Racial Fatigue?

[unregistered]

 

[KingOrfeo]

The truth or untruth of the Bell Curve aside, in an "academic environment" it is dangerous to stray across any of the rigid boundaries set by the politically correct leftist academia.

Not quite true.

 

[The_Trouvere]

The truth or untruth of the Bell Curve aside, in an "academic environment" it is dangerous to stray across any of the rigid boundaries set by the politically correct leftist academia. The future of our liberty demand these institutions be purged of doctrinaire leftists.

Purging universities of who you consider to be "doctrinaire leftists" would be just as wrong as purging them of academics who agree with The Bell Curve.

What we need in the universities, journalism, and in the general culture is tolerance for intellectual diversity, and a willingness to debate controversial subjects, rather than a desire to suppress the debate.

 

[1sickbastard]

The truth or untruth of the Bell Curve aside, in an "academic environment" it is dangerous to stray across any of the rigid boundaries set by the politically correct leftist academia. The future of our liberty demand these institutions be purged of doctrinaire leftists.

1) It is only dangerous to cross your self proclaimed 'rigid boundaries of the politically correct leftists' if one makes assertions without solid evidence. Do note that unsubstantiated claims and logical fallacies do NOT count as evidence.
2) Calls to 'purge' any public institution of ideology not in concordance with your own is the hallmark of those who own ideology is so weak and unsubstantiated that it cannot withstand either criticism or competition.
3) I expect your response to this post to be either; A) an ad hominem attack, because you seemingly lack the ability to think for yourself and none of your usual sources have easy C&P articles explaining what being open minded or intellectually honest entail, or B) running away as the intellectual coward you've repeatedly shown yourself to be, as you seem to lack the courage to admit when you're wrong.
4) I'd really love for you to prove that last point wrong. Either present actual evidence/facts to support your assertion (but do expect any presentation to be scrutinized for veracity and accuracy) or admit you're wrong. At least you can make the admission that cannot support your claim if you're to chickenshit to admit when you're wrong.

 

[The_Trouvere]

2) Calls to 'purge' any public institution of ideology not in concordance with your own is the hallmark of those who own ideology is so weak and unsubstantiated that it cannot withstand either criticism or competition.

I certainly agree with this. Nevertheless, it must be said that on racial issue all of the drive to purge universities comes from those who do not want a candid discussion of black crime, illegitimacy, and low average intelligence, and the likelihood that genetic differences are responsible for these racial differences.

 

[Sean Renaud]

Well that's mostly because we don't want our schools pushing bullshit.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I can't wait to see how this pissy, shitty, fuck-a-licious thread finally ends up. It's been cruising on fumes for a while, staying in the top five and being bumped up when dipping below ten.

Even Troovy can't keep spreading out the same butter pat of Bell Curved bullshit on this moldy piece of toast. There's gotta be a reckoning and I'll be here to help throw dirt on it.

 

[badbabysitter]

The truth or untruth of the Bell Curve aside, in an "academic environment" it is dangerous to stray across any of the rigid boundaries set by the politically correct leftist academia. The future of our liberty demand these institutions be purged of doctrinaire leftists.

Teaching debunked and discredited theories like the ones espoused in the Bell Curve shouldnt be tauught... because they have been debunked

or do you think fraudulent pseudo-science should be taken as fact in post secondary institutions

 

[badbabysitter]

I certainly agree with this. Nevertheless, it must be said that on racial issue all of the drive to purge universities comes from those who do not want a candid discussion of black crime, illegitimacy, and low average intelligence, and the likelihood that genetic differences are responsible for these racial differences.

Candid is fine... debate is good

buttrying to put forth theories that have been regularly debunked for decades shouldnt be up for debate amongst any serious academic

 

[badbabysitter]

Purging universities of who you consider to be "doctrinaire leftists" would be just as wrong as purging them of academics who agree with The Bell Curve.

What we need in the universities, journalism, and in the general culture is tolerance for intellectual diversity, and a willingness to debate controversial subjects, rather than a desire to suppress the debate.

if they have basis in fact..they should be debated

but the Bell Curve isnt

so , it's not

 

[1sickbastard]

if they have basis in fact..they should be debated

but the Bell Curve isnt

so , it's not

Maybe that is because the authors of the book didn't bother to subject it to peer review before having it published, which means they intended any debate to be in the court of public opinion instead within academic circles.

This is a very common tactic of pseudo scientists, creationists, those with overtly political agendas and snake oil salesmen, but not those wanting to subject their ideas to serious academic debate.

 

[1sickbastard]

I certainly agree with this. Nevertheless, it must be said that on racial issue all of the drive to purge universities comes from those who do not want a candid discussion of black crime, illegitimacy, and low average intelligence, and the likelihood that genetic differences are responsible for these racial differences.

I see, so it's a conspiracy to suppress racial discussion?
Now you not only have to defend the conclusions of "The Bell Curve", which have been debunked by serious academic review, but you must also now provide evidence to support claims of a conspiracy to suppress scientific racism (which has also been debunked).

 

[PoppingTom]

Nevertheless, it must be said that on racial issue all of the drive to purge universities comes from those who do not want a candid discussion of black crime, illegitimacy, and low average intelligence, and the likelihood that genetic differences are responsible for these racial differences.

You say ARE instead of MAY BE. That alone is highly unscientific.

You don't provide any reason for a research in that direction that is NOT ideology based. Again, unscientific.

Science isn't racist. That's no ideology, that's a rule for science that always was and always will be.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The truth or untruth of the Bell Curve aside, in an "academic environment" it is dangerous to stray across any of the rigid boundaries set by the politically correct leftist academia. The future of our liberty demand these institutions be purged of doctrinaire leftists.

In grad school I collided with PC perfessers over their efforts to dismiss statistics by discounting terms that apply to the stats. Discrediting stats by discrediting terms is a liberal tactic to evade debate. In my case the quarrel was about what to call children born to unmarried parents. That is, they insisted the only problem with bastardy is the word NOT the results.

Moderates loathe debate, because its often unpleasant for one side or the other. Cant we all just get along! When liberals, moderates, and conservatives get together to discuss the large dead fish atop the table, the moderate is always the one who wants to buy another case of air freshener.

In America the negro is always the rotting fish atop the table.

 

[PoppingTom]

In grad school I collided with PC perfessers over their efforts to dismiss statistics by discounting terms that apply to the stats. Discrediting stats by discrediting terms is a liberal tactic to evade debate. In my case the quarrel was about what to call children born to unmarried parents. That is, they insisted the only problem with bastardy is the word NOT the results.

What's wrong with that?

Words have meanings, don't you know? Insults aren't scientific, sorry for that rule.

As for the results: it's only a problem for the ideology, not for science.

When liberals, moderates, and conservatives get together to discuss the large dead fish atop the table, the moderate is always the one who wants to buy another case of air freshener.

....while the right-winger ("conservative" is a too moderate word!) claims that there is no problem that can't be fixed with a chainsaw. But the open fish seems to smell heavier.......well, it's the fish's fault. Problem solved.

 

[unregistered]

 

[Adre]

Well, do you think these institutions should be dominated by leftist ideology? Because they are. There is no intellectual balance, a self supporting political correctness and a cadre of thought police runs rampant on our college campuses, using that ideology to kill debate and the truth.

How do you know this? Do you spend considerable time on campuses around the nation? Or is this what you gather from your confirmation biased readings?

 

[unregistered]

 

[unregistered]

 

[Adre]

There's a mountain of evidence available to those who can read, try it sometime.

As I figured, you read it somewhere. And we know all journalists and writers tell the truth all the time. Except if they're Democrats.

 

[1sickbastard]

There's a mountain of evidence available to those who can read, try it sometime.

If there is, as you say, a "mountain of evidence" then is should be a simple thing for you to support your assertion:

The truth or untruth of the Bell Curve aside, in an "academic environment" it is dangerous to stray across any of the rigid boundaries set by the politically correct leftist academia.

See, how it works it the one making the positive assertion has the burden of proof.

 

[Adre]

If there is, as you say, a "mountain of evidence" then is should be a simple thing for you to support your assertion:

See, how it works it the one making the positive assertion has the burden of proof.

That's usually when he runs away.

 

[1sickbastard]

Shut the fuck up. Packing our college level academia with large populations of Marxists, communist revolutionaries, radicals, former terrorists, anarchists, Socialists, all espousing some degree of leftist ideology and an institutional enmity towards more conservative thinking, is not intellectual diversity. It's dishonest to say it isn't simple left wing indoctrination. You're one sickbastard alright and that's no logical fallacy.

Okay, so I'm 1sickbastard. Thanks for stating the painfully obvious.

However, as you intended it as an ad hominem attack, that is, in fact, a logical fallacy called the (surprise, surprise Gomer Pyle) Ad Hominem Attack fallacy.
The point is to attack the character of one's opponent instead having to address the substance of one's point. It is commonly used when one has no valid counter argument and one is completely lacking in the integrity or courage to admit when one cannot defend one's point of view.

 

[Disgustipated]

Shut the fuck up. Packing our college level academia with large populations of Marxists, communist revolutionaries, radicals, former terrorists, anarchists, Socialists, all espousing some degree of leftist ideology and an institutional enmity towards more conservative thinking, is not intellectual diversity. It's dishonest to say it isn't simple left wing indoctrination. You're one sickbastard alright and that's no logical fallacy.

90% of this post is bullshit.

 

[1sickbastard]

That's usually when he runs away.

I think it's called strategically advancing to the rear.