[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

No - not my argument, and I explained how a professor would be able to get his political world view into course curriculum.

Into curriculum? No, this is retarded. You realize that there is a thing called accreditation, right? Besides, do you really think that this would happen enough to flail about with the "indoctrination" whistle blowing as a general truth? Does indoctrination happen some of the time or can it happen? Sure. Is it some problem that deserves massive attention in non-political science fields as something that occurs on a regular basis? No, this is stupid.

If you want to huff and puff about bias and indoctrination in political science classes have at it. It is no doubt very difficult to keep everybody happy within this field of study, but since this whole field is study sort of involves students forming opinions, they'll come to their own conclusions sooner or later that resonate with them personally. Sifting through the different schools of thought is part of the process, no matter what these schools of thought are, so meh.

Besides, I'm of the opinion that right wing politics in this country are significantly more ideologically narrow than left wing politics, which are sort of a grab bag of miscellaneous. Being exposed to this grab bag is good for students, so I would *expect* to be exposed to these viewpoints at at least a slightly higher ratio compared to conservative viewpoints if I were a student, and I'd be happy about it no matter if I was liberal or conservative myself. I guess Big Mac felt differently, but he like you isn't exactly what I'd call the ideologically open-minded type.

Yes, but it's an extremely rare occurance.

I'm waiting for your first concession of any kind, in any thread, directed at anybody, about anything.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

For instance, when I was in college, the campus group I spent most of my time in was right across the hall from the Gay and Lesbian club in the Student Union, and I saw some things that would make Rick Santorum really throw up! I was able to coexist with these folks, and somehow I didn't catch teh gay from them.

You haven't caught it yet, but give it time, it could strike you any day now, probably when you are eating a hotdog.

[besson3c]

I'm feeling better that Romney won MI and AZ tonight, but damn, I don't understand why his victory margins weren't much bigger than they have been lately.

The right wing/Tea Party has been so up in arms about cutting down the size of government and reducing spending and blah blah blah, so why would they want to nominate the guy who is going to create the most distractions and noise about social issues?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

Even if what you say is true, is Barack Obama orchestrating it all specifically to secularize society, as Santorum is implying? Or is it that the people who are most attracted to academic ivory-tower life are the ones who lean left (because the ones who lean right are too busy working at real jobs)?'

Possibly.

While it may not be the huge, conscious conspiracy that Santorum has suggested, I don't think that people who have spent most of their life in higher education (where left-leaners far outweigh the opposite) aren't bright enough to know that sending young impressionable minds to their comrades for training and education won't do anything but help their cause.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Into curriculum? No, this is retarded. You realize that there is a thing called accreditation, right? Besides, do you really think that this would happen enough to flail about with the "indoctrination" whistle blowing as a general truth?

Yes, but I'm speaking from personal experience. I never had a professor who injected a conservative world view into teaching the way I had ones from left of center. The music class I mentioned was only one of many where it was clear that the person teaching was doing everything they could to skew the discussion to the left. There was also the history professor that went out of his way to explain all that was wrong with going to war (spent a entire lecture on WWII and how the government lied to us about everything) and why the Bible has no historical value because it was all stolen from other sources (his opinion, not fact). Then there was the ethics course where religion was also skewered and the RELIGION class where Christianity was presented in a very poor light.

...and that's just a start.

Does indoctrination happen some of the time or can it happen? Sure. Is it some problem that deserves massive attention in non-political science fields as something that occurs on a regular basis? No, this is stupid.

Funny, but one of the classes I took where I saw no attempt to bias the discussion was an introductory PS class. However, the Constitutional law class I took was a doozy. Quite the mind bender when it came to logically interrupting what our Founder's intended. The guy teaching was one of those "living document' people who believe it could be twisted to fit any left leaning purpose desired and suggestions otherwise where met with derision.

So, either your experience was significantly different than mine (and David Horowitz and others), or you didn't notice because the views espoused meshed with yours. You can pass out all the insults you want ("stupid", "retarded"), but that's not making your argument any more convincing.

Besides, I'm of the opinion that right wing politics in this country are significantly more ideologically narrow than left wing politics, which are sort of a grab bag of miscellaneous.

I'd agree. Right wing politics typically are based on a set of fairly consistent values and an examination of what has worked in the past. Left wing politics typically revolves around a vacillating set of values based on one's current situation and will be met with a "grab bag" of options for solutions, most of which have already been proven to be unreliable or non-productive. When you have looser standards and would rather choices be made that make you feel good instead of what will require discipline and possibly sacrifice, it significantly widens the spectrum of options.

Being exposed to this grab bag is good for students, so I would *expect* to be exposed to these viewpoints at at least a slightly higher ratio compared to conservative viewpoints if I were a student, and I'd be happy about it no matter if I was liberal or conservative myself. I guess Big Mac felt differently, but he like you isn't exactly what I'd call the ideologically open-minded type.

One doesn't have to be closed minded in order to not want to have a person's personal ideology pushed on then in a subject matter that does not require it. The fact of the matter is that the left is usually quite hypocritical about these sorts of things. They have no problem with the viewpoint being pressed is non-traditional, radical or just simply from the far left. However, when one tries to inject a viewpoint based on traditional religious morals or conservative values, we've seen and wold see HUGE amount of resistance from faculty and student groups. You can hardly even have a conservative speaker at most colleges these days because of the lack of true diversity and closed mindedness apparent in higher education presently. Again, "diversity" and "tolerance" are often times just code words for acceptance of non-traditional values with the goal of suppressing conservative values. Otherwise, you wouldn't see the resistance to conservative speakers, or see the huge amount of institutional bias against scientists who do not espouse the most politically correct, left leaning unproven theories (like the coming man-made global warming catastrophe that was supposed to have been happening already.)

I'm waiting for your first concession of any kind, in any thread, directed at anybody, about anything.

How about you just concentrate on making well thought out arguments and stop worrying about how the arguments of others make you feel? I'm not going to concede something just for the sake of making others feel good about themselves when their arguments provide nothing for concession. If there's something that I don't disagree with, I usually just don't comment on it.

[Dork.]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

The music class I mentioned was only one of many where it was clear that the person teaching was doing everything they could to skew the discussion to the left.

Did he play everything an octave lower?

There was also the history professor that went out of his way to explain all that was wrong with going to war (spent a entire lecture on WWII and how the government lied to us about everything) and why the Bible has no historical value because it was all stolen from other sources (his opinion, not fact).

You can't have a pacifist teach a history class? And he can't have an opinion on the Bible?

Then there was the ethics course where religion was also skewered and the RELIGION class where Christianity was presented in a very poor light.

Now, here's a complaint that has to do with what the guy actually taught, and not a veiled insult at his perceived leanings. A lot of questionable ethical practices have been done throughout history in the name of Christ. Did you think he needed to lob stones at the other religions too, just to be fair? That sounds awfully PC to me.

However, the Constitutional law class I took was a doozy. Quite the mind bender when it came to logically interrupting what our Founder's intended. The guy teaching was one of those "living document' people who believe it could be twisted to fit any left leaning purpose desired and suggestions otherwise where met with derision.

I've never taken a constitutional law class, but as far as I know that's a perfectly valid way to interpret the Constitution, and many judges and constitutional scholars hold that view.

But the thing is, in life you are going to encounter people who don't share your views all the time. Do you write off your friends or co-workers the instant they say something liberal? Maybe there's some resentment because you're forced to deal with this teacher to get a grade, but there are going to be other times in life where you are forced to deal with people you don't like to get what you want. Do you just mutter about how the world is going to hell in a handbasket the while time? No wonder conservatives are so cranky!

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by Dork. 

You can't have a pacifist teach a history class? And he can't have an opinion on the Bible?

You CAN. My point is that these sorts of world views are the types that are prevalent in higher education. You don't have real diversity. You normally have either a straight, facts based presentation of the material, or a bias toward shifting the subject matter to reflect a left-leaning world view as I've pointed out.

Now, here's a complaint that has to do with what the guy actually taught, and not a veiled insult at his perceived leanings. A lot of questionable ethical practices have been done throughout history in the name of Christ. Did you think he needed to lob stones at the other religions too, just to be fair? That sounds awfully PC to me.

I'm not talking about simply pointing out wrongdoing by people who claim to be followers of Christ, but the religion itself.

I've never taken a constitutional law class, but as far as I know that's a perfectly valid way to interpret the Constitution, and many judges and constitutional scholars hold that view.

Simply holding that view doesn't make it "valid" when it goes against most everything the majority of the founders suggested where goals when they set up the Constitution as a set of absolutes. They made it very clear that they where dealing with absolutes that could be changed via a specific process, not just due to the whims of five unelected elite Americans. Suggesting that we do otherwise isn't based on anything other than personal preference and that's part of the problem with the judicial system. This is how the left interjects it's desires into law without it having anything to do with the wishes of either the founding fathers or the majority of the electorate and is a fraudulent practice.

But the thing is, in life you are going to encounter people who don't share your views all the time. Do you write off your friends or co-workers the instant they say something liberal?

No. The thing is, unlike my experiences in higher education, there typically is real "diversity" in the ideas I see myself surrounded by in "real life." Also, I'm not being forced to listen to my friends or co-workers and pay them in order to be able to be granted the thing which would certify me as "educated." I CAN choose to not be subjected to crazy ideas if I want. Students really have no choice and the lack of true diversity doesn't really help them as much as indoctrinate them often times.

Maybe there's some resentment because you're forced to deal with this teacher to get a grade, but there are going to be other times in life where you are forced to deal with people you don't like to get what you want. Do you just mutter about how the world is going to hell in a handbasket the while time? No wonder conservatives are so cranky!

Nope. I choose to surround myself with a diverse lot. It's not really anything like higher education in "real life" where "diversity" means toleration of everything other than traditional values and ideas.

[subego]

What's the difference between "teaching something you don't agree with/believe" and "indoctrination"?

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

What's the difference between "teaching something you don't agree with/believe" and "indoctrination"?

I guess it's how the material is presented.

You have two teachers, one from Georgia, the other from Maine. They are both to give a presentation on the Confederate POW camp Andersonville. Something tells me that their presentations are not going to be same.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

You have two teachers, one from Georgia, the other from Maine. They are both to give a presentation on the Confederate POW camp Andersonville. Something tells me that their presentations are not going to be same.

So, which one is "indoctrinating"?

[subego]

^^ Of course. This is bias.

But is one indoctrination and the other not?


Edit: scooped.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

So, which one is "indoctrinating"?

The teacher from Georgia might think this was indoctrination.

A Union soldier described his entry into the prison camp:

"As we entered the place, a spectacle met our eyes that almost froze our blood with horror, and made our hearts fail within us. Before us were forms that had once been active and erect;—stalwart men, now nothing but mere walking skeletons, covered with filth and vermin. Many of our men, in the heat and intensity of their feeling, exclaimed with earnestness. "Can this be hell?" "God protect us!" and all thought that He alone could bring them out alive from so terrible a place. In the center of the whole was a swamp, occupying about three or four acres of the narrowed limits, and a part of this marshy place had been used by the prisoners as a sink, and excrement covered the ground, the scent arising from which was suffocating. The ground allotted to our ninety was near the edge of this plague-spot, and how we were to live through the warm summer weather in the midst of such fearful surroundings, was more than we cared to think of just then."

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

The teacher from Georgia might think this was indoctrination.

That's not an answer.

[besson3c]

Indoctrination is just another word some people on the right use when being intellectually lazy, along with "socialist", "communist", etc. which also have very specific meanings that are constantly misused to basically be shorthand for "something I generically don't like". Indoctrination just basically means "expressing an opinion I disagree with in a certain setting", which is not hard to do given the fairly narrow ideological range of conservative beliefs.

It is this stupid drama queen rhetoric that is going to make it hard to gain inroads with some independent voters. I wish politicians would just use accurate language without all of the emotionally manipulative read such as this, and I wish even more emphatically that this wouldn't work in the first place.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

That's not an answer.

Inculcating a young skull full of mush about how evil the Confederacy was and is vile treatment of benevolent Union soldiers is not indoctrinating?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Inculcating a young skull full of mush about how evil the Confederacy was and is vile treatment of benevolent Union soldiers is not indoctrinating?

Maybe the problem is that you can't see validity in some other point of view here?

[besson3c]

Indoctrination is, I believe, interchangeable with brain washing - a consistent and deliberate manipulative attempt to persuade on multiple occasions where the same message is repeated over and over again ala Clockwork Orange or 1984 or something. Just expressing an opinion is not indoctrination, ever.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Inculcating a young skull full of mush about how evil the Confederacy was and is vile treatment of benevolent Union soldiers is not indoctrinating?

It's a historical account by someone who was there. Presented in a vacuum it could perhaps paint things in unfair light – but that's assuming that there's plenty of evidence to the contrary, and that the person reading it hasn't the smallest modicum of common sense that there might be bias considering the source.


By the way, I find a certain hypocrisy in how those who fear indoctrination of children refer to their minds as so young and impressionable, yet somehow seem unable to mold those minds whom they are raising to their own liking in the more malleable 18 years prior to their entry to higher education.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

How about you just concentrate on making well thought out arguments and stop worrying about how the arguments of others make you feel? I'm not going to concede something just for the sake of making others feel good about themselves when their arguments provide nothing for concession. If there's something that I don't disagree with, I usually just don't comment on it.

Which is why debating with you is generally a complete waste of time. There is nothing anybody could ever say that would make you consider the notion that your viewpoint is flawed, because you will just debate for the sake of debate, probably because you feel too insecure to expose anything that could be perceived as a weakness.

This whole line of debate about non poli-sci classes generally involving "indoctrination", or at least enough so that this should be identified as a national issue (or simply considering that perhaps your experiences were unique and rare), is a great opportunity for to back off and recognize that your ridiculous viewpoints are just that, but you won't come around no matter what is said, and you'll convince yourself that this is so because your viewpoint is the right one.

So, what's the point of discussing anything with you? Give up a little ground every once in a while and discussions with you might be a little more enjoyable and interesting, and learn that your feeling of self-worth does not have to be tethered to your righteousness.

You're welcome.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

By the way, I find a certain hypocrisy in how those who fear indoctrination of children refer to their minds as so young and impressionable, yet somehow seem unable to mold those minds whom they are raising to their own liking in the more malleable 18 years prior to their entry to higher education.

That's a great point.

Ideas introduced to adults that they can discard should almost never, if ever, be threatening.

[subego]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Indoctrination is, I believe, interchangeable with brain washing - a consistent and deliberate manipulative attempt to persuade on multiple occasions where the same message is repeated over and over again ala Clockwork Orange or 1984 or something. Just expressing an opinion is not indoctrination, ever.

Hmmm... I'd say consistency is the only real requirement.

It isn't expressing an opinion, it's expressing an opinion over and over.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

That's a great point.

Ideas introduced to adults that they can discard should almost never, if ever, be threatening.

Do paraphrase WJC
It depends on what your definition of what adult is

Originally Posted by subego 

Hmmm... I'd say consistency is the only real requirement.

It isn't expressing an opinion, it's expressing an opinion over and over.

GODWIN'S LAW ALERT!!!!!!!!!!!


Joseph Goebbels could not have said it better.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

By the way, I find a certain hypocrisy in how those who fear indoctrination of children refer to their minds as so young and impressionable, yet somehow seem unable to mold those minds whom they are raising to their own liking in the more malleable 18 years prior to their entry to higher education.

Along the same lines, I never see any acknowledgement of the basic market principles at play. Could higher education lean left because young people (the market they are seving) lean left? Teaching is a low paying, high-stress job. Which political philosophy would find this career prospect more attractive?

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Along the same lines, I never see any acknowledgement of the basic market principles at play. Could higher education lean left because young people (the market they are seving) lean left? Teaching is a low paying, high-stress job. Which political philosophy would find this career prospect more attractive?

Or perhaps it doesn't pay enough for the other ideology? (I don't)

I remember college, and you'll find the divisions run along predictable subjects. Unless my JFK-hating, Nixon-loving history prof is a figment of my imagination.

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by subego 

Along the same lines, I never see any acknowledgement of the basic market principles at play. Could higher education lean left because young people (the market they are seving) lean left? Teaching is a low paying, high-stress job. Which political philosophy would find this career prospect more attractive?

Cleon Skousen, author of "The Naked Communist" wrote back in the stone age:

Goal #17:Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

[subego]

Georges Clemenceau wrote "Not to be a socialist at twenty is proof of want of heart; to be one at thirty is proof of want of head."

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by Chongo 

Cleon Skousen, author of "The Naked Communist" wrote back in the stone age:

Goal #17:Get control of the schools. Use them as transmission belts for socialism and current Communist propaganda. Soften the curriculum. Get control of teachers' associations. Put the party line in textbooks.

…and this proves?

[The Final Dakar]

Also, I take it discussing the Civil War example was one those exercises in futility?

[subego]

Chongo can be mercurial.

[Waragainstsleep]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

…and this proves?

That creationists can read?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by subego 

What's the difference between "teaching something you don't agree with/believe" and "indoctrination"?

When one strays from base facts, and veers into opinion. This is often done in the guise of "analysis."

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Which is why debating with you is generally a complete waste of time. There is nothing anybody could ever say that would make you consider the notion that your viewpoint is flawed, because you will just debate for the sake of debate, probably because you feel too insecure to expose anything that could be perceived as a weakness.

I typically don't debate points which are open for logical rebuttal. You're right. If I take the time to point out a huge flaw in someone's argument, it's probably a waste of time to try and go ahead and tilt at windmills and attempt to go ahead and try to make an illogical argument, or one not supported by facts, fly. That exercise isn't one you can blame me for though. That's all on you.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

When one strays from base facts, and veers into opinion. This is often done in the guise of "analysis."

You just provided the definition of an "editorial".

I suppose in your mind though you're right, and your definition is completely interchangeable with indoctrination, and you know better than the dictionary?

Why am I wasting my time?

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

You just provided the definition of an "editorial".

Why is it that students should be subject to biased editorials by those tasked with teaching them the facts?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Why is it that students should be subject to biased editorials by those tasked with teaching them the facts?

You're changing the subject.

Here is your opportunity to admit that "indoctrination" is not the most appropriate word to use here (hint: it's too strong). Surprise us.

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

You're changing the subject.

How so? An "editorial" by nature is an expression of opinion on an issue, formed by one's own biases. Your argument seems to be that what the professors are doing is editorializing in the classroom. It's not an example of the professors just reporting the facts and letting the students make their own decisions as to what they mean. When higher education shows a pattern of editorializing from the left to influence those it's supposed to be teaching, I can't see how that's not an attempt to indoctrinate.

Here is your opportunity to admit that "indoctrination" is not the most appropriate word to use here (hint: it's too strong). Surprise us.

Here's your chance to stop making nonsensical arguments that don't require me to rebut them in ways that make you look silly. Surprise us and just stop.

[subego]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

When one strays from base facts, and veers into opinion. This is often done in the guise of "analysis."

You must have been a riot in English class.

[besson3c]

I give up.

Okay stupendousman, you are absolutely right. Those early music classes that you can take will be filled with attempts to indoctrinate young, easily impressionable unknowing victims by using sackbuts and harpsichords as clever catalysts, and whatever experiences you had in school are an exact representation of norms. The fact that I went to 3 music higher ed schools, my wife 2, and I can't tell you the politics of my professors because we were too busy talking music is invalid too, because you feel that there is left wing indoctrination going on at such a wide endemic scale that this needs to be discussed at the national level.

I'm done, and once again, to close, you have obvious insecurity issues.

[subego]

TIL what a "sackbut" is.

[besson3c]

My typical theory class was something like this:

- showed up at 9 AM, got out the books
- "we are going to look at variations of I Got Rhythm chord changes today, and if we have time, Coltrane reharmonizations of some standards he recorded and how he figured out these alternate progressions
- "I hope you had a good weekend. Just a reminder, there will be a quiz this Friday on the last two chapters of the text, I recommend showing up for this class"
- "Oh, did I ever mention to you guys how big of a fascist and a fiscal and environmental disaster Ronald Reagan was? Yeah, he was kind of the worst thing that has happened to America and to music this century.... Anyhoo, on to those chord changes!"

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

My typical theory class was something like this

Theory...not "history" or "appreciation."

Noted.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Theory...not "history" or "appreciation."

Noted.

You got me bad here!

Yes, I was a music student (but not an early music student), music theory is a class that music students take. We were all heavily indoctrinated first thing in the morning in that class, and that was just how a typical day began... wait until I get to my improv or arranging classes!

[stupendousman]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

You got me bad here!

Yes, I was a music student (but not an early music student), music theory is a class that music students take. We were all heavily indoctrinated first thing in the morning in that class, and that was just how a typical day began... wait until I get to my improv or arranging classes!

Of course it's hard to veer certain topics that don't really allow for opinions towards the left. For instance, you'd be hard pressed to find a left-leaning calculus course. However, there's a vast number of classes and subject matters that are ripe for the type of political editorializing I referred to.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

Chongo can be mercurial.

Really? Because I find his posting to be fairly predictable.

[subego]

Originally Posted by The Final Dakar 

Really? Because I find his posting to be fairly predictable.

I mean mercurial like actual mercury.

[The Final Dakar]

Poisonous if he comes into contact with your skin?

[subego]

More you shouldn't get it in your mouth.

That, and that any attempt to pin it down is doomed to fail.

[The Final Dakar]

Originally Posted by subego 

More you shouldn't get it in your mouth.

You're thinking of Santorum.

Originally Posted by subego 

That, and that any attempt to pin it down is doomed to fail.

That's not quite it, though. I know my (post) history. It amuses me to ask simple things like "What do you mean" and "What is the point" and that is enough to make him disappear like a fart in the wind.

I suppose that's what you get when your approach to these threads is to throw shit on the wall and see what sticks, very rarely even bothering to aim.

[subego]

Call me crazy, but I actually like that in controlled doses.

However you want to fault him for not replying, his Civil War example is excellent WRT people teaching opinion as fact. Far better than the other examples given.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by stupendousman 

Of course it's hard to veer certain topics that don't really allow for opinions towards the left. For instance, you'd be hard pressed to find a left-leaning calculus course. However, there's a vast number of classes and subject matters that are ripe for the type of political editorializing I referred to.

It is nice to see that you are backing off of the word "indoctrinate". Maybe you are teachable.

If your original claim had been about general left wing bias or about editorialization I probably wouldn't have responded, I responded because the word "indoctrinate" is totally overblown and designed to illicit emotional responses. I'm tired of politicians manipulating people with fear mongering and emotional statements, and this goes for any politician, so save us your examples of Obama or anybody else appealing to emotions, I have not claimed that this is exclusive to the right.

I will say however, to change the topic, that the right seems to be doing a great job this time around making a strong claim as the party for:

- ideologically narrow people
- fear mongers, whether this is anti-Obama or anything else
- religious zealots with particularly backwards ways of thinking
- "persecuted" Christians
- zealots that have a hard time controlling and getting past their emotions

This is not necessarily new, but I'm thinking that their image is increasingly ugly to those who do not fall into this narrow demographic. Time will tell if I'm on to something here, I guess.