doesn't also respect your ability to draw your own conclusions.

 

[jimmy eat jazz]

I agree that the 'crisis' in education is probably overblown a bit. This is another one of those 'evergreen' topics that people (on left and right)are always harping on. We've been hearing about this education crisis for, literally, decades now.

That said, I do believe, however, that there is a definite strain of anti-intellectualism and anti-science in today's society and political culture AND it comes almost exclusively from the right, more specifically from the religious right. And these are the same bozos who want to impose MORE religion (thus more anti-intellectualism and more anti-science) on today's education curriculum and culture.

At it's heart, the religious right is not only anti-intellectual and anti-science, it is anti-freedom, despite all of its lip service to the Constitution. Their entire world view is based on the primacy of received knowledge over the value of learned knowledge, as they see the latter is a direct threat to the former. God help us if these people ever seize the reigns of political power. If they do, kiss our civil liberties/rights goodbye, as they slowly but surely eliminate them in their quest to create their dream society based on 'Judeo-Christian' values. In my opinion, the religious right poses the single greatest threat to American freedom and prosperity today--far greater than any threat imposed by any external source (including the much-feared and mythological Sharia law imposing Muslims).

 

[Siro]

I agree that the 'crisis' in education is probably overblown a bit. This is another one of those 'evergreen' topics that people (on left and right)are always harping on. We've been hearing about this education crisis for, literally, decades now.

That said, I do believe, however, that there is a definite strain of anti-intellectualism and anti-science in today's society and political culture AND it comes almost exclusively from the right, more specifically from the religious right. And these are the same bozos who want to impose MORE religion (thus more anti-intellectualism and more anti-science) on today's education curriculum and culture.

At it's heart, the religious right is not only anti-intellectual and anti-science, it is anti-freedom, despite all of its lip service to the Constitution. Their entire world view is based on the primacy of received knowledge over the value of learned knowledge, as they see the latter is a direct threat to the former. God help us if these people ever seize the reigns of political power. If they do, kiss our civil liberties/rights goodbye, as they slowly but surely eliminate them in their quest to create their dream society based on 'Judeo-Christian' values. In my opinion, the religious right poses the single greatest threat to American freedom and prosperity today--far greater than any threat imposed by any external source (including the much-feared and mythological Sharia law imposing Muslims).

It is ironic. The fathers of the Enlightenment were mostly Christian. Many of them, including Newton, their greatest thinker, saw the pursuit of naturalistic explanations as the purest form of worship. Trying to understand the mind of God. I'm not sure what went wrong. I agree with you. The far right has become a thorn in the throat of Western ideals.

 

[Stoked]

It is ironic. The fathers of the Enlightenment were mostly Christian. Many of them, including Newton, their greatest thinker, saw the pursuit of naturalistic explanations as the purest form of worship. Trying to understand the mind of God. I'm not sure what went wrong. I agree with you. The far right has become a thorn in the throat of Western ideals.

I think that would be a debatable point on many fronts. Are we talking far right as in the fring of the right that wants women in the kitchens barefoot? Or just the general right such as evangelicals? Seeing as how "the far right" is part of the west shouldn't they have a say in "western ideals"?

It seems that your point could be debated on the conotation that you are linking "western ideals" to what the left wants.

Note: I am not arguing that but I can see it being done and possibly to some affect depending on your exact meanings of "western ideals" and "far right".

 

[Siro]

I think that would be a debatable point on many fronts. Are we talking far right as in the fring of the right that wants women in the kitchens barefoot? Or just the general right such as evangelicals? Seeing as how "the far right" is part of the west shouldn't they have a say in "western ideals"?

It seems that your point could be debated on the conotation that you are linking "western ideals" to what the left wants.

Note: I am not arguing that but I can see it being done and possibly to some affect depending on your exact meanings of "western ideals" and "far right".

Western ideals of secularism, rationalism, mass education, intellect being a respected social norm, civil rights, reasonable individualism, scholasticism, and other values that enabled the creation of the greatest culture in human history. And I do mean fundamentalist evangelicals. Specially ones in the South. The left is guilty of plenty of anti-Western ideals as well. Collectivism, anti-enterprise, even anti-humanism on some occasions. But the far right is attacking education. The most important cornerstone of Western culture. Moderates should not tolerate that.

 

[Stoked]

Western ideals of secularism, rationalism, mass education, intellect being a respected social norm, civil rights, reasonable individualism, scholasticism, and other values that enabled the creation of the greatest culture in human history. And I do mean fundamentalist evangelicals. Specially ones in the South. The left is guilty of plenty of anti-Western ideals as well. Collectivism, anti-enterprise, even anti-humanism on some occasions. But the far right is attacking education. The most important cornerstone of Western culture. Moderates should not tolerate that.

I'd be interested in reading you debate that with some one willing to take up the mantle and actually debate it and not PMS like Pearl Watson and The Thriller.

I do think your definition of "far right" is debatable. It would interestign and would increase my knowledge in that area.

 

[PearlWatson]

I've seen Fox attack "educated elites" like Bill Ayers.

 

[Scat]

I'm sure she and millions like her will continue to vote D for the rest of their lives- regardless of what anyone tells them.

See how that works?

 

[babe]

Western ideals of secularism, rationalism, mass education, intellect being a respected social norm, civil rights, reasonable individualism, scholasticism, and other values that enabled the creation of the greatest culture in human history. And I do mean fundamentalist evangelicals. Specially ones in the South. The left is guilty of plenty of anti-Western ideals as well. Collectivism, anti-enterprise, even anti-humanism on some occasions. But the far right is attacking education. The most important cornerstone of Western culture. Moderates should not tolerate that.

So your basic problem here is how you choose to pick a point in time to define "Western". Pretty sure you do not include the Arabic world in "Western", even though Islam derives from Judeo-Christian influences in many ways. Probably you'd see events involving Abraham, Sarai, and Hagar in slightly different light than, say, the "Western" thinkers prior to the Renaisance.

The idea of a personal conscience is "seeable" in the New Testament accounts of the teachings of Jesus, but it was sunk out of existence after "Christianity" became a state religion. How would you view "Sharia Law" if not as a State Religion that sinks individual conscience out of existence?

It took Martin Luther and a whole bunch of freedom-loving peasants to start the revolution in the "West" that, for a while, restored individual conscience and human liberty to the public square.

While I appreciate the capacity of religious zealots to once again sink most of what is lovable in the "Western Tradition" off the screen of realistic tolerance by Statists, I assert that today's "progressives" are the potent Statists today, who really do intend to impose control on the human "herd". Well, maybe there's a reason why progressives are soft on Islamists. . . . they are both at war with all kinds of "Christian" ideals some folks think are better.

"the enemy of my enemy is my brother".

The ideals of "education" back in the age of Greek dominance, though co-existing with Sparta's statist militarist imperatives, really do not conform to any ideological or theological or Statist imperatives. People who can just discuss the merits of ideas in a comparative framework are rare. We all have our point of view, our "happy place" where some ideas are loved and cherished. . . . and we should really have the right to keep these preferences.

The long line of rants here against "conservatives" does more to sustain my view of "progressive" intolerance and statism than to justify hope that human rights will survive their political success.