U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-10-2008, 01:36 PM
 
Location: SE Arizona - FINALLY! :D
18,980 posts, read 21,969,178 times
Reputation: 6553

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
High education may lead to high income, but high education doesn't necessarily mean you will vote Republican. Your fallacy is known as Affirming the consequent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1.Highly educated people make a high income.
2.High income people vote Republican.
3. Therefore, highly educated people vote Republican.

or

1. If P (high education), then Q (high income)
2. Q (high income) votes Republican
3. Therefore P (high education) votes Republican.

In other words, high education and high income are independent variables when determining party affiliation. Yes, high education leads to high income, but it is fallacious to conclude that high education leads to Republican party affiliation.
Yup.
This is a common well-known formal logic mistake people make ALL the time.

I'd give you a point, but I already have.

Ken
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-10-2008, 01:39 PM
 
8,758 posts, read 8,644,477 times
Reputation: 1422
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
High education may lead to high income, but high education doesn't necessarily mean you will vote Republican. Your fallacy is known as Affirming the consequent - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

1.Highly educated people make a high income.
2.High income people vote Republican.
3. Therefore, highly educated people vote Republican.

or

1. If P (high education), then Q (high income)
2. Q (high income) votes Republican
3. Therefore P (high education) votes Republican.

In other words, high education and high income are independent variables when determining party affiliation. Yes, high education leads to high income, but it is fallacious to conclude that high education leads to Republican party affiliation.

It is not a given across the board, but if the most successful (income wise) are also on average the most well educated and they statistically vote Republican, then Obama needs to draw more of the less educated, lower income voters to be successful. So far, most of that vote has gone to Hillary.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 01:59 PM
 
90 posts, read 220,409 times
Reputation: 95
Assuming this wasn't an idea with terrifying implications, how would you define "educated"? Is it learning facts? Critical thinking skills? Honing common sense? Being able to solve a differential equation? We can't measure education. We can measure schooling, but those two things aren't the same, not by a long shot. You don't have to have been around for very long to have met some very uneducated people who graduated from college. Two people can even sit in the same classroom and make the same final grade and one come away with a lot more education than the other. And if tests could adequately measure education, we wouldn't have as many problems as we do surrounding "No Child Left Behind" legislation and the like.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:23 PM
 
5,721 posts, read 5,248,622 times
Reputation: 3603
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
.....this election would have been over a long time ago, and Barack Obama would be the hands-down winner.

I wonder what would happen if we passed a constitutional amendment allowing only those with a college education and higher the right to vote. Or for those who can't go to college for whatever reason, they should at least pass some kind of mental aptitude or intelligence test before being allowed to vote. Will our country be better off or worse off as a result? Would a presumably wise electorate produce a wise leader akin to Plato's philosopher-king?

I'm not necessarily advocating this.....I'm just wondering what the implications are of such a system.
This is WHY a lot of Democrats (myself included) don't like Obama. people saying stuff like this makes us think that he will only be the president of the liberal elites.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:29 PM
 
8,758 posts, read 8,644,477 times
Reputation: 1422
Quote:
Originally Posted by juppiter View Post
This is WHY a lot of Democrats (myself included) don't like Obama. people saying stuff like this makes us think that he will only be the president of the liberal elites.

There are not enough "liberal elites" to get him elected.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:30 PM
 
5,721 posts, read 5,248,622 times
Reputation: 3603
And that is why Obama will lose. He splits all of us moderate-to-conservative democrats with John McCain on election day. McCain also gets all conservatives.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:31 PM
 
3,413 posts, read 6,321,450 times
Reputation: 1410
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
.....this election would have been over a long time ago, and Barack Obama would be the hands-down winner.

I wonder what would happen if we passed a constitutional amendment allowing only those with a college education and higher the right to vote. Or for those who can't go to college for whatever reason, they should at least pass some kind of mental aptitude or intelligence test before being allowed to vote. Will our country be better off or worse off as a result? Would a presumably wise electorate produce a wise leader akin to Plato's philosopher-king?

I'm not necessarily advocating this.....I'm just wondering what the implications are of such a system.
What does college-education have to do with "wise"?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:39 PM
 
4,182 posts, read 5,665,009 times
Reputation: 1719
Quote:
Assuming this wasn't an idea with terrifying implications, how would you define "educated"? Is it learning facts? Critical thinking skills? Honing common sense? Being able to solve a differential equation? We can't measure education. We can measure schooling, but those two things aren't the same, not by a long shot. You don't have to have been around for very long to have met some very uneducated people who graduated from college. Two people can even sit in the same classroom and make the same final grade and one come away with a lot more education than the other. And if tests could adequately measure education, we wouldn't have as many problems as we do surrounding "No Child Left Behind" legislation and the like.

At the very least, a good education should give the person the ability to evaluate a byte of information and to decide whether it is to be accepted as fact (or has a high probability of being factual) or not. It should enable the person to take a rational course of action based on such evaluations. This means the education should be grounded on reality.

Knowledge of math and mathematical reasoning, basic natural sciences, and basic knowledge of the humanities are must-haves. It is not so much the content of the knowledge that it is important...it is the ability to reason to derive that knowledge, or the ability to reconstruct the process by which such knowledge was derived, that is important.

A voter who is educated in the sense I defined above will then be able to evaluate political issues with a sound grounding on reality. When he is told, for example, that Obama is a Muslim terrorist plant and a neoconservative, the voter can figure out how logical this piece of information is supposed to be. An uneducated voter will lap up such propaganda with gusto, but a critical thinking voter will immediately spot the logical inconsistencies inherent therein. When Obama is criticized for saying that small town Americans are bitter because of economic decline, an educated voter can figure out whether Obama's statement is valid and whether the criticism against him is indeed deserved.

Basically, a good education is that which enables you to think clearly. Thinking clearly means a reality-based processing of information. Reality means that which is defined and accepted by natural science.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:46 PM
 
11,128 posts, read 12,386,477 times
Reputation: 3668
Lets not confuse the educated with being intelligent. The American educational system today is famous for teaching kids and people what to think instead of how to think. As has been offered by the many post on this and other forums.

One of the historical and key signs of intelligence is a burning curiosity about the world around us, at least in my opinion. As curiosity leads to questioning the world around us instead of merely taking things on faith or believing them to be true because we were told they were.

Examples of this premise in how it relates to politics are people from any given political philosophy that start out threads, comments or make statements such as, "All dems/repubs are (or believe or behave) like this or that". This very statement reeks of ignorance, generalization, and leads to a polemic defense of ones own views, supported by evidence derived through confirmation bias.

This is how a patent clerk can become one of the greatest minds known in human history or why a Yale grad may end up not being able to articulate a basic simple sentence in the English language.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-10-2008, 02:49 PM
 
90 posts, read 220,409 times
Reputation: 95
Quote:
Originally Posted by ndfmnlf View Post
At the very least, a good education should give the person the ability to evaluate a byte of information and to decide whether it is to be accepted as fact (or has a high probability of being factual) or not. It should enable the person to take a rational course of action based on such evaluations. This means the education should be grounded on reality.

Knowledge of math and mathematical reasoning, basic natural sciences, and basic knowledge of the humanities are must-haves. It is not so much the content of the knowledge that it is important...it is the ability to reason to derive that knowledge, or the ability to reconstruct the process by which such knowledge was derived, that is important.

A voter who is educated in the sense I defined above will then be able to evaluate political issues with a sound grounding on reality. When he is told, for example, that Obama is a Muslim terrorist plant and a neoconservative, the voter can figure out how logical this piece of information is supposed to be. An uneducated voter will lap up such propaganda with gusto, but a critical thinking voter will immediately spot the logical inconsistencies inherent therein. When Obama is criticized for saying that small town Americans are bitter because of economic decline, an educated voter can figure out whether Obama's statement is valid and whether the criticism against him is indeed deserved.

Basically, a good education is that which enables you to think clearly. Thinking clearly means a reality-based processing of information. Reality means that which is defined and accepted by natural science.
Ok, but how would you measure this as to exclude people who were not well educated? Practically speaking.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies > Elections
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top