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

[Dante]

Did someone really say conservatives hate history?

I doubt there are people that smaht here.

 

[antagon]

Did someone really say conservatives hate history?

uber-cons hate accurate history. i said something to that effect.

 

[daveman]

(the following is especially funny coming from Yale history)

About Yale | History

Yale’s roots can be traced back to the 1640s, when colonial clergymen led an effort to establish a college in New Haven to preserve the tradition of European liberal education in the New World.

(is that a hoot or what?)

Yes, especially when you consider that modern liberalism and traditional European liberalism share only a name.

Classical liberalism is about liberty of the individual. Modern liberalism is about the collective and government control over individual lives. It has nothing to do with actual liberty.

 

[mudwhistle]

It's simple really. Credible colleges all teach science. Many conservatives belief systems don't allow for real scientific facts and accepted theories. That excludes most of the religious fundamentalists by their own choice. Also to expand on the religious theme... History and archeology defies much of the religious dogma and flies in the face of those that choose the bible and other religious doctrine as their historical guide.

Oh boy, another idiot who thinks liberals are automatically smarter than conservatives because they can conveniently ignore the fact that liberals are just as likely to call themselves Christians, or by another religious tag, as conservatives. Then they jump to the ridiculous conclusion that because conservatives are Christian that they believe the Earth is 5000 years old. and are thus totally ignorant about science.

Believe it or not, more conservatives have a solid grounding in science than liberals. Most liberals tend to specialize in social sciences or art, which means that their understanding of science stops somewhere in grade school. Conservatives tend to go into engineering, mathematics, and business, which means they have to deal with the real world. That means that even if they are brought up to believe that magic is what makes cars work, they are forced to learn that physics makes the world go round.

Would you like me to list all the Christian colleges in the US that have a better reputation for teaching science than any liberal arts college you can find? Or would the simple name of Harvard blow your little world apart?

Maybe you should stop using rdean as your source of arguments about science and politics.

The name Harvard came from a Christian Minister in 1636. That was nearly four hundred years ago. Read the Harvard Mission Statement and there is nary a mention of "Gawd'.

Mission statement - Harvard University

And I'm just, pardon the word, "mystified", why the right would think they have lots of scientists and "stuff"?

The Republican truth is they have lots of scientists and "big" thinkers.

The truth "truth" is the right has only contempt for education which is exemplified by one of their leaders, Sarah Palin. The sad thing isn't that Mother Sarah rolled her eyes when the women said she was a "teacher", but the FACT that the right wing has made "teacher" a dirty word and the woman was "ashamed" of being a teacher. She said, "I have a few other jobs". Sad and pathetic.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=85wOCIDgu1U&feature=related]YouTube - Sarah Palin - The eyeroll that did not happen - Homer, Alaska, August 7, 2010[/ame]

Everyone assumes Sarah Palin is stupid....which explains why she was a Journalism major.

Where that woman got the idea she was a teacher one can only wonder.

But Sarah Palin isn't one of our leaders. We don't have any leaders. Most of us can think for ourselves and don't take our ques from higher ups.

I think teachers give themselves the image they have today...not the right.

 

[lizzie]

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

Just a couple of possibilities-

I'm sure you know the old adage "those who can't do, teach".

Generally, in my observation, those who are "hands-on" in personality tend to be more practical, while those who are thinkers tend to live more in the world of ideas, thus are less practical. Many of us live in both worlds, and can find a balance point at which our ideology doesn't dominate what is practical, but universities seem to be staffed primarily with a high proportion of thinkers rather than doers.

 

[Spoonman]

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

Just a couple of possibilities-

I'm sure you know the old adage "those who can't do, teach".

Generally, in my observation, those who are "hands-on" in personality tend to be more practical, while those who are thinkers tend to live more in the world of ideas, thus are less practical. Many of us live in both worlds, and can find a balance point at which our ideology doesn't dominate what is practical, but universities seem to be staffed primarily with a high proportion of thinkers rather than doers.

You have a pretty good take on a lot of things.

 

[daveman]

The juvenile sea squirt wanders through the ocean searching for a suitable rock or hunk of coral to cling to and make its home for life. When it finds its spot and takes root, it doesn't need its brain any more...so it eats it. It's rather like getting tenure.

--Michael Scriven

 

[topspin]

Simple. those who can do, those who can't teach. Liberals can't , so they teach.

so those who can cut it in history do, those that can't Narc?

 

[Dr.Traveler]

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

Just a couple of possibilities-

I'm sure you know the old adage "those who can't do, teach".

Generally, in my observation, those who are "hands-on" in personality tend to be more practical, while those who are thinkers tend to live more in the world of ideas, thus are less practical. Many of us live in both worlds, and can find a balance point at which our ideology doesn't dominate what is practical, but universities seem to be staffed primarily with a high proportion of thinkers rather than doers.

I don't buy into the whole "those that can't..." blah blah blah nonsense.

But I do think that your "thinkers versus doers" line of argument might be a clue as to what is going on. I can tell you as an Academic myself, I work easily 60+ hours a week between research, class prep, committee work, community outreach, recruiting, etc. A decent amount of that time is spent staring at my blackboard willing the logic symbols to form together into something coherent and practical.

What's really very interesting to me though is how the modern world has formed a working relationship between the doers and thinkers. Most of the cutting edge research driving innovation and business is happening on campus by the "thinkers" and then getting exported out to the "doers" when in the past the body of knowledge necessary to truly innovate was such that the "doers" had a chance of innovating the world without the "thinkers."

Now industry is incredibly dependent on academia to provide skilled workers and research needed to drive business.

 

[antagon]

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

Just a couple of possibilities-

I'm sure you know the old adage "those who can't do, teach".

Generally, in my observation, those who are "hands-on" in personality tend to be more practical, while those who are thinkers tend to live more in the world of ideas, thus are less practical. Many of us live in both worlds, and can find a balance point at which our ideology doesn't dominate what is practical, but universities seem to be staffed primarily with a high proportion of thinkers rather than doers.

universities tend to 'live in both worlds' too. i don't think there's any sense in separating practicality from knowledge if you're talking about the real world.

 

[lizzie]

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

Just a couple of possibilities-

I'm sure you know the old adage "those who can't do, teach".

Generally, in my observation, those who are "hands-on" in personality tend to be more practical, while those who are thinkers tend to live more in the world of ideas, thus are less practical. Many of us live in both worlds, and can find a balance point at which our ideology doesn't dominate what is practical, but universities seem to be staffed primarily with a high proportion of thinkers rather than doers.

universities tend to 'live in both worlds' too. i don't think there's any sense in separating practicality from knowledge if you're talking about the real world.

The university as an entity does (live in both worlds). The individuals who make up the teaching staff of universities do not. Those who are teaching are not running and managing the institution- they are instructing those of us who are the doers.

 

[rdean]

Not really, unless you are counting rdean as someone.

rdean is funny. He lauds Science but doesn't endeavor himself as someone who bothers to study Science. Telling.

He trusts that which he does not understand. Something tells me he thinks that would be foolish if the same situation were applied to an ignorant (according to the Engineer) person who accepts Christianity.

It's human dynamic and typical power acquisition folks. This stuff isn't complicated.

rdean hasn't taken 7 vacations this year, but he'll gladly say that you should pay for his leader'[s prerogative to do it.

All these observations explained and yet not a single concrete example. One could almost say your full of shit, but that would be impolite. How about, "The world is lucky that it doesn't operate the way you 'imagine' it to work."

 

[Dr.Traveler]

Not so much "instructing" the doers as enabling them. After all the doers go to the university because they need/can use what they find there. If the University had nothing to offer, the doers wouldn't be filling my classrooms.

And it isn't just students coming to take advantage of what the university has to offer. Many of my colleagues across campus supplement their income working as consultants for local industry. Local businesses help keep the campus open through donations.

I want to address something else too. Many on this board seem to think that academia is a "Borg mentality.". The only reason it appears that way is because academia closes ranks quickly against outsiders. It's pure survival. The truth is there isn't a department on campus that isn't rife with disagreements on techniques, research, methodology, etc. Academia is a haven for diverse ideas. Closing ranks when attacked is how we protect that.

Sorry for any typos. I'm typing this on my iPod touch, not an iPhone. I can't get reception with AT&T.

 

[rdean]

Not so much "instructing" the doers as enabling them. After all the doers go to the university because they need/can use what they find there. If the University had nothing to offer, the doers wouldn't be filling my classrooms.

And it isn't just students coming to take advantage of what the university has to offer. Many of my colleagues across campus supplement their income working as consultants for local industry. Local businesses help keep the campus open through donations.

I want to address something else too. Many on this board seem to think that academia is a "Borg mentality.". The only reason it appears that way is because academia closes ranks quickly against outsiders. It's pure survival. The truth is there isn't a department on campus that isn't rife with disagreements on techniques, research, methodology, etc. Academia is a haven for diverse ideas. Closing ranks when attacked is how we protect that.

Sorry for any typos. I'm typing this on my iPod touch, not an iPhone. I can't get reception with AT&T.

There is such a difference between what goes on at a university and what the right wing "imagines" goes on.

I never worked so hard in my life. And in all the years I attended (going to night school and weekends on the GI bill, doubles the time it takes), I only had one teacher ever talked politics.

He was a physics teacher that also worked in research on using lasers in dermatology. He was from Iraq and talked about the Iranians because at the time Iraq was a war with Iran. He was hilarious.

I don't know what set him off, but it was so funny. He talked in that accent Iraqis have:

"Oh these Iranians, tsk, tsk, they only have one way to learn. You have to beat them. To teach them, they must be beaten. And the women are so ugly, they are always covered. (remember, women were only forced to wear burkas in Iraq AFTER Bush freed them). They have so much hair on their lip. And the men are all homosexual. Which is so strange, because they breed like flies. And in Tehran, they carry those big radios with that music playing so loud. They have no class. To teach them, you have to beat them."

And there was a guy from the Israeli military who was studying to be a doctor and he was falling out of his chair. It was hilarious.

 

[jillian]

A common cry of many conservatives is that, in general, our institutions of higher learning in this country (colleges, universities, etc.) are "liberal." They teach "liberal concepts," they cater to liberals, all of the professors are liberals, and so forth. Let's assume, for sake of argument, that this is correct - that our colleges and universities are, for the most part, liberal.

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

funny you should ask that. a few weeks ago, the author Lizzie Wurtzel (Prozac Nation) tweeted something to the effect that if it's 'intellectuals' who are drawn toward 'liberalism', maybe liberalism is just smarter.

 

[jillian]

Just a couple of possibilities-

I'm sure you know the old adage "those who can't do, teach".

Generally, in my observation, those who are "hands-on" in personality tend to be more practical, while those who are thinkers tend to live more in the world of ideas, thus are less practical. Many of us live in both worlds, and can find a balance point at which our ideology doesn't dominate what is practical, but universities seem to be staffed primarily with a high proportion of thinkers rather than doers.

universities tend to 'live in both worlds' too. i don't think there's any sense in separating practicality from knowledge if you're talking about the real world.

The university as an entity does (live in both worlds). The individuals who make up the teaching staff of universities do not. Those who are teaching are not running and managing the institution- they are instructing those of us who are the doers.

most colleges populate their professorial staffs with people who are not only intellectuals but who have had practical experience... probably more among the adjunct professors, though, i'd think.

 

[Modbert]

So am I the only one in this thread who has posted and is actually currently going to college currently?

 

[rdean]

A common cry of many conservatives is that, in general, our institutions of higher learning in this country (colleges, universities, etc.) are "liberal." They teach "liberal concepts," they cater to liberals, all of the professors are liberals, and so forth. Let's assume, for sake of argument, that this is correct - that our colleges and universities are, for the most part, liberal.

What is it about our colleges and universities that makes them liberal, in your opinion and why do you think they became so, as opposed to leaning more toward conservative thought?

funny you should ask that. a few weeks ago, the author Lizzie Wurtzel (Prozac Nation) tweeted something to the effect that if it's 'intellectuals' who are drawn toward 'liberalism', maybe liberalism is just smarter.

Knowledge isn't conservative or liberal, it's impartial. But liberals are generally drawn towards education, facts, research and knowledge because it's so satisfying. The more you learn, the more secure you feel.

Conservative is all about "freeze everything in place" so we can feel secure. Only, you feel less secure. What you don't understand can be frightening.

 

[lizzie]

I want to address something else too. Many on this board seem to think that academia is a "Borg mentality.".

I don't see it as Borg mentality myself, I just tend to think that the world of academia is primarily made up of people who are more skilled at conceptualizing than producing. It's not an insult, it's just differences in the way individuals perceive, analyze, and act. I can conceptualize something that I want to accomplish, and I accomplish it myself with my own energy and skills. Some people can conceptualize something that they desire to be a reality, but they lack the skills or knowledge to create it. Others cannot conceptualize something that they want, but when they see it, they can replicate it. My original premise was that academia primarily attracts those that can conceptualize, dream, and think, but their inability to put their ideas into "form" keeps them from being oriented toward practicality, because thinking, in and of itself, does not demand practical solutions.

 

[lizzie]

So am I the only one in this thread who has posted and is actually currently going to college currently?

Maybe so. I finished 27 years ago, with the exception of a few courses I've taken just because I love school. I would be a student my entire life if I didn't need to work for a living.