Professor fights for right to sex with coeds

[quade 3]

Quote

Your profession is full of sick people who think they know best about the second and first amendments as long as they don't have to live under the rules they would would impose.

As opposed to these fine people throughout history?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Your profession is full of sick people who think they know best about the second and first amendments as long as they don't have to live under the rules they would would impose.

As opposed to these fine people throughout history?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism

In support of these fine people?

Quote

A 2006 study by Charles Taber and Milton Lodge at Stony Brook University showed that politically sophisticated thinkers were even less open to new information than less sophisticated types. These people may be factually right about 90 percent of things, but their confidence makes it nearly impossible to correct the 10 percent on which they’re totally wrong. Taber and Lodge found this alarming, because engaged, sophisticated thinkers are “the very folks on whom democratic theory relies most heavily.”

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Your profession is full of sick people who think they know best about the second and first amendments as long as they don't have to live under the rules they would would impose.

As opposed to these fine people throughout history?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism

In support of these fine people?

Quote

A 2006 study by Charles Taber and Milton Lodge at Stony Brook University showed that politically sophisticated thinkers were even less open to new information than less sophisticated types. These people may be factually right about 90 percent of things, but their confidence makes it nearly impossible to correct the 10 percent on which they’re totally wrong. Taber and Lodge found this alarming, because engaged, sophisticated thinkers are “the very folks on whom democratic theory relies most heavily.”

I think you can also read that another way; "Stupid people can be easily swayed."

Of course, every con man, astrologer, tarot card or palm reader; every "miracle healer" or revival tent preacher throughout history has known this. So, that's not really new information.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Quote

Your profession is full of sick people who think they know best about the second and first amendments as long as they don't have to live under the rules they would would impose.

I had no idea that engineers were such a cohesive political group.

Professors not engineers

sick bastards

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[Bolas 5]

Quote

I think you can also read that another way; "Stupid people can be easily swayed."

So does the opposite hold true? Highly educated intellectuals will never admit when wrong?

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Quote

Your profession is full of sick people who think they know best about the second and first amendments as long as they don't have to live under the rules they would would impose.

As opposed to these fine people throughout history?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-intellectualism

In support of these fine people?

Quote

A 2006 study by Charles Taber and Milton Lodge at Stony Brook University showed that politically sophisticated thinkers were even less open to new information than less sophisticated types. These people may be factually right about 90 percent of things, but their confidence makes it nearly impossible to correct the 10 percent on which they’re totally wrong. Taber and Lodge found this alarming, because engaged, sophisticated thinkers are “the very folks on whom democratic theory relies most heavily.”

I think you can also read that another way; "Stupid people can be easily swayed."

Of course, every con man, astrologer, tarot card or palm reader; every "miracle healer" or revival tent preacher throughout history has known this. So, that's not really new information.

Perhaps you should re-read the second sentence of the quote, mr. politically-sophisticated moderator.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 3]

Quote

Quote

I think you can also read that another way; "Stupid people can be easily swayed."

So does the opposite hold true? Highly educated intellectuals will never admit when wrong?

I think the difference is "intellectuals" need to be shown actual and verifiable proof. Once an intellectual is shown hard data, they're usually more than willing to admit something about the previous theory was wrong.

Contrast that to people who rely on belief. It's easy to get them to believe in something to begin with and once they go down that rabbit hole, there is practically no way of logically arguing with them.

Another issue is a lot of people aren't educated enough to know pseudoscience from actual science. Oh, they sure as hell believe they do, but they don't.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[rhaig 0]

Quote

Another issue is a lot of people aren't educated enough to know pseudoscience from actual science. Oh, they sure as hell believe they do, but they don't.

and that right there is the argument from both sides of the fence.

--
Rob

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I think you can also read that another way; "Stupid people can be easily swayed."

So does the opposite hold true? Highly educated intellectuals will never admit when wrong?

I think the difference is "intellectuals" need to be shown actual and verifiable proof. Once an intellectual is shown hard data, they're usually more than willing to admit something about the previous theory was wrong.

Contrast that to people who rely on belief. It's easy to get them to believe in something to begin with and once they go down that rabbit hole, there is practically no way of logically arguing with them.

Another issue is a lot of people aren't educated enough to know pseudoscience from actual science. Oh, they sure as hell believe they do, but they don't.

From the study:
On prior effect (ability to put aside pre-existing views)-

Quote

Table 1 shows a strong prior attitude effect in the predicted direction, with only non-sophisticates and those with weak priors failing to show the effect. Both studies suggest that citizens with even modest
political knowledge and moderately strong beliefs find it difficult to lay their prior attitudes aside, even when they are asked to be even-handed.

On disconfirmation bias (tendency to believe countervailing evidence)-

Quote

Perhaps not surprisingly, sophisticated participants
produced many more thoughts overall than did their less knowledgeable peers. More interesting, as predicted incongruent arguments elicited far more thoughts than did congruent ones, and these were almost entirely denigrating. Both sophisticated and unsophisticated participants showed this basic pattern of bolstering congruent arguments while denigrating incongruent ones, though
sophisticates were clearly most biased.

On confirmation bias (tendency to seek information confirming a person's viewpoint)-

Quote

Supporters of gun control or affirmative action were
significantly more likely to search out the arguments of “their” issue groups (e.g., Citizens Against Handguns or the NAACP). As expected, these results are particularly pronounced for sophisticates, where, for example, every 10% increase in support for affirmative action in study 1 led to a 7.78% increase in the proportion of pro-affirmative action hits on the information board.
By contrast, the results for strength of priors were mixed at best.

Attitude polarization (tendency to become more extreme in view)-

Quote

Looking at the most sophisticated third of the sample who rated affirmative action arguments, for example, the regression slope (1.268) indicates that those with positive priors had even more positive
posteriors, while those with negative priors had even more negative posteriors (on average, 27% more extreme). By contrast, unsophisticates and those with weak priors did not polarize
(unsophisticates who rated the strength of affirmative action arguments present the one exception to this pattern).

***Finally and most important, we find substantial polarization among participants who processed information in a biased manner, but not among those who were less biased. This finding directly and clearly links the processes of motivated skepticism to attitude polarization as our theory predicts, something that previous research has not been able to do. Those participants whose argument strength ratings were most skewed by disconfirmation biases had significantly
more extreme attitudes on affirmative action and gun control after rating the arguments, while those whose ratings were more evenhanded showed no significant attitude polarization.
Similarly, confirmation biases – seeking out attitudinally consistent arguments while avoidinginconsistent arguments in the information board – led to more extreme attitudes as compared to the least biased participants for both issues.

[billvon 2,471]

> Highly educated intellectuals will never admit when wrong?

Or smarter people are right more often than stupid people. Depends on what you're going for I guess.

[Coreece 190]

Quote

> Highly educated intellectuals will never admit when wrong?

Or smarter people are right more often than stupid people. Depends on what you're going for I guess.

ridiculous...don't ever underestimate the powere of pride.

Your secrets are the true reflection of who you really are...

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Your profession is full of sick people who think they know best about the second and first amendments as long as they don't have to live under the rules they would would impose.

I had no idea that engineers were such a cohesive political group.

Professors not engineers

sick bastards

Yes, what utter bastards. Sitting there carrying out a fair amount of the pure research that keep your country's industry in world leading positions - sitting there educating the very people who are going to go on into industry and business and (hopefully) keep your country up there for the next generation as well.

Yeah, those guys is dicks.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[rushmc 18]

WOOOSH

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,279]

Don't kid yourself, guy. You're not that subtle.

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[Bolas 5]

Quote

> Highly educated intellectuals will never admit when wrong?

Or smarter people are right more often than stupid people. Depends on what you're going for I guess.

That's not being disputed that they may be right, what the study shows is even when wrong...

Quote

These people may be factually right about 90 percent of things, but their confidence makes it nearly impossible to correct the 10 percent on which they’re totally wrong.

As generally the more highly educated are running government and industry the 90% figure is nice but the 10% figure scares me as that shows an inabilty or refusal to learn from mistakes because they refuse to acknowledge them.

How often do we see gov't and industry continue to do the same thing to solve issues that has failed repeatedly in the past?

Maybe there's another reason we're constantly lowering the bars for "success" and "winners." Possibly because whomever was behind the program that was supposed to "fix" whatever can't admit they were wrong.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[rushmc 18]

Quote

Don't kid yourself, guy. You're not that subtle.

You will get it soon enough....

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,279]

Quote

Looks like it's the sophisticates that are 'down the rabbit hole' according the study. It also appears they like it down there and don't want to come back out.

How are they defining 'sophisticate'?

Whatever our differences, I have to admit that you obviously spend a lot of time researching and debating political issues... are you not sophisticated?

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[AndyBoyd 0]

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
— Socrates

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Looks like it's the sophisticates that are 'down the rabbit hole' according the study. It also appears they like it down there and don't want to come back out.

How are they defining 'sophisticate'?

They're not, that I can see.

Quote

Two experiments were carried out to test these six hypotheses. Participants (Ps) were recruited from introductory political science courses at Stony Brook University. Their participation, for which they received course credit, consisted of a single session lasting less than one hour (Study 1: N=126, 59 male, 70 white, 64 Democrat, 34 Republican; Study 2: N=136, 68 male, 64 white, 61 Democrat, 21 Republican). Since the two experiments share the same basic design, differing in but one manipulation, we will describe them together.

In the tables, they specify 'low knowledge' and 'high knowledge', but they don't give any information as to where the break point is between the two.

Quote

Whatever our differences, I have to admit that you obviously spend a lot of time researching and debating political issues... are you not sophisticated?

In the classical sense of the word - decidedly not.

Absent some sort of criteria of how they determined 'low knowledge' and 'high knowledge' in the study, I can't offer a guess as to which group I would belong.

Based on comments by several of the...ahem...learned professionals on the site, I would guess *their* classification would be 'low knowledge'.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[rushmc 18]

Quote

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
— Socrates

If only Dems and libs would understand this of themselves

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[jakee 1,279]

Well, it reads like you're assuming that you're not sophisticated - since you're quite obviously using this study as an attack on those you are labelling as sophisticated. It's interesting that in your attack posts related to this study you are treating 'sophisticate' as synonymous with 'liberal' which has the neat side effect of excluding you from its scope - even though it's highly unlikely that this is the case.



(Of course, this has the unfortunate side effect of admitting that Quade and the rest of 'our politically sophisticated posters' may well be right the vast majority of the time. It's a nice little double edged sword you've found yourself there, but I'd be careful how you swing it.)

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Well, it reads like you're assuming that you're not sophisticated - since you're quite obviously using this study as an attack on those you are labelling as sophisticated. It's interesting that in your attack posts related to this study you are treating 'sophisticate' as synonymous with 'liberal' which has the neat side effect of excluding you from its scope - even though it's highly unlikely that this is the case.

You may think what you wish - I saw it more of an indictment against the basic "anyone that doesn't think as I do is stupid" theme of many of their posts.

(Of course, this has the unfortunate side effect of admitting that Quade and the rest of 'our politically sophisticated posters' may well be right the vast majority of the time. It's a nice little double edged sword you've found yourself there, but I'd be careful how you swing it.)

[Bolas 5]

Quote

Quote

"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."
— Socrates

If only Dems and libs all would understand this of themselves

Fixed.

Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting
If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh.

[billvon 2,471]

>"The only true wisdom is in knowing you know nothing."

Old joke based on a long rivalry - at Harvard, you learn less and less about more and more until you know nothing about everything; at MIT you learn more and more about less and less until you know everything about nothing.

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

(Of course, this has the unfortunate side effect of admitting that Quade and the rest of 'our politically sophisticated posters' may well be right the vast majority of the time. It's a nice little double edged sword you've found yourself there, but I'd be careful how you swing it.)

Could be that they only post about the 10% here on SC.