<p>Anti-factual. lol. There is no shortage of anti-factual leftist political propaganda these days. That’s funny.</p>
<p>I don’t want my kid learning biology from professors who believe that evolution is a theory on par with the creation of the world in 7 days. I don’t want my kid studying nursing being taught by professors who believe that an IUD is the same as a second term abortion. I don’t want my kid studying oceanography from professors who believe that the documented increase in sea levels around the world is just a vast left wing lie concocted by people who hate BP and Exxon Mobile. I don’t want my kid studying statistics with professors who believe that the MMR vaccine causes autism. And I don’t want my kid studying economics with professors who conflate their private religious beliefs that Jesus wants them to be affluent (which is entirely their right and their prerogative) with a study of how global markets operate and how wealth is created in the economy.</p>
<p>Frankly, the idea that you can insulate your kids from any sort of extremism in college is sort of absurd. So your kid can be the most anti-political kid on the planet, at a school with no particular bias-- left or right- and your kid may still have to wade past the “Abortion is Murder” signs and “God killed our troups in Afghanistan because the military allows Gays” in order to get to bed every night. Presumably, the roommate is as entitled to his or her beliefs as your kid is entitled to his or her LACK of beliefs.</p>
<p>Just saying.</p>
<p>But if you had to do a census of which political party attracts the greater number of the anti-science, anti-double blind peer reviewed medical study, anti-factual folks, I’m not sure it’s a fair fight.</p>
<p>I had a neighbor who believes that the only effective form of birth control is the rhythm method and she’s got 7 kids who have proven her wrong. I don’t criticize her religious beliefs- she is surely entitled to those. But the science on “take your temperature every day which is the most reliable way to predict ovulation” is something that a savvy 7th grader could see right through (is the thermometer accurate? Are you taking the temp every day at the same time and under the same circumstances? where is the thermometer stored? and have you compared a large sample size of women of the same cohort using this method to women using oral contraception and then assessed how many of them get pregnant over a two year time frame?)</p>
<p>She believes that oral contraception is a vast left wing plot to sterilize women against their will. Namaste.</p>
<p>So forgive me if I’m not crying that the right wingers don’t have enough universities to call their own. Someone’s got to teach statistics and medicine and engineering and god knows what and it surely won’t be the Michele Bachman “vaccinations cause mental retardation” gang.</p>
<p>Wow! A lot has happened her since my single sentence about Davis. The Davis example, however, does illustrate that at a lot can happen in moment at a seemingly quiet place. The thing about a college or university that likes to steer a course safely down the middle is that often the student body still contains a broad mix of kids with a broad mix of ideas. I suspect that they might engender more protests as students representing one view or another feel that the administration hasn’t been as responsive as it should have been on any given topic. If the student body is farther left or right the school policies likely mirror that and most are fairly content with the status quo. My kid’s school is one of those middle of the road places and they had campus demonstrations last year around perceived administrative inaction on various fronts. I know from talking with alumni that there were demonstrations and flaps when students pushed for birth control to be readily available on campus (it now is).</p>
<p>“Anti-factual. lol. There is no shortage of anti-factual leftist political propaganda these days. That’s funny.”</p>
<p>I don’t find it funny, and neither do the reasonable people on the left. The problem with today’s right is that its extreme factions are so loud, and so dominant, that reasonable people on the right are shut out of the conversation. </p>
<p>
I guess I understand preferring to go where more students and profs share my beliefs however I’m having a hard time understanding why there is a big issue attending virtually any mainstream school. Full disclosure, I do not buy the argument often put forward of it being common that liberal professors are trashing conservative students because of their views … there are something like 1 million full-time faculty members … I’m sure there are some stepping over the ethical boundary but I’d also guess it is a minuscule number. One current shorting coming I would think would be course offerings … I would guess course offerings in social science disciplines which have a conservative slant are in a small minority.</p>
<p>Thought experiment. If overnight Cornell (or any other mainstream school) was transformed reversing the political polarity of the students and professors would it be a radically different place? The course offerings in the social sciences would change a lot … the ratio of students on each side of the midnight hallway debate on AA might switch … however it does not seem to be that it would be a radically different place. In addition, if the focus is on outcomes (what was learned in class, student’s friends at school, student’s political/social issue growth at school, etc) I find it hard to believe it would be radically different at this new Cornell. If worlds did flip this way do you really believe a student’s experience would be substantially different?</p>
<p>Frankly, to me it seems to be the list of far left schools is about the same or maybe even shorter than the far right schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And I find it both funny and perplexing that the reasonable people of the left have such a hard time understanding the simplest of arguments. And especially perplexing since they also claim rather easily to have the superior intellect. Actually, it is not funny; it is plainly sad because, as this thread has shown, it is the weapon of choice to dismiss or covering the divergent opinions of others with ridicule. Yes, some here think it is quite acceptable or perhaps admirable to call the OP a nutcase or equally demeaning terms. </p>
<p>This was NOT my battle. As I repeatedly wrote upthread, I have had ZERO problems navigating the waters of education and would have no problems doing the same from Hiilsdale to the Columbia School of Education. Part of not having had any problems stems from the capacity of educators to understand that different opinions are not necessarily wrong, and worthy of further analysis. From the get go, I opined that the OP should not have such worries, concerns, or fear. And that attending a school that is somewhat hostile to “conservative” values or has a definite preference for left of center positions can be rewarding and formative. </p>
<p>This said, I have a hard time understanding why some like to move the goalposts or question a statement about the political leanings of faculty (and students) in our tertiary education system. Some must live in a parallel world! </p>
<p>Fwiw, I got a final note for my leftist friends here. Do you ever wonder why the “reasonable people on the right are shut out of the conversation?” Take a good look at your conversational style and the type of intellectual grenades you like to hurl. </p>
<p>Contrary to what some of you might think or posit, I am very far from being an unreasonable conservative. My positions range from left of center on many issues and right of center on others. That brings me solidly in the middle and very much in line with people who have an affinity for conservative or libertarian viewpoints. Ask me about unions and affirmative action, and you will find it hard to label me correctly! Further, I do not think that I fit the mold of a “dumb, intellectually manipulated/manipulative and/or blatantly ignorant” person.
" and neither am I a person who has grown up in the backwaters of Texas and only left my reservation to go to college and finally meet people with common sense and intelligence. </p>
<p>For all the merits you anoint yourselves, you surely are not exhibiting much of an open mind. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Winner of the sage and concise statement of the day. </p>
<p>CC members post an almost unlimited variety of questions in an attempt to assist their offspring in finding the ultimate ‘right fit’. It’s okay to ask where just about every and any combination of preferences might feel comfortable…but ask about finding an environment such as the OP is attempting to find…and…well…you are obviously a…</p>
<p>Racist
Bible thumping
Narrow minded
Science denying
Socially backward
neanderthal gun-toting
Under educated
under exposed to the proper reality</p>
<p>Goober…</p>
<p>Frankly, maybe the only truly socially enlightened thing to do is to remove any youn’uns from these obviously abusive situations so that they may be given the proper opportunity to ‘think correctly’.</p>
<p>dietz and xiggi, you are missing the point. People can believe whatever they choose. But this site is about education, not religion or political ideology. Why even bother talking about which schools are best for STEM if we have to treat climate-change deniers as equal to the 97% of scientists who are convinced that climate change is actually happening? Why should anyone take seriously a political science department in which students are encouraged to learn about various philosophies, but then have to accept the legitimacy or veracity of those that are full of underlying contradictions?</p>
<p>In cases like the OP’s, in which a parent or student is trying to find a college that will be friendly to their beliefs, what they often seem to be looking for is a place that does not question the inherent anti-intellectual, pro-faith-based views they consider inviolate. There is nothing wrong with seeking a college like that. But that is not what most of us here are looking for, and it is disingenuous to expect that the majority who are looking for an intellectually stimulating educational experience for themselves or their kids should treat those who are motivated primarily by religious beliefs or political ideology as peers in discussions about colleges. The two perspectives are fundamentally at odds.</p>
<p>It’s generally people of the right persuasion – and appearing on FOX News, and voting overwhelmingly Republican – who deny science or basics of biology, and deride the very social sciences which have placed a left-leaning Democrat in the White House. Twice.</p>
<p>There was a time when Republicans built universities, built roads, maintained bridges, passed environmental protection laws and even funded (gasp) science. These days Republicans of this ilk hide, if they in fact exists. Until that changes, they and the right will be perceived as the party that’s anti-intellectual, and anti-progressive. And it’s totally their own fault that that’s the case. They censor far too few of their vocal fellow rightists/Republican wingnuts. </p>
<h1>227 So because I prefer the ivory tower type of academic environment, I am anti-intellectual?</h1>
<p>I answered your question in post #12, and this has devolved into meaningless political wankery. We can probably all go home now. </p>
<p>I guess it depends what you mean by “ivory tower.” If you don’t want an institution that is driven by science but rather that supports rigid pre-existing ideas you have that are based on religion, I would say your motivations are indeed anti-intellectual. If this is what you want, you shouldn’t take it as an insult. You should embrace it and find a place that is right for your child, and you.</p>
<p>@SomeOldGuy, I liked your answer in #12, it was both funny and realistic.
I doubt people will go home yet though, as bashing me seems like too much fun for them.</p>
<p>Who the heck brought religion into this - I do not recall mentioning it?</p>
<p>It seems the main difference between right and left these days, in economic matters, boils down to this:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Libs believe the poor when they claim that they are trying.</p></li>
<li><p>Conservatives do not.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Both base their economic programs, to an extent – including the extent and voracity of socialism that we need to add to our ideal of laissez faire capitalism – on these findings.</p>
<p>How can you tell if someone is lying? And even if they are not lying, how do we judge whether they are correct in their self-judgment? </p>
<p>The assumptions of the left, thus, become the denials of the right.</p>
<p>Good grief. People who have a religion are capable of taking a comparative religion class. And why are we talking about religion anyway. The OP wants a non-political school. I didn’t see her say anything about climate change or religiousity. Are you seriously suggesting that anyone affiliated with a conservative college is not an intellectual peer? So U Podunk beats Hillsdale? Okay. I think the point has been made nicely on this thread. Thanks.</p>
<p>Wingnuts and goobers. lol.</p>
<p>If I understand OP correctly, he/she is looking for a place that’s anti-political, focused only on specific subjects (not political ones, limiting the selection of social sciences and liberal arts). Theoretically that’s not the same as anti-intellectual. Practically speaking, however, in the United States and much of Western Europe, that’s close to the same thing. Suggestions of schools with a large percentage of adult learners (too busy for political activism outside the classroom) and online programs were met with less than enthusiasm, and so the discussion continues. </p>
<p>OP, I repeat my suggestion of Northeastern University, in Boston. It’s a lefty, political city, but the school is sleepy, politically, and you’ll approve that its students are focused on grades in very practical subjects (lots of business, pre-med, engineering & CS majors) getting them good co-ops good jobs and into good grad schools.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No, I never said that. I do think people who deny science or eschew critical thinking in favor of belief in religious myths are not intellectual peers.</p>
<p>"… it is disingenuous to expect that the majority who are looking for an intellectually stimulating educational experience for themselves or their kids should treat those who are motivated primarily by religious beliefs or political ideology as peers in discussions about colleges."</p>
<p>The OP deserves to be treated as a peer. Her question was about a non-activist campus for a naïve and impressionable young student. Not the craziest question, by far.</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Science cannot explain the origin of matter. </p></li>
<li><p>People who eschew critical thinking in favor of Scripture – or putting God above human rationalization – are not beneath you intellectually per se. They simply believe God over man when the two differ. This doesn’t mean they are stupid… in fact, some probably believe you are lacking in some aspects of your own decision-making.</p></li>
</ol>