Sydney University Arts for "discredited leftist/postmodern thinking" (1 Viewer)

[Trippendicular]

Miranda Devine is, in my opinion, one of the best opinion columnists around.

Challenging our paradigms is one thing, but the philosophy of being accepting and tolerant of all sorts of other forms of belief, such as homosexuality, feminism, polygamy, necrophilia etc., is not one that I personally believe the University should be supporting. In our society, we should be able to say "This is wrong", but thanks to "poltical correctness", we can't say that Anything is wrong. The University is encouraging us to accept and even agree with other points of view to what we may consider right, and that in turn breeds societal decay.

Go home, Fascist

How about the article in the telegraph the other day going on about how it will cost taxpayers $100 000 to cover the meeting reinstating Kim Beazley as Labor leader. It was a full page article that made something out of absolutely nothing. No wonder the Liberals won the election, they have the full support of both major newspapers in Sydney and the influential owners of them, ie kerry Packer, what a fascist

 

[Phanatical]

Are you an Arts student?

Yes, I am. At the University of Sydney moreso.

I'm just saying that it's important that the Faculty recognise that not everything is justifiable. There are things that are just plain wrong in society, like sex before the age of 18, pop music, abortion, pop music, racism, pop music, falun gong, pop music, people who eat frog legs and escargot, but not chicken feet and of course, pop music.

The Faculty doesn't believe that we should be able to say that "That is wrong". They promote the idea that Everything can be justified, and that we should be more tolerant of what we don't agree with. Like the idea that we should accept Falun Gong spreading their cult across our university, instead of criticising them and putting them in loony bins. This is an incredibly politically incorrect statement, yet it's still the morally justified thing to say. If I were to submit an essay with this point of view, I'd probably be expelled from the University.

 

[Xayma]

I'm just saying that it's important that the Faculty recognise that not everything is justifiable. There are things that are just plain wrong in society, like sex before the age of 18, pop music, abortion, pop music, racism, pop music, falun gong, pop music, people who eat frog legs and escargot, but not chicken feet and of course, pop music.

How is sex before the age of 18 not justifiable? It depends on the couple involved, it depends why they want to have sex. Mainstream society has set it up to be something that is sacred if two just want to have sex for fun go for it as long as that is what both want.

There are many people under the age of 18 more mature in their relationships then those in their 20's, 30's and 40's.

Pop music, is from your perspective again. Racism, I notice you put that in there, why because you are affected by it, yet I didn't notice homophobia, probably because you aren't affected by it yet in 15 or so years it is likely to appear on that list of another "phanatical", similarly 15 years ago it wouldn't have appeared, except on a few left winged arts students list.

Racism yet you point out the French and accuse them of being wrong.

Abortion again depends on the person, when is life, life? Are you saying it is wrong to remove a cancerous tumour that through an act of sheer mutation might grow into another person? Long reach but when is a set of cells human life?

 

[Phanatical]

People under the age of 18, and a good deal of people over it are too immature to commit an act which may potentially result in the creation of a life. Quite besides the point in this argument. And Pop music is evil. Don't ever question me on this one.

Racism, Sexism, a whole bunch of other -isms are also evil. I'm not saying that the faculty must teach that there is a right and wrong, but it must understand that defining right and wrong is itself not wrong. For me to say that, for example, surfboarding is evil, would I need to be a surfboarder? According to the Faculty, and a whole bunch of other people, for me to criticise feminists I would Have to be a feminist, for me to criticise Falun Gong, I would have to practice Falun Gong. I criticise Falun Gong because it is a bad thing. While we can, and in my case Have, argued the merits of Falun Gong, the end result is that we must make a determination whether it is wrong or not. The faculty doesn't like this in regards to certain issues, such as feminism, multiculturalism, gender orientation, and there is a presumption that all students must subscribe to certain views on these issues - ie that feminism is great, multiculturalism is great, and that it's okay to be gay. Why can't we challenge these paradigms?

 

[withoutaface]

People under the age of 18, and a good deal of people over it are too immature to commit an act which may potentially result in the creation of a life. Quite besides the point in this argument. And Pop music is evil. Don't ever question me on this one.

Define pop music. By that do you mean most of the mind numbing crap that fills our charts, or merely all music made since 1950?

 

[Phanatical]

Oh, just the mind-numbing crap. There's been a helluva lot of fantastic music written since 1950, both popular and not so.

 

[Phanatical]

I didn't say that. I'm saying that there's no room to even question it. Just like there's no room to question a whole bevy of other philosophies, some of which I agree with, some which I don't. We're expected to just agree, or fail.

 

[chelloveck]

Kerry Packer doesn't actually own a major newspaper in Sydney, and hasn't for a while. Seriously lefty stereotypes are flying around.

no that guy's just an ignorant bandwaggon leftie. i'm skeptical of anyone that calls people fascists in the context of our society. they're normally idiots.

oh and phanatical is kinda right. because of politicall corectness, i can't question thins like aboriginal rights without being immediately and ignorantly dismissed. It's quite ironic, often people say they're opening their minds with post-modernism ideals, but they can be closing them at the same time without realising it, because they simply DISMISS conservative ideals.

 

[alien]

what the hay this article is one of the silliest wastes of bytes on my computer ever. i especially love the translations of "graduate attributes". it sounds like one of her close friends didn't get in so now she's bitter and taking it out on the faculty. what a nut.

 

[Phanatical]

I'm not saying that the faculty should determine what is Right or Wrong. I'm just saying that there Is a tendancy of the Faculty of Arts at USYD to be biased in terms of marks in favour of particular philosophies. Some lecturers are fully aware of their biases and work to be fairer, but there are some who revel in it.

 

[Phanatical]

The majority of lecturers may themselves feel that multiculturalism is better than monoculturalism, but if I were to write an essay talking about the virtues of coming from a foreign society and assimillating into Australian society, should that mean I deserve less marks than somebody who argues that everybody should maintain the cultures they bring from overseas? I don't think so, especially if I can quote sources which back my arguments up, but that is what is regularly happening at USYD. What I want to know is how you can criticise somebody like me, a student in the University of Sydney Faculty of Arts, for my views on the faculty, when you don't even go to USYD. I don't know how they do things at UNSW, but if we have a problem with the way we're being taught at USYD, we fix it.

My argument is this. Instead of the lecturers dictating to the students what is right and wrong, it should be the students who, upon reading the arguments for and against a point, decide, and argue, what they believe is right and wrong.

 

[Frigid]

Phanatical, why the hell are you so 'obsessed' about arguing things in black and white? in right and wrong?... why the hell must you be so determined to "make a determination whether [something] is wrong or not"?

geez. talk about naivete.

i've a few questions for you: what are morals? what is the distinction between society's morals and laws? are morals constant or are they changing? are they necessarily universal, across different nations and ethnicities? are the minority that cannot accept the morals of their society necessarily pure evil?

 

[Generator]

Black or white, or numerous shades of grey? Why one over the other? It's clear from this thread alone that it is a contentious issue. Well done, Miranda.

I stand for numerous shades of grey, by the way... I know that the above is an oversimplification, but what can you do?

---

Coherent arguments with credible claims seem to be accepted no matter the lecturer's own beliefs, but if you are going against the grain there appears to be a need to for a stronger argument (anyone with an ounce of common sense would realise that). Of course, that is normally a result of the lecturer seeking to improve the student's argument and point out any potential faults rather than deride it as 'wrong'.

What a pointless paragraph.

 

[Sarah]

They justify their view/marking/marks based on the level of argument. I've never come acorss this at unsw even after completing a number of very emotive and divisive courses. ie Aussie History ATSI role - globalisation - International law and iraq - Australia political parties and what they stand for.

I'm a student at UNSW and marking is fair so long as you have evidence/sources backing up your argument.

However, there was this one time in first yr where i did come across a lecturer who i felt was trying to impose her view on a politically controversial topic at the time and one that is still ongoing. I don't have a problem with the view itself. What i did have a problem with was that for the majority of the lecture, she presented the case for her view and didn't look much at arguments opposing it.

It was and still is a controversial topic. As it was a 1st year course, I thought her view would have been highly inflential for students who don't know anything about the topic.

Based on subjects i've done, i think that UNSW Arts and Social Sciences faculty are open to differing views on topics. It's fellow students more than lecturers or tutors who are critical of each other when someone has a view that goes against the norm.