Liberal Colleges and Universities - Why and How Did They Get That Way?

[George Costanza]

Broadly speaking, conservatism by definition is traditional; liberalism, tolerant and open to new ideas. Conservatives home-school or send their children to private schools for a reason. (The wealthy do too but that is a class issue.) The reason conservatives dislike college and universities is they are broad minded and broad minded conflicts with narrow traditional ideas. Why no conservative simply says that is because ideally Americans are supposed to be open minded etc. Imagine a strict conservative coming home from college, and now understanding evolution, and believing it is science. The parents may go cuckoo. Or even worse suppose the child comes home agnostic. Ideas have power, conservatives recognize this well, their think tanks spew nonsense constantly, and calling colleges and media "liberal" is one constant charge. Of course they have had to make liberal a bad word too.


"Objectivity cannot be equated with mental blankness; rather, objectivity resides in recognizing your preferences and then subjecting them to especially harsh scrutiny." Stephen Jay Gould

By definition, perhaps. But liberalism in practice is intolerant.

No, it's not. It's just contrary to what you believe.

 

[Dr.Traveler]

By definition, perhaps. But liberalism in practice is intolerant.

Not my experience at all. Conservatism, with a tendancy to favor what has gone before, has always been more intolerant to anything that amounts to change in my experience.

I'll bet Joe Lieberman might have something to say about liberal tolerance.

I bet a great many of the folks that have been labelled RINOs and targetted by Rush, Sean, Anne, Glenn, etc. would have a lot ot say about the tolerance of Conservatives. How is that any different?

Neat thing about Freedom of Speech is that it isn't freedom from Consequence. I can defend Joe's right to say what he wants about his own party without the need to vote for him. Both Joe and Zell excersied their rights and complained about the consequences.

I can tolerate your views, I can support your rights, and I can act to ensure your freedom without having to agree with you, vote for you, or shield you from consequences.

This goes along with how things are in Academia. I can violently disagree with my colleagues, their methodology, and their conclusions. At the end of the day I'll support their ability to keep researching though.

That at the end of the day is tolerance. It isn't blind agreement. It isn't even liking your views. Its supporting the fact you can be different.

 

[daveman]

Broadly speaking, conservatism by definition is traditional; liberalism, tolerant and open to new ideas. Conservatives home-school or send their children to private schools for a reason. (The wealthy do too but that is a class issue.) The reason conservatives dislike college and universities is they are broad minded and broad minded conflicts with narrow traditional ideas. Why no conservative simply says that is because ideally Americans are supposed to be open minded etc. Imagine a strict conservative coming home from college, and now understanding evolution, and believing it is science. The parents may go cuckoo. Or even worse suppose the child comes home agnostic. Ideas have power, conservatives recognize this well, their think tanks spew nonsense constantly, and calling colleges and media "liberal" is one constant charge. Of course they have had to make liberal a bad word too.


"Objectivity cannot be equated with mental blankness; rather, objectivity resides in recognizing your preferences and then subjecting them to especially harsh scrutiny." Stephen Jay Gould

By definition, perhaps. But liberalism in practice is intolerant.

No, it's not. It's just contrary to what you believe.

No, it's intolerant. That's contrary to what you believe.

 

[daveman]

Not my experience at all. Conservatism, with a tendancy to favor what has gone before, has always been more intolerant to anything that amounts to change in my experience.

I'll bet Joe Lieberman might have something to say about liberal tolerance.

I bet a great many of the folks that have been labelled RINOs and targetted by Rush, Sean, Anne, Glenn, etc. would have a lot ot say about the tolerance of Conservatives. How is that any different?

Neat thing about Freedom of Speech is that it isn't freedom from Consequence. I can defend Joe's right to say what he wants about his own party without the need to vote for him. Both Joe and Zell excersied their rights and complained about the consequences.

I can tolerate your views, I can support your rights, and I can act to ensure your freedom without having to agree with you, vote for you, or shield you from consequences.

This goes along with how things are in Academia. I can violently disagree with my colleagues, their methodology, and their conclusions. At the end of the day I'll support their ability to keep researching though.

That at the end of the day is tolerance. It isn't blind agreement. It isn't even liking your views. Its supporting the fact you can be different.

I agree completely.

 

[antagon]

i think presuming all liberals and all conservatives are one way or another is the issue in this thread. the only conservatives taking issue with education are the very furthest right and uneducated ones in my opinion. while conservatism has become more extreme and stupid over the last 25 years, this does not include those who are in education or who are educated or who appreciate the value of education, but who also value conservatism. similarly, there are many, many liberals who are scarely educated and hold prejudices against people who are educated and the systems which educated them.

on this topic, there's more in common between idiots of either persuasion than there is along strictly partisan lines.

 

[Titanic Sailor]

Intel CEO: "Jobs will not be created here" and says Obama's to blame.
"Unless government policies are altered, he predicted, "the next big thing will not be invented here. Jobs will not be created here."


"Intel CEO Paul Otellini, who warned this week that the U.S. faces a huge tech decline.

"(Credit: Intel) The U.S. legal environment has become so hostile to business, Otellini said, that there is likely to be "an inevitable erosion and shift of wealth, much like we're seeing today in Europe--this is the bitter truth."

"Not long ago, Otellini said, "our research centers were without peer. No country was more attractive for start-up capital... We seemed a generation ahead of the rest of the world in information technology. That simply is no longer the case."

Gee, who knew...........