Education Not Indoctrination (1 Viewer)

[Captain Gh3y]

Of course those who choose to be academics and to teach rather than go into more lucrative career paths in private industry that ultimately yield lower positive social externalities will tend to possess a left wing 'bias'. Likewise those that tend to focus on the importance of history, politics, philosophy, psychology etc. will be relatively more left-leaning compared to those that lecture in economics, statistics, accounting, finance etc. Arguably, intellectuals are more likely to possess a left-wing stance than others. There is no conspiracy to indoctrinate. It's purely a result of natural selection.

We should be able to test this theory with a simple example of one of the areas your list in bold to one example of a more lucrative career.

Historian vs. Petroleum Geologist.

Historian writes a book; benefit to humanity = ????

Petroleum geologist does what those guys do; benefit to humanity = humans not living in pre-industrial conditions

or maybe something like

benefit of marxist economic philosophy = communism, and also plenty of nice arguments in universities

benefit of an economic philosophy based on of division of labour, pursuit of self interest, and freedom of trade = humans not living in pre-industrial conditions

also

result of not studying science = using 'natural selection' somewhere it makes no sense

 

[jb_nc]

This time with feeling.

 

[Slidey]

Perhaps it is better that we are indoctrinated with left wing socially conscious views rather than individualistic views. Experiments have consistently shown that actors do not play the Nash equilibrium in prisoner dilemma-like scenarios whereby better social outcomes are yielded through individualistically irrational actions, even when there is no strategic advantage in cooperation. Perhaps those actors are naive. Alternatively, perhaps natural selection has allowed left-leaning individuals to plant the "seeds", to inculcated us with irrational notions of "fairness", "justice" and "relative poverty"; notions that are beneficial for humankind though not for the individual.

I think there are better ways to teach altruism.

 

[_dhj_]

...Are you fucking kidding me?

Seriously, I cannot believe you're advocating indoctrination. What is this, Stalinist Russia? (Though people like you probably wish it was.)

I shouldn't have used "indoctrination" actually. My point is that there is no left wing conspiracy at work here. If there is the left-leaning culture within the education profession it arises purely from the fact that educators have tended to, for whatever reason, been ideologically left-leaning.

 

[_dhj_]

We should be able to test this theory with a simple example of one of the areas your list in bold to one example of a more lucrative career.

Historian vs. Petroleum Geologist.

Historian writes a book; benefit to humanity = ????

Petroleum geologist does what those guys do; benefit to humanity = humans not living in pre-industrial conditions

or maybe something like

benefit of marxist economic philosophy = communism, and also plenty of nice arguments in universities

benefit of an economic philosophy based on of division of labour, pursuit of self interest, and freedom of trade = humans not living in pre-industrial conditions

also

result of not studying science = using 'natural selection' somewhere it makes no sense

I'm not claiming that the externality produced by the educator is greater in every case. But the educators tend to believe that their work is not purely done for self interest. The choice made in regard to career path reflects in their ideology.

In regard to the historian v petroleum geologist example: what is the externality created by the petroleum geologist btw? Petroleum is non-renewable and will eventually be drilled up, so I guess the petroleum geologist produces a negative externality by inducing the use of petroleum rather than renewable energy.

In regard to marxism v capitalism: the individual actor is unlikely to transform the system in today's world. Actors with marxist-leaning ideologies are more likely to act altruistically and produce positive externalities than actors will capitalistic ideologies.

 

[Captain Gh3y]

In regard to the historian v petroleum geologist example: what is the externality created by the petroleum geologist btw? Petroleum is non-renewable and will eventually be drilled up, so I guess the petroleum geologist produces a negative externality by inducing the use of petroleum rather than renewable energy.

facilitating the development of absolutely everything you depend on for your entire life

including renewable energy, which we'd not have any time to sit around thinking up if we were all living on subsistence agriculture due to no oil

you're basically just saying that acting altruistically is always better than acting selfishly, even if individuals acting selfishly can achieve more...

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner..."

EDIT: the irony of Adam Smith being a philosopher is not lost on me

 

[_dhj_]

Yet the historian's biased account of the Petroleum Geologist is a positive thing?

Also considering the modular nature of science, surely were we out of petrol the petrol geologist would learn a different field fairly easily. The basic axioms of science still hold up. What if you found out that I don't know, Proust was a nazi and studying in his field was considered anathema, yet it was all you did since birth.

You'd be dated, sonny.

Science > Arts.

Even though many scientists partake in both fields, very few 'artists' do.

Not sure where you got the impression that I suggested that Arts > Science from. Of course Ghey raised the individual case of the historian versus the petroleum geologist but no-one suggested that all Arts was more important than science.

As for where historians would be without their specialised subject. Well history is a social science, there is a scientific method behind historical research. The Proust historian is in the same boat as the petroleum geologist in the sense that she partakes in a particular specialisation. Of course if the subject became anathema she would apply the historical method to another subject.

From personal experience, and in the nature of this actual argument we are all purely subjective; I'd say marxists are only good at wasting paper and self-replication, from what I've seen.

Believe me I am no fan of the Socialist Alternative or other radical student organisations. Those people will always exist regardless of the bias education contains.

Anyways I'm in a hurry...

 

[Bacilli]

*In faculty room "McCoy you fag, that's a fail for you.

 

[boris]

Good, lefties shit me. Especially lefty teachers.
Man I had some leftist hacks back in my day.

 

[_dhj_]

facilitating the development of absolutely everything you depend on for your entire life

including renewable energy, which we'd not have any time to sit around thinking up if we were all living on subsistence agriculture due to no oil

you're basically just saying that acting altruistically is always better than acting selfishly, even if individuals acting selfishly can achieve more...

"It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer, or the baker that we expect our dinner..."

EDIT: the irony of Adam Smith being a philosopher is not lost on me

I'm not saying that in a perfect world everyone should study Arts. I am saying that the education profession is left-leaning partly because of selection (those that choose to be teachers tend to be left leaning).

I do believe that acting altruistically is generally better than acting selfishly. On the basic level it involves obeying our laws rather than "rationally" weighing the benefits of breaking the law against the risk of getting caught times the negative utility of punishment. On the broader level it incorporates respect, courtesy, ethics, duty, good faith and most importantly in my opinion compassion towards humanity.

We would be in trouble if we removed any of the major professions from geologists to teachers, builders to garbage collectors (although the less vital industries such as plastic surgery or marketing tend to be purely driven by market demand).

I will say regarding the Adam Smith quote that if education became more right-leaning we would have fewer teachers, nurses and scientists but more bankers, stock-brokers and plastic surgeons.

 

[ari89]

My Law Foundations teachers were the biggest lefty leaning people I have ever met.

The claim really is, that unless students adopt the lecturer's point of view they will bemarked down. They feel intellectually intimidated.

This is what happened to me in the assignment and class discussions. A lot of the time when I'd find issue with the teachers point of view and mention it it would simply be ignored. I'm sure they could have brought up a rebuttal of any sort but they wouldn't even bother, they'd just ignore anything that contradicted what they said.

After seeing how they reacted to in class discussion when someone contradicted their beliefs I decided it would be best that I didn't do that in the assignment so I ended up writing some leftie essay on the glory of Stalin and the many shortcomings of the United States.

tbh the subject was pretty bias. It only allowed for the critique of right wing ideology, promotion of left wing ideas, the teachers were lefties, the only sources we used were two books written by the teacher and our assignment was based on that teachers article.

And one of the teachers said some crap along the lines of Rudd being a better PM even though Rudd has no record of being a PM? And that if you take something political away from the class it is to vote Greens.

But yeah, I wouldn't dob in this teacher because it was also the structure of the entire subject that allowed for this. He was a pretty great lecturer tbh, I just didn't agree with everything he said.

 

[youBROKEmyLIFE]

Mann isn't biased but tbh he puts up with a lot of very stupid arguments in his class.

 

[Triangulum]

What is this, Stalinist Russia? (Though people like you probably wish it was.)

Thanks for that insightful contribution to the debate. Because anyone who expresses a left-of-centre opinion, particularly a member of the socially/politically liberal modern left, must obviously identify with Stalinist authoritarianism. Similarly, 'people like you' love Augusto Pinochet.

 

[Trampoline Man]

"The problem is hurting schools too. Parents who think their kids are learning how to read and write are mistaken.''

Holy shit, they're brainwashing 4 year olds! Next every toddler will be having The Communist Manifesto read to them before bed!

The allegations of bias are in themselves biased, if the Young Liberals were serious about this and not just bitching about anyone left of them they'd be campaigning for a total removal of any hint of political speech in universities. Of course this isn't in their interest, so don't expect to hear it any time soon.

As it is, they're aiming for the same thing the former Government did, replacing lefties with righties.

 

[A High Way Man]

Re: Education, Not Indoctrination: continued

whingers
8 hour per week law students with nothing better to do, the foundation of student politics

 

[chicky_pie]

Re: Education, Not Indoctrination: continued

She did the right thing.











Go Young Liberals.

 

[A High Way Man]

Re: Education, Not Indoctrination: continued

lol, sisters doing it for themselves

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xDQE4UMVhEQ

 

[boris]

Re: Education, Not Indoctrination: continued

Wait. What?
Chick in question had no idea how disgustingly left lecturers are?
Deal with it.

From what I've read the lecturer in question didn't hassle her for being YL. If the chick in question was a greenie she wouldn't be having a cry.

STFU.

 

[Trampoline Man]

Re: Education, Not Indoctrination: continued

Is that meant to be one of the bad cases?

She feels uncomfortable just knowing the political affiliation of her lecturer? Isn't that exactly the sort of bias against political views that the Young Liberals are so against?

Fucking hypocrites the lot of them.

edit: NTEU makes an interesting point about importing political issues from the US. I can't say I disagree that young people across the political spectrum get a lot of information on political issues from places like the US, and it might be that they try to recreate the issues here, where the political climate is much more benign.

 

[_dhj_]

Re: Education, Not Indoctrination: continued

Although I've had a few law lecturers that identified themselves as conservatives I never saw it as a problem. Take your lecturers as they come.