Old, but for those who don't know...

[J.]

Also incidently, the one guy I know with a doctorate is a hardcore Reagan-fanboy republican.....

Probably because he makes a lot of money. Usually the wealthy (SEE: Oil billionaires and wealthy plumbers like Joe) vote conservative, because they get butthurt when someone mentions raising taxes.

 

[skeptik]

You got some data to back that up?

Dude, have you never taken a basic political science course? That's one of the first things you learn concerning voting trends. The higher education one receives, the more likely they are to vote Democratic or liberally. I amazingly can't find any fucking information on voting trends on the internet right now for some fucking reason, and I actually searched my house for my old textbooks, but I evidently sold them, and the electronic reserve documents have been taken down...I'll try to get back to you on this, but it's been statistically shown numerous times that the most highly educated and the most lowly educated both tend to vote that way.

Even if provided data backed that statement up, "educated" is way too broad of a term. Educated in what? An education on one subject does not necessarily lend intelligence to another.

Also incidently, the one guy I know with a doctorate is a hardcore Reagan-fanboy republican.....

I was not equating education with intelligence, unlike you equating private schooling with superiority over public schooling.

I don't have data that correlate education with voting patterns, but I shared an article in my facebook profile a while ago that correlated education with liberalism. Generally, someone with a higher IQ tends to be less religious and less conservative, but they still end up behaving more appropriately by conservative standards, ie. later sexual debut and fewer life time sexual partners.

I was referring to liberalism in terms strictly in terms of norms regarding voting trends, just for clarification's sake.

There is a difference between innate intelligence and how much information you have accumulated. The whole "dumb smart person" bit etc.

I've seen statistics based off the reqs you listed and would concur, a more intelligent person would behave less liberally, at least when it came to sex if nothing else.

wat

I like how you refuse to acknowledge the authority of surveys, but yet your personal anecdotal experience of the people you know who went to private school and the smartest person you know is perfectly acceptable.

 

[The Ozzman]

Dude, have you never taken a basic political science course?

I never took political science in college. The closest I came was a semester of government and a semester of sociology in high school, but I'll be damned if I can remember half the shit we went over then

 

[skeptik]

I'm thinking about e-mailing my old professor to see if she can direct me to this information. I just spent the last half hour trying to dig this up, and it's annoying me now. Anyway, the explanation is that the higher education you go, the more likely you are to vote for ideological purposes. Now that I think about it, colleges are generally considered "bastions of liberalism" and the like, so this shouldn't be surprising data.

 

[AchrisK]

I'm thinking about e-mailing my old professor to see if she can direct me to this information. I just spent the last half hour trying to dig this up, and it's annoying me now. Anyway, the explanation is that the higher education you go, the more likely you are to vote for ideological purposes. Now that I think about it, colleges are generally considered "bastions of liberalism" and the like, so this shouldn't be surprising data.

I believe you probably will find a correlation between higher education and liberal thought, but I tend to think it is for the reason in your last sentence. Not because they have more information, but because like begets like.

Now I also have a theory on why they became liberal in the fist place, but it is based on my belief in Christianity, and I don't want to start a religious debate.

 

[Dak]

I like how you refuse to acknowledge the authority of surveys, but yet your personal anecdotal experience of the people you know who went to private school and the smartest person you know is perfectly acceptable.

my turn to say "wat"

No, I don't consider it as the absolute. However, I will say I really haven't met any smart, publically educated individuals.

unlike you equating private schooling with superiority over public schooling.

Since you like statistics, here is the: Nations Report Card (Test scores are NOT surveys btw)

I like how the study adjusted for the "socio-economic factor" and by 8th grade it didn't even matter anyway.

Also [incidently] although I didn't go to a public or private grade school and didn't finish college, and I outscored like 90%+ of the enlisted US military on the AQFT/GT scores. Never took the SATs so I don't have the scores from that to wave around or I would. (Disclaimer: my opinion) Bottom line is, a publically funded liberal indoctrination does not qualify as a real education. Of course those who spend more time getting told what to think , think like those who taught them.

(Waits for someone to post a reply that utilizes the intelligent responses of "faggot", "gtfo", "kill yourself" "you bring new meanings to the word stupider" etc.)

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

my turn to say "wat"

No, I don't consider it as the absolute. However, I will say I really haven't met any smart, publically educated individuals.

Die, faggot.

Happy?

Bottom line is, a publically funded liberal indoctrination does not qualify as a real education. Of course those who spend more time getting told what to think , think like those who taught them.

Whoa did you really just say this?

 

[Cythraul]

Academia certainly is a bastion of liberalism, and I suppose leftism more broadly. I attribute this in part to insidious Jewish influence. Robert Nozick (my hero) has a little something to say about why large parts of academia tend to be opposed to capitalism: http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n1-1.html

edit: not so sure if his explanation is all that great, but it's interesting.

 

[MasterOLightning]

I'm used to the term 'mixed economy' and not so much 'social democracy'

Maybe because you've never taken a political science course. "Social democracy" has specific implications about how money is spent, whereas "mixed economy" does not.

 

[MasterOLightning]

Incidently, based off of the people I have known in life, the trend seams to be that publicly educated people vote democrat and the privately educated vote republican........now why would that be?

Do you even fucking know the fucking difference between correlation and causation you fucking cockwhore? Or is that too liberal of a concept for you?

 

[Cythraul]

Dang, MasterOLightning gettin' all irate up in this bitch. Now there's something I never thought I'd see.

 

[MasterOLightning]

I'm not even drunk. This guy is either the most daft human on the planet, or the best troll I've ever seen.

 

[Dak]

Die, faggot.

Happy?

Whoa did you really just say this?

Again, provided nothing.

those who spend more time getting told what to think, think like those who taught them.

If you do not believe this sir,you need serious help.

Do you even fucking know the fucking difference between correlation and causation you fucking cockwhore? Or is that too liberal of a concept for you?

Oops, left out random usage of the word cock. You are missing the point entirely while getting wrapped around the axle on something said fairly tongue-in-cheek. Way to not make yourself look like a blithering knee-jerk responder.

Correlation does not imply causation specifically when referring to the education itself, however, I would say there is causation when you turn the focus to socioeconimic influences.

I'm not even drunk. This guy is either the most daft human on the planet, or the best troll I've ever seen.

Still amazed at accusations of troll due to nonconformence to the majority view, or being called all forms of stupid. I realize it is hard to understand what it looks like outside the box when all you've known is the inside.

 

[cookiecutter]

Dodens and Ozzman:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Modern...ited_States#Demographics_of_American_liberals

"Of those who identified as liberal, 49% were college graduates and 41% had household incomes exceeding $75,000, compared to 27% and 28% as the national average, respectively."

 

[AchrisK]

Academia certainly is a bastion of liberalism, and I suppose leftism more broadly. I attribute this in part to insidious Jewish influence. Robert Nozick (my hero) has a little something to say about why large parts of academia tend to be opposed to capitalism: http://www.cato.org/pubs/policy_report/cpr-20n1-1.html

edit: not so sure if his explanation is all that great, but it's interesting.

In my post I said I had a theory about how liberalism ended up being the primary view in the universities, but it mainly deals with the social aspect. I had no clue, and even momentarily forgot, about the fiscal aspect. That article is very interesting, and seems to make logical sense.

 

[cookiecutter]

Robert Nozick is an asshole and the Cato Institue is retarded. I had to read a lot of their bullshit when I was working over the summer.

 

[AchrisK]

^Did you read that article? Do you have specific arguments with the ideas presented?

 

[V.V.V.V.V.]

So do you morons who think college-grads are only more liberal because they've been indoctrinated (lmfao) think that because everyone in college is fucking stupid and can't think for themselves? This is incredibly untrue, even in public universities like mine which is even a STATE school (Dakryn, go fuck off).

In order to teach at a university, you usually need a degree yourself, meaning that by your logic, this "indoctrination" goes back quiiiiite a while. Personally I think that notion is pure and unadulterated shenanigans.

I've never met a smart hard-right person or one who didn't have serious logic problems, stupid lines of thinking, completely regressive idea(l)s etc. I'm actually pretty moderate (leaning left obviously but yeah) and think pretty critically about both parties' positions and ideas, but I'm just stating something I've noticed.

 

[AchrisK]

Well, I didn't write that article, and I previously had not thought much about the whole idea. Cythraul himself said that he is not entirely convinced by the guys conclusions. The author even talked about the potential problems and ways it could be better. I read the article and could see where the guy was going. I mean, he is using whatever research methods he knows and trying to come to conclusions. There is some sort of correlation. I think that "like begets like" is a valid idea and the fact that "72% of full-time faculty [identify themselves] as liberal" (from cookie's link), supports the idea. Nobody said educated people are stupid and cannot think for themselves. But our views are shaped by our experiences and upbringings and observations. Where is the huge flaw in the logic? Is it that you don't like it? So what do you think the relation is?

 

[Cythraul]

Robert Nozick is an asshole and the Cato Institue is retarded. I had to read a lot of their bullshit when I was working over the summer.

Why exactly do you think Robert Nozick is an asshole? And what is your point anyway? That has nothing to do with the plausibility of his views.

Well, I didn't write that article, and I previously had not thought much about the whole idea. Cythraul himself said that he is not entirely convinced by the guys conclusions.

Well, I don't know if V5 was responding to anything in the article I linked but I will say that the article had nothing to do with indoctrination.