• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

What's something you wish the right understood about the left (or vice versa)?

A lot of educators are morons. Why haven't we had a K-12 National Recommend Reading List for decades?

I had to explain to a high school teacher that a 9 kilometer wall was impossible. It must have been meters. The book did say meters.


I asked a half-dozen high school teachers about Project Gutenberg. Only one had heard of it and she had not told her students about it.

Educators want students dependent on educators. An excellent book is better than a mediocre book used by a mediocre teacher.
You have just eloquently demonstrated the very conservative compositional fallacy I am talking about here.

Some educators certainly are "morons." Most are not. Most are good at their jobs and use curricula designed by people even more educated and better at their jobs than they are.

What this fallacy ultimately amounts to is: "Because every scientist, medical professional, educator, etc. makes mistakes, statistical outliers are as likely to be correct as the majority scientific/medical/educational consensus." This is false statement. That it is remotely possible that the majority consensus is wrong does not make it in any way likely. It takes strong evidence to support the position that a consensus of professionals are wrong about their specialty, and simple personal discomfort with the consensus is not strong evidence.
 
From where do you prefer to derive your should statements?

By considering the costs and benefits of the available options and then weighing the trade-offs. That's something your beloved "trained and educated authorities" cannot do for anyone but themselves.
 
You have just eloquently demonstrated the very conservative compositional fallacy I am talking about here.

Some educators certainly are "morons." Most are not. Most are good at their jobs and use curricula designed by people even more educated and better at their jobs than they are.

What this fallacy ultimately amounts to is: "Because every scientist, medical professional, educator, etc. makes mistakes, statistical outliers are as likely to be correct as the majority scientific/medical/educational consensus." This is false statement. That it is remotely possible that the majority consensus is wrong does not make it in any way likely. It takes strong evidence to support the position that a consensus of professionals are wrong about their specialty, and simple personal discomfort with the consensus is not strong evidence.

Sounds like a "literary intellectual" response.

Ever read The Two Cultures by C P Snow?


Curious how we have been told that education is necessary for success but educators have not been proposing mandatory accounting/finance in the schools.

https://www.upi.com/Accounting-collegians-vs-5th-graders/82121056408042/

Why hasn't a K-12 National Recommend Reading List been proposed and discussed for decades. Aren't there any kids who could do a lot of self education if they didn't have to wade through crappy books?
 
The right needs to understand that people who devote their lives to science, medicine, education, etc. may not be perfect, but they are not idiots. They are, in fact, more knowledgeable than you are about their specialty to a person. When there is a consensus among trained and educated authorities, it is foolish to reject this consensus in favor of an "alternative" partisan narrative supported by a few statistical outliers you hear coming from your political party.

The left needs to understand that social change is always going to be existentially terrifying to the close-minded and uneducated, regardless of whether it is ultimately for the greater good or not. The harder and faster you push for social change, the harder the right is going to rebel against it. The pendulum always swings back to the right, even when the clock would look better a few feet to the left.
They certainly think they are anyway, and they may not be, which is scary.
 
By considering the costs and benefits of the available options and then weighing the trade-offs. That's something your beloved "trained and educated authorities" cannot do for anyone but themselves.
Are those things not facts? Or are you saying that facts are unnecessary to consider cost and benefits?

You said "It would be nice if the left would understand the fallacy of attempting to derive should statements from facts."
 
Sounds like a "literary intellectual" response.

Ever read The Two Cultures by C P Snow?


Curious how we have been told that education is necessary for success but educators have not been proposing mandatory accounting/finance in the schools.

https://www.upi.com/Accounting-collegians-vs-5th-graders/82121056408042/

Why hasn't a K-12 National Recommend Reading List been proposed and discussed for decades. Aren't there any kids who could do a lot of self education if they didn't have to wade through crappy books?
That these things you mention are required for success is an unsupported assumption you are making, not a given.
 
They certainly think they are anyway, and they may not be, which is scary.
It is not the case that "they may not be." They are. While they may not be as knowledgeable as other professionals, they are more knowledgeable than laymen. And that's where professional consensus comes in. The "authorities" who are less knowledgeable than most become statistical outliers.

What is truly scary is how often conservatives mistake those less knowledgeable statistical outliers as being more knowledgeable than the majority consensus. It is almost always those few outliers who go against the majority consensus who foolishly believe they are more knowledgeable than everyone else. And they are somehow capable of convincing conservatives to agree with them. And that is scary.
 
That these things you mention are required for success is an unsupported assumption you are making, not a given.
What I actually wrote was:

"Curious how we have been told that education is necessary for success"

I have heard it so often from "educational authority" that I would be surprised if you haven't.

Maybe I should Google "keys to success" and see what turns up.




Is that enough?
 
Last edited:
They certainly think they are anyway, and they may not be, which is scary.
They certainly think they are because in most all situations, in fact they are.

Tell me which is scarier: the few random scientists who think they are smarter than the average untrained conservative, but really aren't.

Or the millions of untrained conservatives who think they know more than the trained scientists, but in reality don't? And they make policy and political decisions based upon their mistaken confidence in their scientific knowledge?

I'm going with option B as the scarier of the 2. And it is the America we are currently living in. Unfortunately.
 
What I actually wrote was:

I have heard it so often from "educational authority" that I would be surprised if you haven't.

Maybe I should Google "keys to success" and see what turns up.




Is that enough?
None of those claim that education is necessary for success, only that education makes success much easier to attain.

No one thinks that a formal education is a guarantee of success, or that no formal education is a guarantee of failure, but they are highly correlated nonetheless.

1650039013798.png

1650039028972.png
 
Back
Top Bottom