Massassi Forums Logo

This is the static archive of the Massassi Forums. The forums are closed indefinitely. Thanks for all the memories!

You can also download Super Old Archived Message Boards from when Massassi first started.

"View" counts are as of the day the forums were archived, and will no longer increase.

☖ Forums → Discussion Forum → Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401
Inauguration Day, Inauguration Hooooooraaay!
2018-10-19, 8:57 PM #12081
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Did he really make a list? That's pretty scary.


Yes. And posted it online.
2018-10-19, 8:58 PM #12082
E.g.: http://sites.math.rutgers.edu/~zeilberg/Opinion81.html
2018-10-19, 9:00 PM #12083
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
But look, we don't need to turn this into an ideological battle. I think it's pretty common knowledge that academia in general can be extremely insular.


Insular in what way? It's not like right-wingers are writing coherent, well-researched rebuttals that actually match the format. The response by these people is to hurl **** in the form of Youtube rants and Twitter posts.
2018-10-19, 9:05 PM #12084
Probably part of it is, since gender studies writes about things people are familiar with, i.e. gender, laymen are more easily impassioned and quicker to think they understand everything. Whereas a physics paper could be published with equally as stupid crap, but there's no reason anyone ever would read it or care, or ever want to get political about it.
2018-10-19, 9:07 PM #12085
Let's not lose the forest for the trees. You originally wrote:

Originally posted by Reid:
FWIW, I don't get this "university culture" thing. People hardly ever talk politics in either academic department I've been in. Maybe it's a math thing, IDK. Most everyone is liberal, but it's not like we don't have conservatives who we get along with fine.


Is it so hard to fathom that there exist university departments which are sufficiently insular and ideologically motivated (and therefore seemingly lacking in scholarship), that they attract students who conservatives are already predisposed to disagree with? Of course conservatives are going to be up in arms. And don't pretend that the students in these departments aren't going to skew far left. You can choose to call that statistical correlation "university culture" or not. My only point was that the phrase (if it is to have any meaning) clearly can't be applied uniformly across departments.
2018-10-19, 9:10 PM #12086
Originally posted by Reid:
Probably part of it is, since gender studies writes about things people are familiar with, i.e. gender, laymen are more easily impassioned and quicker to think they understand everything. Whereas a physics paper could be published with equally as stupid crap, but there's no reason anyone ever would read it or care, or ever want to get political about it.


Yes, physicists have already obsessed over this reality, it's called the Sokal Hoax.
2018-10-19, 9:12 PM #12087
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Is it so hard to fathom that there exist university departments which are sufficiently insular and ideologically motivated (and therefore seemingly lacking in scholarship), which seem to be filled with students who conservatives are already predisposed to disagree with? Of course conservatives are going to be up in arms. And don't pretend that the students in these departments are going to skew far left. You can choose to call that statistical correlation "culture" or not.


I don't think ideology drives these people that much.
2018-10-19, 9:12 PM #12088
Maybe not in your academic department. Hey, aren't you a philosophy and history buff? Can you seriously say with a straight face that people who are most passionate about these things aren't ideologically motivated?
2018-10-19, 9:14 PM #12089
Did you really think that the point of becoming a professor in Women's Studies wasn't to influence the next generation of students into implementing social change? (Note that this is not the same thing as scholarship.) I mean, what do you think feminism is?
2018-10-19, 9:19 PM #12090
Originally posted by Reid:
So like, yeah, there's some stupid stuff written. I don't go out of my way to find them or memorize these instances, and I don't know why you would. Just.. why?


Oh I dunno, maybe to get an A in the class, like I did?

Quote:
It's like writing a screed against physics because of how dumb they were to allow cold fusion papers to be published.


Get back to me on that when they start purvaying cold fusion in lower division physics survey classes as established science.
2018-10-19, 9:23 PM #12091
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Yes, physicists have already obsessed over this reality, it's called the Sokal Hoax.


1. Postmodernism is not gender studies is not women's studies

2. Sokal is an ******* with an ideological agenda as fierce as anyone in postmodernism

3. The journal that **** was published in wasn't even peer reviewed, and was still almost rejected, being forced through by Sokal's insistence and position only

4. Hard science journals also can have gibberish published.

One thing you need to understand: being published is in itself not that important. Academics care far more about the quality of the journal than about whether a paper was published at all. Call me when Sokal gets his paper published in a leading journal.

So, yeah, if you commit academic fraud and scrape the bottom of the barrel for journals, you may just get something published where it shouldn't be. And if you're an ideologue seeking to create propaganda bits, you can make it seem like a really disturbing indictment. I don't think it's that important of a revelation.
2018-10-19, 9:24 PM #12092
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Did you really think that the point of becoming a professor in Women's Studies wasn't to influence the next generation of students into implementing social change? (Note that this is not the same thing as scholarship.) I mean, what do you think feminism is?


No, the point of Women's Studies is to study women. Is that seriously hard to grasp?

Like that paper I mentioned above: you think someone went through old Nazi wartime records to advance social justice today? Get real.
2018-10-19, 9:27 PM #12093
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Get back to me on that when they start purvaying cold fusion in lower division physics survey classes as established science.


Cold fusion is outright rejected in mainstream academic journals lol, if you haven't been caught up on that it's crankery, like perpetual motion or proofs of the Riemann Hypothesis.
2018-10-19, 9:28 PM #12094
Originally posted by Reid:
1. Postmodernism is not gender studies is not women's studies

2. Sokal is an ******* with an ideological agenda as fierce as anyone in postmodernism

3. The journal that **** was published in wasn't even peer reviewed, and was still almost rejected, being forced through by Sokal's insistence and position only

4. Hard science journals also can have gibberish published.

One thing you need to understand: being published is in itself not that important. Academics care far more about the quality of the journal than about whether a paper was published at all. Call me when Sokal gets his paper published in a leading journal.

So, yeah, if you commit academic fraud and scrape the bottom of the barrel for journals, you may just get something published where it shouldn't be. And if you're an ideologue seeking to create propaganda bits, you can make it seem like a really disturbing indictment. I don't think it's that important of a revelation.


Just to be clear, I did not mean to imply that Sokal in any way bolstered any of the points I was making. I only brought it up as an aside, because you seemed to imply his point in one of your own posts.
2018-10-19, 9:30 PM #12095
Originally posted by Reid:
No, the point of Women's Studies is to study women. Is that seriously hard to grasp?


Sure. And Homeopathy is about curing disease. Are you this naive?
2018-10-19, 9:32 PM #12096
Originally posted by Reid:
Cold fusion is outright rejected in mainstream academic journals lol, if you haven't been caught up on that it's crankery, like perpetual motion or proofs of the Riemann Hypothesis.


Does all the patriarchy-laced Kool-Aid ideology appear in mainstream journals outside some insular Women's Studies publication? I'd be surprised if it did.
2018-10-19, 9:33 PM #12097
Note that I am not saying that we should reject entire academic departments wholesale (or make enemies lists, etc.). I am sure there are plenty of fantastic professors who do great scholarship in Women's Studies. Unfortunately the survey class I took was mostly about feminist ideology that had made itself into what was billed as a survey course of the Abrahamic religions, feigning to be anthropology, but with the obvious intent of inculcating us into this universal boogieman of the "patriarchy". No alternate point of view was presented.
2018-10-19, 9:37 PM #12098
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Sure. And Homeopathy is about curing disease. Are you this naive?


I don't know what kind of world view makes you think everyone is ideologically crusading, and nobody can just be interested in just studying things.
2018-10-19, 9:39 PM #12099
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Note that I am not saying that we should reject entire academic departments wholesale (or make enemies lists, etc.). I am sure there are plenty of fantastic professors who do great scholarship in Women's Studies. Unfortunately the survey class I took was mostly about feminist ideology that had made itself into what was billed as a survey course of the Abrahamic religions, feigning to be anthropology, but with the obvious intent of inculcating us into this universal boogieman of the "patriarchy". No alternate point of view was presented.


Western society is patriarchal. As in, quite literally, it has been run primarily by men for centuries. Any specific claim about that is questionable, sure, but if you reject the basic fact you're rejecting something which is very obviously true.
2018-10-19, 9:43 PM #12100
Yes, and the Old Testament is "just studying" the human condition. Surely it isn't about enforcing a very narrow set of tribal norms!

Did it ever occur to you that the humanities are in imprecise in nature, and that humans in general are ideologically motivated? That is the entire point of subjecting your viewpoints to opposing views. Which is what's notably going to be absent if you only publish in journals where people already hold the same worldview as yourself, frame questions in the same way, avoid the same taboos, etc.

I really do think you have a wee bit too much faith in academia in its capacity to overcome the inherent biases in human cognition. Academia is just as vulnerable to groupthink as everybody else, and it only gets worse when you're working in subjects for which there can never be an objective standard to judge the quality of a paper.
2018-10-19, 9:45 PM #12101
Originally posted by Reid:
I don't know what kind of world view makes you think everyone is ideologically crusading, and nobody can just be interested in just studying things.


An accurate one.
I agree with RJ on this one (I hate when that happens). I had instructors outright tell us on the first day of class that they were going to try to "dissuade you of your belief in a god," "convince you to become a vegan," and "show you that socialism is the only moral system."
All of the liberal arts and humanities courses I took were so socially and politically colored Joncy could have written them.
None of my beliefs were shattered and my world wasn't shaken, but I don't need to be convinced on anything. Just present the information and let the learners decide.
2018-10-19, 9:47 PM #12102
Originally posted by Reid:
Western society is patriarchal. As in, quite literally, it has been run primarily by men for centuries. Any specific claim about that is questionable, sure, but if you reject the basic fact you're rejecting something which is very obviously true.


Of course their theories aren't wrong. What's concerning is that they can't be wrong, in the sense of Wolfgang Pauli. OK, we live in this thing called a patriarchy. What now? Oh, look, here's problem X in society! Oh, I know what caused this, it was a man's fault!

Should the patriarchal aspects of society be acknowledged and studied? Of course. Should the fact that Western Civilization is patriarchal in many ways be sole basis for some vast number of explanations for everything except the kitchen sink in all of the humanities? I don't think so, but you're kidding yourself if you don't think folks who do are alive and kicking in academia.
2018-10-19, 9:48 PM #12103
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Yes, and the Old Testament is "just studying" the human condition. Surely it isn't about enforcing a very narrow set of tribal norms!


If you can't handle the basic fact that western society is patriarchal, then I think it's more that your ideological bias is getting in the way of fact.

Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Did it ever occur to you that the humanities are in imprecise in nature, and that humans in general are ideologically motivated?


Well, I do happen to think that in some sense, but if you want to discuss people's persistent motivations in some kind of Heideggerian sense, then I think it's clear why some people have a real big ****in problem with noting obvious facts about history, like how colonization worked, how women were treated, and so forth. IDK, what do you think it says about the motivations of men who can't simply acknowledge that western society is patriarchal?

Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
That is the entire point of subjecting your viewpoints to opposing views. Which is what's notably going to be absent if you only publish in journals where people already hold the same worldview as yourself, frame questions in the same way, avoid the same taboos, etc.

I really do think you have a wee bit too much faith in academia in its capacity to overcome the inherent biases in human cognition. Academia is just as vulnerable to groupthink as everybody else, and it only gets worse when you're working in subjects for which there can never be an objective standard to judge the quality of a paper.


I think you have some really dumb notion of how academia is "supposed" to work, and are holding academia to your made-up standard. You're welcome to preach, but realize how what you're saying sounds.
2018-10-19, 9:51 PM #12104
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Of course their theories aren't wrong. What's concerning is that they can't be wrong, in the sense of Wolfgang Pauli. OK, we live in this thing called a patriarchy. What now? Oh, look, here's problem X in society! Oh, I know what caused this, it was a man's fault!

Should the patriarchal aspects of society be acknowledged and studied? Of course. Should the fact that Western Civilization is patriarchal in many ways be sole basis for some vast number of explanations for everything except the kitchen sink in all of the humanities? I don't think so, but you're kidding yourself if you don't think folks who do are alive and kicking in academia.


Of course some people exist like that. And it's nice you can admit that these studies exist and have a legitimate purpose. I guess we're done talking now? Other than that you seemingly want to purge the undesirables and ideologically control what's taught, or something, I'm not really sure what your exact problem/solution is.
2018-10-19, 9:52 PM #12105
Originally posted by Reid:
If you can't handle the basic fact that western society is patriarchal, then I think it's more that your ideological bias is getting in the way of fact.


Of course I can handle it! I'm a man. It's everyone else who's got the short end of the stick, right?
2018-10-19, 9:52 PM #12106
dekulakize gender studies, get some men in there
2018-10-19, 9:52 PM #12107
Originally posted by Reid:
Of course some people exist like that. And it's nice you can admit that these studies exist and have a legitimate purpose. I guess we're done talking now? Other than that you seemingly want to purge the undesirables and ideologically control what's taught, or something, I'm not really sure what your exact problem/solution is.


At least now you're talking to me instead of pretending that everyone who disagrees with your far-left worldview is an ideologically motivated conservative!
2018-10-19, 9:54 PM #12108
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Of course I can handle it! I'm a man. It's everyone else who's got the short end of the stick, right?


I guess the education at your alma mater was pretty poor if this is all you were able to get from your class, because they seemingly taught you exactly the right wing stereotypes of their own positions.
2018-10-19, 9:54 PM #12109
Note that my sole purpose for discussing this matter is to persuade you that your original remark,

Originally posted by Reid:
FWIW, I don't get this "university culture" thing. People hardly ever talk politics in either academic department I've been in. Maybe it's a math thing, IDK. Most everyone is liberal, but it's not like we don't have conservatives who we get along with fine.


seems more than a little odd, when it's so clear to me that you're going to have pretty strong ideological currents in certain departments. My only point was you clearly weren't looking in the right places if you think it doesn't exist.
2018-10-19, 9:55 PM #12110
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
At least now you're talking to me instead of pretending that everyone who disagrees with your far-left worldview is an ideologically motivated conservative!


get outta here, you ideologically motivated conservative, i'm indoctrinating students with my far-left worldview
2018-10-19, 9:55 PM #12111
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Note that my sole purpose for discussing this matter is to persuade you that your original remark,

seems more than a little odd, when it's so clear to me that you're going to have pretty strong ideological currents in certain departments. My only point was you clearly weren't looking in the right places if you think it doesn't exist.


It seems weird to point out something to me I say in my own post.
2018-10-19, 9:56 PM #12112
Originally posted by Reid:
I guess the education at your alma mater was pretty poor if this is all you were able to get from your class, because they seemingly taught you exactly the right wing stereotypes of their own positions.


Oh, don't blame the quality of the entire college on the low quality of one academic department. And these people teach in many schools, not just the college that offered this particular course.
2018-10-19, 9:58 PM #12113
Originally posted by Reid:
It seems weird to point out something to me I say in my own post.


It's weird to quote you, in order to put my responses in context, and in order to keep the discussion focused?

As far as I know, you haven't conceded that this fabled "university culture" actually might exist, which is what I've been trying to argue here (and I think I've argued my point fairly convincingly).
2018-10-19, 10:01 PM #12114
Originally posted by Reid:
I guess the education at your alma mater was pretty poor if this is all you were able to get from your class, because they seemingly taught you exactly the right wing stereotypes of their own positions.


Note that the possibility exists as well that what you are calling "right wing stereotypes" are in fact true insights that are held by conservatives, but which you cannot possibly acknowledge, due to your apparent universal assumption that nothing a conservative says can be anything but biased, misguided, right wing ideology.

The fact that you yourself have claimed that you don't know about and don't care about the shortcomings of the scholarship in these departments, but nevertheless feel the need to claim that whatever it is it must be good enough for you, well, that's the kind of arrogant elitism that is creating the kind of wide open holes for conservatives to come in and legitimately glom onto.
2018-10-19, 10:04 PM #12115
Originally posted by Reid:
I think you have some really dumb notion of how academia is "supposed" to work, and are holding academia to your made-up standard. You're welcome to preach, but realize how what you're saying sounds.


Is peer review is too high a standard?
2018-10-19, 10:07 PM #12116
Originally posted by Reverend Jones:
Note that the possibility exists as well that what you are calling "right wing stereotypes" are in fact true insights that are held by conservatives, but which you cannot possibly acknowledge, due to your apparent universal assumption that nothing a conservative says can be anything but biased, misguided, right wing ideology.

The fact that you yourself have claimed that you don't know about and don't care about the shortcomings of the scholarship in these departments, but nevertheless feel the need to claim that whatever it is it must be good enough for you, well, that's the kind of arrogant elitism that is creating the kind of wide open holes for conservatives to come in and legitimately glom onto.


Note: I don't know about it either! But the question of whether or not so-called "third wave feminism" even goes through peer review has come up on this board before (I won't mention names because I don't want to drag anybody into this somewhat silly discussion).

I'd say that I don't have an ideological axe to grind here, but admit to having a limited amount of personal experience that has colored my views perhaps more strongly than appropriate (or maybe it's just the tip of the iceberg, who knows).
2018-10-19, 10:11 PM #12117
But here's a start from a naive Google search that lands you on Quora.

[quote=Some Random Dude on Quora]
One of the more significant and valid criticisms of intersectional feminism is on an academic level. Much of the work done by intersectional feminists in academia is, to put it politely, less than credible.[/quote]
2018-10-19, 10:12 PM #12118
Originally posted by Steven:
An accurate one.
I agree with RJ on this one (I hate when that happens). I had instructors outright tell us on the first day of class that they were going to try to "dissuade you of your belief in a god," "convince you to become a vegan," and "show you that socialism is the only moral system."
All of the liberal arts and humanities courses I took were so socially and politically colored Joncy could have written them.
None of my beliefs were shattered and my world wasn't shaken, but I don't need to be convinced on anything. Just present the information and let the learners decide.


That's what you get for taking blow-off courses.
2018-10-19, 10:18 PM #12119
At least in the United States, non-engineering students are required to take a large number (IIRC, around 10) survey courses that have nothing to do with their major. There are upsides and downsides to this. As a science major, I think I could probably have benefited from having taken more courses related to my major in my freshman and sophmore years. On the other hand, because high school education is so pathetically poor here, I actually learned a hell of a lot that had been hitherto lacking in my education in my survey courses... at least, the ones that covered actual, scholarly subjects--particularly, world history, which was one of the best courses I ever took, and which also drastically improved my research skills at a very early stage of my college career.
2018-10-19, 10:20 PM #12120
Amusingly, another "blow off" course that I took that really helped me in life was a nutrition science survey course. Being shown how to use PubMed was an eye opener that I've made use of ever since.
123456789101112131415161718192021222324252627282930313233343536373839404142434445464748495051525354555657585960616263646566676869707172737475767778798081828384858687888990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151152153154155156157158159160161162163164165166167168169170171172173174175176177178179180181182183184185186187188189190191192193194195196197198199200201202203204205206207208209210211212213214215216217218219220221222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307308309310311312313314315316317318319320321322323324325326327328329330331332333334335336337338339340341342343344345346347348349350351352353354355356357358359360361362363364365366367368369370371372373374375376377378379380381382383384385386387388389390391392393394395396397398399400401

↑ Up to the top!