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.
Academic research is peer-reviewed and heavily critiqued before published. It's hardly just a single person's point of view. Research with political or financial motives is not published in academic journals.
That's the best one I heard today. Leftist elite professors with collectivist-statist agendas peer-reviewed by other leftist professors with collectivist-statist agendas.
Absolutely rich.
EVERYTHING coming out of academia today is biased, agenda-driven, peer reviewed, and a pack of lies! From AGW to "privilege" to redistribution to subjectivist-relativist dogma to you-name-it. Garbage. It's all garbage.
That's the best one I heard today. Leftist elite professors with collectivist-statist agendas peer-reviewed by other leftist professors with collectivist-statist agendas.
Absolutely rich.
EVERYTHING coming out of academia today is biased, agenda-driven, peer reviewed, and a pack of lies! From AGW to "privilege" to redistribution to subjectivist-relativist dogma to you-name-it. Garbage. It's all garbage.
Please understand what you are espousing. To sweep all education into such a terrible pyre is absolutely, bedrock fascistic. If you understand that, and are ok with it, then so be it. But understand the slippery slope you stand on while pointing your finger. Fascism is tied to capitalism on opposite ends of the spectrum. Unless that is some liberal BS as well?
Anyone can say anything they like about anyone. They can claim that the truth is a conspiracy, thereby rendering all facts suspect and all argument against their point of view as superfluous. Its a neat trick of semantics- claiming that everything, ESPECIALLY the ones who don't agree with you, are party to some vast conspiracy. Its ALWAYS unprovable, illogical to its core, and almost impossible to talk anyone out of.
Why do we like this kind of thinking, or rather, why do we gravitate towards it? Because its an absolute in a world of no absolutes. Human beings were evolved to like the simplest answer. Some of us have evolved past that. Its like some people can only see in black and white, and then eventually you see in color and realize, WOW, I didn't know that was that complicated.
Black and white is easier, based more on emotion than reason, and keeps us from looking ourselves square in the eye.
That's the best one I heard today. Leftist elite professors with collectivist-statist agendas peer-reviewed by other leftist professors with collectivist-statist agendas.
Absolutely rich.
EVERYTHING coming out of academia today is biased, agenda-driven, peer reviewed, and a pack of lies! From AGW to "privilege" to redistribution to subjectivist-relativist dogma to you-name-it. Garbage. It's all garbage.
This blind trust of intellectuals is scary. It is completely an outsiders view.
. Your journals of all sorts of biases. First the people who reviewed these journals and will write for these journals are self-selected. Second, experts disagree and journal sometimes compete with one another with opposing views. The thing about academic research is precisely that it is a platform of Sherry results and debating on these results. It's never intended to be a blind trust of so-called academic journals. If you think it's academic journals and therefore it is stressful, then you are not cut to read academic journals. Even if these are supposed to be facts, they are still research and are subject to examinations of the research methodology, the way they sampled their populations, the way they conduct the research, the funding agency and the political motives behind it. There are different schools of thought, some of which are in sharp contrast and opposition to one another.
And finally, it was a challenge this for you that's professors are somehow leftist elites. I have used the phrase leftist or Elise to describe a lot of professors but those are just some of the professors. There are plenty of professors in business, medicine, management, engineering who are more fiscally conservative. Some of these are at some of the best schools in this country. Is just the overall yesterday via tends to lean toward liberalism, with many variations.
Last but not least, it is only based on what these professors that they want. They are leftists only based on what they say. We do not know if they are truly leftist in real life. Power money and sex do not stop at the door steps of the academia. In fact power money and sex are deeply ingrained in a tenure structure. People like to call it "chastity poverty and obedience" for a reason!
EVERYTHING coming out of academia today is biased, agenda-driven, peer reviewed, and a pack of lies!
This of course is based upon your recent perusal of the "Quarterly Journal of Economics", "Econometrica," the "American Economic Review," "Review of Economics & Statistics," or the "Economic Journal?" So what did you think of Francesco Caselli, Massimo Morelli, and Dominic Rohner paper on the Geography of Interstate Resource Wars?
Please understand what you are espousing. To sweep all education into such a terrible pyre is absolutely, bedrock fascistic. If you understand that, and are ok with it, then so be it. But understand the slippery slope you stand on while pointing your finger. Fascism is tied to capitalism on opposite ends of the spectrum. Unless that is some liberal BS as well?
Anyone can say anything they like about anyone. They can claim that the truth is a conspiracy, thereby rendering all facts suspect and all argument against their point of view as superfluous. Its a neat trick of semantics- claiming that everything, ESPECIALLY the ones who don't agree with you, are party to some vast conspiracy. Its ALWAYS unprovable, illogical to its core, and almost impossible to talk anyone out of.
Why do we like this kind of thinking, or rather, why do we gravitate towards it? Because its an absolute in a world of no absolutes. Human beings were evolved to like the simplest answer. Some of us have evolved past that. Its like some people can only see in black and white, and then eventually you see in color and realize, WOW, I didn't know that was that complicated.
Black and white is easier, based more on emotion than reason, and keeps us from looking ourselves square in the eye.
So good luck with that.
The more I read your descriptions, the more I think you are describing those on the left than the poster you responded to. Fascism, whatever ism, are neat simplistic labels to insult people, crush them, and pride yourself with.
I don't fully agree with that poster and I do think that posters view is a bit absolute. But is not without merit. The liberal strategy to any criticism on intellectuals and academia is to yell anti intellectualism. But it doesn't work. As I said in my other post just now, plenty of people in the academia are very critical and are fighting within.
Economics is a mix of humanities and quantitative analysis. Education can enhance one's understanding of both.
Where is the quantitative analysis of the depreciation of durable consumer goods?
There were 200,000,000 cars in the US in 1995. What effect does planned obsolescence have on that depreciation? Oh yeah, economists don't discuss planned obsolescence.
Who would you trust your retirement investment with? (let's say you got $1,000,000 saved)
A liberal with a a Phd in Economics
or a conservative with a high school education that is a strong supporter of supply side economics?
I guarantee 99% of people would trust their retirement money to the liberal with the Phd
I'd give my retirement money to the liberal with the PhD because investment management (the field in which I work) is a scholarly endeavor in which education really does count, generally the more advanced the better.
And I'd vote for the conservative for Congressman. His or her job is to spend other people's money, hopefully as little as possible, not to make advances in economic theory.
I'd give my retirement money to the liberal with the PhD because investment management (the field in which I work) is a scholarly endeavor in which education really does count, generally the more advanced the better.
And I'd vote for the conservative for Congressman. His or her job is to spend other people's money, hopefully as little as possible, not to make advances in economic theory.
But wouldn't you want an educated conservative for congress rather than an uneducated, college dropout... or worse, high school graduate, making decisions for the nation? Being conservative and educated can go a long way.
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.
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.
