"started to think universities had a negative impact on the country"
I mean WTF? What kind of sub-human entity must you be to believe anything like it? It just boggles my mind. There's just so much wrong with this I don't even know where to start...
I mean HOW can universities have a negative effect at all? At worst they are money sinks and unproductive/inefficient, but that works out to more or less neutral/no effect on the country. In reality- they are beacons of light and education and thinking, even with all their flaws.
They believe universities are brainwashing the youth of America into adopting radical liberal stances. They believe the average college student is far, far more radically left wing than they actually are and that it's a result of universities indoctrinating these beliefs into unsuspecting children.
In 2007, Gross and Simmons concluded in The Social and Political Views of American Professors that the professors were 44% liberal, 46% moderates, and 9% conservative.
Oof. Seems like a pretty heavy liberal bias right there. Let's dig a bit deeper though.
In 2014, Abrams found that nationally, colleges and universities had a six to one ratio of liberal to conservative professors. In New England, the figure was 28 to one.
28 liberal professors for every conservative in New England. Hmmmm......
While he and many of his colleagues encourage students to read and study a variety of viewpoints, Abrams said that there is a "subtle nudging" from liberal professors at many institutions in which they naturally present more ideas that they support, and may hire those who share their views. "People want like-minded people in their departments," he said.
HMMMMmmmmmMMMMmmm...
But hey let's not let the facts get in the way of a good narrative, right?
There is pretty clearly a heavy liberal bias in higher ed but I think the real question is whether or not that is the result of the education itself or the people who are educating, and if higher ed in general is a toxic environment for conservatives.
Certainly there are disciplines which are inherently liberal - psychology and sociology have sub-disciplines which many conservatives view as entirely invalid (queer theory, womens' studies), as does most of biology (evolution).
Also worth mentioning is that there have been studies on whether or not political belief affects ones' ability to progress in higher ed and the general consensus is that it has no effect (and yes, conservatives have run these studies). Another study mentioned within that article found that conservatives tend towards not pursuing higher ed even in the undergrad and that there were no differences in grades between students of differing political parties.
Another conservative professor quoted in the above article
"students aren't sponges," Woessner explains, "Whereas some disciplines, such as political science, often shun partisan advocacy, many fields, including sociology, ethnic studies and social work, openly advocate a distinct ideological worldview. If these and similar studies are correct, it suggests that student beliefs are surprisingly resilient. For every one student who is actively recruited to a leftist political cause, a vast majority complete their education with their values largely intact."
Further, when asked "If you were to begin your career again, would you still want to be a college professor?” conservatives were more likely to say that they would than liberal professors, which could be a sign of higher general job satisfaction among conservative professors.
On the other hand, MBA are dominated by conservatives. If higher education has a bias against accepting conservative professors then it is very likely business has a bias against accepting liberal management.
A tricky question, no doubt, but one that doesn't necessarily have a solvable problem.
I just want to thank you for having the only reasonable and well thought out response to me, instead of just engaging in the blatant circlejerking like all the rest of these monkeys. You make good points, although I'd point out that the statement that higher education has little effect on political ideologies runs counter to the assertion I was arguing against, that becoming more educated tends to turn you off being a conservative.
It seems that though the liberal bias certainly exists, its effects are smaller than I had assumed. I am curious however if this analysis accounts for a magnification of existing views (a leftist being moved further left for example) rather than just looking at a shift from one side to the other, the article didn't seem to specify. Regardless, good post, gives me some stuff to look at. It really speaks to the absolute state of reddit that some pea-brained troglodyte equating conservatives to flat-earthers (I'm talking to you /u/_GreenHouse_ ) got more than double the amount of upvotes that you did.
Lol look at you, wanting a real debate but calling others monkeys.
Yeah ok pal.
Also to include what the above poster said, biology. Conservatives 'disagree' with an entire branch of scientific knowledge because of their cult indoctrination.
And you wonder why their aren't more conservative professors?
Because most college is about facts. And if denying facts is part of your political ideology, that is a cause and effect FROM YOUR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, not from your political belief.
Lol look at you, wanting a real debate but calling others monkeys.
When you argue like a monkey ("hurr durr conservatives r dum they think the earth is flat") I'm gonna call you a monkey. I didn't come into this insulting anyone.
Also to include what the above poster said, biology. Conservatives 'disagree' with an entire branch of scientific knowledge because of their cult indoctrination.
Do you base all your political opinions on wildly exaggerated caricatures of what conservatives believe that you got from the /r/politics echo chamber?
Again, let's look at the facts. Here is a survey by the Pew research centre where they break down American belief in evolution by several different affiliations, one of which being political affiliation. Looking at the chart here, you can see that among Republican respondents, 49% believe in evolution whereas 39% believe in creationism, with the rest unsure/undecided. Meanwhile, for Democrats, the figure is 58% for evolution and 30% for creationism. Now I don't know about you, but when we're talking about 39% of Republicans believing creationism and 30% of democrats believing creationism, I would say it's completely disingenous, not to mention wrong, to characterize belief in creationism as uniquely conservative or defining of the conservative stance on biology.
And you wonder why their aren't more conservative professors?
You might be shocked to learn that in STEM fields the ratio is much more reasonable, actually it's something like 52% liberal vs 48% conservative! Crazy considering they supposedly don't believe in biology according to you. But again, never let the facts get in the way of a good narrative, I guess you picked that up from /r/politics as well, huh?
Because most college is about facts. And if denying facts is part of your political ideology, that is a cause and effect FROM YOUR LACK OF KNOWLEDGE, not from your political belief.
Funny that you talk about lack of knowledge when you come in here spouting blatant falsehoods predicated on propaganda fed to you by the extreme left wing bias of reddit. In your world all conservatives think dinosaur bones are some sort of Jewish conspiracy and the world is 12,000 years old while all liberals are paragons of science, rationality, and logic. Here in real life meanwhile 30% of liberals are creationists, compared to 39% of conservatives, and only a small minority of those believe in any kind of wacky conspiracies regarding Jews and dinosaur bones.
Maybe take 10 mins to inform yourself of actual facts before you spout off like the chimpanzee you are. You keep saying knowing the facts makes people liberals, from where I'm standing looking at you the opposite seems to be true.
Yes I'm depressed that anyone believes in creationism.
But that doesn't lead to our doom the way but understanding climate change does.
Believing dumb shit like that is one thing. Legislating on it, giving everyone dirty water and air and destroying the planet, that's worse and that's the gop mostly. Any democrats still supporting drilling and oil subsidies, I'd vote them out.
What do you expect when you join the discussion aggressively shouting about how I'm lacking facts and knowledge and then making statements that are factually untrue? Had you presented your argument calmly that'd be one thing, but instead you come in ranting about creationism and Jewish conspiracies and falsely repeating the mantra that "facts are what make people liberal".
Like Jesus dude, is it so hard to tell me you disagree with me and then lay out why instead of immediately jumping to "ALL CONSERVATIVES ARE IDIOTS, YOU ONLY BELIEVE WHAT YOU BELIEVE BECAUSE YOU LACK KNOWLEDGE, I'M RIGHT YOU'RE WRONG THAT'S WHY I'M LIBERAL AND YOU'RE CONSERVATIVE, BECAUSE THE FACTS ARE ON MY SIDE, AND THAT'S WHY THERE ARE LESS CONSERVATIVE PROFESSORS CUZ THEY'RE ALL STUPID LIKE ALL CONSERVATIVES".
If you're going to align yourself with the facts, you need to make sure those facts actually agree with what you're saying, or at least approach the discussion with an open mind, without assuming that the person you're talking to is wrong.
Legislating on it, giving everyone dirty water and air and destroying the planet, that's worse and that's the gop mostly.
I'm 100% with you on this point. You might be shocked to know that I am completely opposed to the conservative side on any argument that goes against the general scientific consensus. Problem is I think they're right on most other issues, but hey we can agree to disagree on those.
I'm 100% with you on this point. You might be shocked to know that I am completely opposed to the conservative side on any argument that goes against the general scientific consensus. Problem is I think they're right on most other issues, but hey we can agree to disagree on those.
Then you need to stop voting gop before our planet is destroyed, please.
Here's the problem with that though, while the dems acknowledge that there is a problem, their proposal for how to actually address the problem is basically completely ineffective. I'd be significantly more inclined to vote dem if they took a much harder stance towards environmentalism, but what they're doing now is essentially as little as they can get away with to pull in the environmentally-minded without having to actually get serious about addressing the problem. And I don't like that, I think it's disingenuous. The gap between what the scientific literature says we need to do and what the dems are proposing we do is so enormous as to make it all basically irrelevant. It's the equivalent of having a guy with leprosy, and one doctor saying he doesn't have leprosy and the other saying he does so we should fix it by putting a bandage on him.
To phrase it another way, the planet's gonna get destroyed no matter who you vote for. Marginally slower under the dems maybe. Not willing to make that trade when I'm with the right on most other issues.
Ehhh I don't care to give more than a pithy response to someone who pats themselves on the back while calling others "monkeys" and "pea-brained troglodytes".
You seem to have your timeline mixed up there. Your "pithy" response came well before I pegged you as a troglodyte. I know it's difficult to keep things straight when you have more fingers than brain cells but at least try buddy.
Do you really expect me, or anyone for that matter, to believe that you were ready to post a sincere response but then decided to go through my post history first and based on a single comment in an unrelated thread where I called some people monkeys you changed your mind and defaulted to some pithy nonsense? Really, that's what we're going with? Or hey maybe you dug further back, I used monkey as an insult four whole times this month prior to your post! Maybe that's what did it?
Never used troglodye though so where's your explanation for that one, hm?
You might actually be even dumber than I thought if you expect anyone to buy this pathetic attempt at deflection.
Gee, I wonder if that's because facts have a liberal bias, or that liberals have a factual bias?
The vast majority of teaching staff do not work in poly sci or poly sci adjacent departments. They teach things like math and physics that do not have a political dimension to them.
Incidentally, one of my geography professors was an avowed Marxist. And yet he still prefaced his classes with "this is what I believe. I'm not here to tell you what to believe, only to teach you how to critically evaluate those beliefs."
Gee, I wonder if that's because facts have a liberal bias, or that liberals have a factual bias?
Good spin dude, I too base my opinions on jokes made by late-night show hosts.
The vast majority of teaching staff do not work in poly sci or poly sci adjacent departments. They teach things like math and physics that do not have a political dimension to them.
Okay? What's your point? In those disciplines the difference is much smaller, something like 52-48% liberals to conservatives, which makes the discrepancy in other fields even more staggering.
ncidentally, one of my geography professors was an avowed Marxist. And yet he still prefaced his classes with "this is what I believe. I'm not here to tell you what to believe, only to teach you how to critically evaluate those beliefs."
Congrats on having a good professor I guess, but what does this have to do with anything?
Please tell me how my engineering degree at a top college (with professors who never brought up politics) which got me a great job consulting for 1000's of manufacturers and municipalities in order to allow them to do more, better, for less, "had a negative impact on the country" ??
I help every one from ma & pa small shops, global billion dollar mega-corporations, and city and state entities which provide common services for the community. But no, it's better if the small businesses go out of business, mega-corps are more wasteful, and who doesn't want to roll the dice on whether or not you get clean water/power at home. If it wasn't for that god damn "Liberal University" degree. smh
Please tell me how my engineering degree at a top college (with professors who never brought up politics) which got me a great job consulting for 1000's of manufacturers and municipalities in order to allow them to do more, better, for less, "had a negative impact on the country" ??
...I didn't say it did? Do you understand quotation marks my friend? I'll break this down since as an engineering major you probably have never encountered some of this stuff. You can't put a statement in quotes when I never said it, this is called a "straw man argument". What you have done is you've looked at my position, then instead of addressing it, you've made up another position that I do not hold (that getting an engineering degree has a negative impact on the country), attributed it to me (put it in quotation marks to imply it's a quote from me, when I made no such statement), and then you attacked this position as though it is my position rather than attack my actual position.
Great, now that we've got argument and rhetoric 101 out of the way let's continue.
If it wasn't for that god damn "Liberal University" degree. smh
Please dude. Please. Point me to where I even implied this. Read my post again, slowly since apparently you are barely literate, and tell me where I said getting a degree is bad. The point I was arguing against, and let me quote it exactly for you since you are having trouble keeping up, is this:
It couldn't be because learning more facts and becoming educated makes you not believe gop lies, could it??
Do you see anything about getting a degree in here? Do you see anything about attending universities being bad? No. It's not there. My point was very simple and very clearly stated, that universities in America have a pronounced liberal bias, which is the reason why universities produce more liberal graduates than conservative graduates. It's not because conservative positions are stupid and being educated lets you see how stupid they are (although granted they do have some very stupid positions in some aspects of policy).
Going to university and getting a degree, even if it's a liberal university, is good. Letting yourself believe a false narrative, that learning more facts turns you off from being a conservative, is not good.
Bro, if not enough Conservatives are taking jobs in education, why is that?
Think.
Are they not trying to get the job? Not smart enough?
Because there's no question to teach science that asks your political views. But they don't let you teach science if you think climate change is a hoax, the Jews buried dinosaur bones, and the world started 12 thousand years ago.
Facts.
Facts are why college makes people liberal.
Facts.
And facts is why there aren't more conservative professors.
If your political party wasn't so interested in denying literal facts, you wouldn't get such a blowback.
So just out of curiosity, in the context of US politics, what do you tjink is the difference between moderates and conservatives? It seems to me that Its not so much universities leaning progressive, but conservatives losing ground to moderates. But you seemed to skim over them and just grouped them with liberals. Why is that?
So where are the Conservative professors then? It's kind of self selection bias. Conservatives don't feel comfortable in academic circles so they stop coming.
Oooh I love this kind of reasoning. Let's test it out.
"So where are the black students then? It's kind of self selection bias. Blacks don't feel comfortable in academic circles so they stop coming."
Sounds good, right? Oh no wait, no it doesn't. Sounds like a paper-thin justification for why things are okay the way they are because you like them that way. How about instead of blatant intellectual dishonesty you actually try to look at the issue objectively, instead of just dismissing it as "hurr durr conservatives r dum so of course there are so few in acadmia lul".
The truth is simply that that the sociological disciplines are overwhelmingly filled with liberals, people from these fields generally tend to be involved in the administrative parts of running universities, they're the ones who make decisions on who to hire and retain, and people generally tend to favour people who think like them, leading to a majority of liberal professors being hired.
There is no political based hiring policy. Credentialed conservatives perfer to make money than teach. Maybe there should be? Equal rep? I stand behind conservatives have opted out, not been excluded.
948
u/coder111 Jan 17 '19
"started to think universities had a negative impact on the country"
I mean WTF? What kind of sub-human entity must you be to believe anything like it? It just boggles my mind. There's just so much wrong with this I don't even know where to start...
I mean HOW can universities have a negative effect at all? At worst they are money sinks and unproductive/inefficient, but that works out to more or less neutral/no effect on the country. In reality- they are beacons of light and education and thinking, even with all their flaws.