Why do conservatives on most forums seem less knowledgeable?

[AlabamaPaul]

On a side note, what do you consider "highly educated?"
Some of the sharpest people I know don't hold Ph.D's and I know Ph.D's with rocks for brains. Which group are you referring to that falls into your "90%" category.

Probably depends on whether or not you agree with their ideas...

 

[Republic Now!]

The notion that academia is dominated by a specific ideology of any form is ignorant and I'm embarrassed that you call yourself a conservative and believe it.

 

[Gaugingcatenate]

Besides education ...another trait that makes the casual observer think republicans are dumb is their propensity to act against their very own interest.

Uh-huh...that the total depth of your "casual observance" is it?

 

[Oftencold]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience). Additionally, conservatives seem much more prone to fallacious arguments and misinformation.

I do have a genuine question (I'm not just voicing my opinion). Assuming this is true (and it seems to be in my experience), what are some possible reasons behind this? If you ever talk to a highly educated person, you know that there is a 90% chance he wont be conservative.

First, I'd say that global warming, especially AGW is easily dismissed by the lack of warming for 15 years, and that printing the AGW model on toilet paper would be a criminal waste of that worthy substance.

But if one is to be ignorant in some aspects of their lives, better that it should be in areas that harm no one. No one is going to be taxed into penury, die in a needles war or have their personal liberties curtailed because someone believes that the world was created 6000 years ago. All those things may happen though, if the same people believe that government may provide services for free, a $17,000,000,000,000 debt may be ignored, or that pretty speech will deter madmen committed to genocide.

Myself, I have a lot more trouble where science related knowledge is concerned in that so few people know that a high fever can bran damage their child, that an aluminum extension ladder can get them electrocuted, or that buying recreational chemicals from criminal strangers can have deleterious effects.

 

[ReformCollege]

Probably depends on whether or not you agree with their ideas...

Hardly. I try to be neutral on judging the merits of one's argument. Even if I disagree with what someone says, I can acknowledge someone who is fairly knowledgeable on the subject at hand. Likewise for vice versa, even if I agree with what someone says I often can find myself thinking that person needs to make a better case for it.

 

[opendebate]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience). Additionally, conservatives seem much more prone to fallacious arguments and misinformation.

I do have a genuine question (I'm not just voicing my opinion). Assuming this is true (and it seems to be in my experience), what are some possible reasons behind this? If you ever talk to a highly educated person, you know that there is a 90% chance he wont be conservative.

I'll get myself in trouble here but I am pretty certain than there is research to support the fact that liberals tend to be more educated. I think people that are less educated are generally more easily led by their emotions, especially fear. I would also suggest that a by-product of a good education is learning there is less to fear than we thought.

 

[Cyrylek]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience).

Now, let's parse this paragraph. You are mixing - quite unintentionally, I am sure - two very different modes of thinking. (1) Accepting on faith "what the Good Book says", in literal interpretation, and (2) Skepticism toward very ambitious proclamations in a very politicized area.

I am not a conservative at all, but I certainly do think that skepticism (caricatured as "denial", with most unsavory allusions) is exactly the right attitude when it comes to the crisis of trust and legitimacy we are facing, as scientists: Some people take data from a limited period of time, nail a trend, make wild extrapolations and wilder predictions, create a panic - and gleefully collect a record harvest of grants and promotions. Not to mention - enable self-serving politicians to manufacture a mass hysteria out of thin air (no pun intended).

If we don't care anymore about our own long-term reputations, at least we have the duty to think what our behavior does to the general public. Whether we want it or not, we, scientists, are the new priesthood. We better keep our robes clean, and stay the hell away from the Caesar and the circus mobs.

Your average "warmist" (a creature of the Left, normally) is no more equipped to talk about the poorly understood physics of climate change than your average Biblical literalist is equipped to discuss geological dating or problems of evolutionary theory. Both rely on - for the lack of a better term - blind faith.

Just like an intelligent, responsible priest would not encourage "pious" creationist drivel coming from people who have no idea what they are talking about, we should never encourage dissemination of politicized climate change (or any other) agendas among eager idiots. Even if it I profitable to do so, in the short term.

 

[Cyrylek]

I'll get myself in trouble here but I am pretty certain than there is research to support the fact that liberals tend to be more educated.

A working hypothesis: On average, people who(se parents) can afford "more education" also "can afford" to be extremely arrogant and surprisingly ignorant at the same time - i.e. to be "liberals" (in the paradoxical American usage)

 

[poweRob]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience). Additionally, conservatives seem much more prone to fallacious arguments and misinformation.

I do have a genuine question (I'm not just voicing my opinion). Assuming this is true (and it seems to be in my experience), what are some possible reasons behind this? If you ever talk to a highly educated person, you know that there is a 90% chance he wont be conservative.

Conservativism isn't less intelligent. It's just different thinking than yours. Forums however aren't a great measure for intellect of any kind. You may see some, but it's generally buried in all the panic and fearmongering.

 

[poweRob]

A working hypothesis: On average, people who(se parents) can afford "more education" also "can afford" to be extremely arrogant and surprisingly ignorant at the same time - i.e. to be "liberals" (in the paradoxical American usage)

Oh come the hell on.

 

[Republic Now!]

A working hypothesis: On average, people who(se parents) can afford "more education" also "can afford" to be extremely arrogant and surprisingly ignorant at the same time - i.e. to be "liberals" (in the paradoxical American usage)

I've seen some ignorant arrogance on the right as well.

 

[Rokkitsci]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience).

Only fundamentalist 'christian' zealots reject evolution and advocate the 6000 year biblical number. This is a small small minority of conservative people. They may be vocal by their numbers are completely insignificant.

Nobody rejects the global warming facts. I believe you have confused those facts with causation. Conservatives are not quick to jump on the man-made causes of global warming. The fact that the globe is 'warming' is not a surprize - that generally happens when we are recovering from an ice-age. Sun spot activity overwhelms man-made causes in the warming of the planet. Which is why Mars is also undergoing a global warming 'disaster' - does man's malfeasance reach that far?

Additionally, conservatives seem much more prone to fallacious arguments and misinformation.

If you have this opinion then you are not speaking to anyone on the other side of the political spectrum - call them liberals, socialists, or Democrats - whatever you think the opposite of 'conservative' is. There is not a liberal in the entire nation who can make a genuine argument stating facts and logic defending any one of their policies without relying of fallacious arguments and misinformation.

This statement makes be wary of your original assertion of "I am a conservative myself." I know of no conservative on any stripe who could hold the opinion that conservatives make fallacious arguments and rely on misinformation. The only logical answer to your situation would be that you never speak to anyone except died in the wool snake-handlers.

Conservatives and Libertarians are the only political factions that EVER use accurate information and present logical arguments. All other factions spew nothing but agenda-driven obfuscation and deliberate lies.

I do have a genuine question (I'm not just voicing my opinion). Assuming this is true (and it seems to be in my experience), what are some possible reasons behind this? If you ever talk to a highly educated person, you know that there is a 90% chance he wont be conservative.

You may be confusing 'highly educated' with some liberal arts PhD somewhere who is adhering to the Democrat party line.

I am truly questioning your conservative principles now.

Do you believe in the constitution as a founding document that should be relied on until amended by constitutional provisions?

Or do you believe that the constitution is a neat historical item written by snarky old white slave owners and that we should sort of ignore its language and just let 9 people vote on what the latest fad should be for our governing principles?

I am a true conservative. I consider myself to be highly educated. I do not believe in any of the things you say identify a conservative, in your experience.

If anyone of any political affiliation were to talk to me on any subject, I do not believe they would go away thinking I was poorly educated or that I made fallacious arguments using misinformation.

I am very much like all the conservatives I know.

I have never met a liberal who can argue their points logically - using facts appropriately - without resorting to vacuous agenda driven bilge. Many of them would fall into the 'highly educated' category as normally understood regarding the meaning of 'education.'

But the most starkly ignorant people I have ever met are liberals (or non-conservative.) The only conservatives I know (both of them) who meet your definition are uneducated fundamentalists.

 

[Cyrylek]

I've seen some ignorant arrogance on the right as well.

Absolutely. It's just that your typical arrogant, ignorant American social-democrat ("liberal") - if my experience is any indication - smugly repeats undigested assertions made by members of educational establishment and "high-brow" media, while the arrogant, ignorant conservative mostly has to rely on opinions of his own circle and of some idiot radio talk show host. Their ignorant arrogance is more shallow and more obvious, therefore less dangerous.

 

[ethanUNC]

I am a true conservative. I consider myself to be highly educated

There is no such thing as an educated global warming denier.

 

[Arbo]

The facts of almost any political situation suggest the left wing position,

If you want to make a ruling class and peasants, destroy the economy and free markets, and removed freedom and liberty.... then you are correct.

 

[Arbo]

There is no such thing as an educated global warming denier.

:lamo

Now that right there is funny!

 

[Rokkitsci]

There is no such thing as an educated global warming denier.

OK

Now I have a data point in evaluating your credibility.

Thank you for the info.

 

[ethanUNC]

OK

Now I have a data point in evaluating your credibility.

Thank you for the info.

When you disagree with 98% of relevant scientists, you're no better than evolution deniers or young earthers.

 

[Arbo]

When you disagree with 98% of relevant scientists, you're no better than evolution deniers or young earthers.

Yeah, sure 98% of 'relevant' 'scientists' agree. :roll:

These are the same one's that in the 1980's talked about global cooling, to recently switch to global warming, and even more recently realize they were yet again wrong so now they just say 'climate change' because they have no idea?

 

[ethanUNC]

Yeah, sure 98% of 'relevant' 'scientists' agree. :roll:

These are the same one's that in the 1980's talked about global cooling, to recently switch to global warming, and even more recently realize they were yet again wrong so now they just say 'climate change' because they have no idea?

This post is the intellectual equivalent to a doorstop. That's like saying "plate tectonics... pfft. These are the same geologists that didn't believe in plate tectonics before the 1960s."

 

[Diogenes]

There is no such thing as an educated global warming denier.

But there are many well educated people who are skeptical that human activity has any effect on (or responsibility for) climate change.

 

[Diogenes]

If you want to make a ruling class and peasants, destroy the economy and free markets, and removed freedom and liberty.... then you are correct.

Exactly!

 

[Muhammed]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience). Additionally, conservatives seem much more prone to fallacious arguments and misinformation.

Go to any thread regarding global warming and all you'll see from anti-conservatives is fallacious arguments and misinformation.

 

[Threegoofs]

I am a conservative myself, and I often feel a little embarrassed to admit it. If you ever see someone denying global warming or evolution, or saying that the world is 6000 years old you know its going to be a conservative (at least in my experience). Additionally, conservatives seem much more prone to fallacious arguments and misinformation.

I do have a genuine question (I'm not just voicing my opinion). Assuming this is true (and it seems to be in my experience), what are some possible reasons behind this? If you ever talk to a highly educated person, you know that there is a 90% chance he wont be conservative.

It's because Conservatism in the US is not the same as Conservatism in Canada, or Europe.

It's a whole special brand of stupidity here.

 

[sangha]

Nobody rejects the global warming facts.

You are wrong. There are many who deny that global warming is occurring. We have a number of them on DP and several threads arguing about it.

All of the deniers are conservatives.