<p>I seriously doubt that a student at Chicago will spend much time listening to professors argue that God does not exist. In 4 years there, I don’t recall hearing (or hearing about) a professor make that case even once.</p>
<p>The predominant teaching style in the Humanities and Social Sciences there is Socratic. The core Humanities and Social Science courses are much like a Great Books program. </p>
<p>I don’t know too much about Thomas Aquinas though. The curriculum looks interesting. I think the success of a Great Books program depends a lot on what the faculty and students bring to discussion of the material.</p>
<p>I’m sorry, I didn’t see that claim in the first post.</p>
<p>I saw secular “colleges,” not “philosophers.” The poster only mentioned a concern that in a “secular” college there would be too many “atheist” professors who push a particular point of view in excess.</p>
<p>Nowhere does it state that the poster is concerned about any particular philosophers being taught, or that any point of view should not be taught for that matter.</p>
<p>Vossron- Schools in general. I actually know almost nothing about either school’s faculty except that they’re good at Reed, and nothing about New College (except that they tend to be more professionals than academics).</p>
<p>And you’re right, Bealor, it was not explicitly stated in the post I was addressing. I was hitting at a larger spectre I saw in the thread. That being said, I stand by my comments. They’re perfectly accurate, regardless of the posters concerns. And the point about “atheist” professors at “secular” schools is still utter nonsense.</p>
<p>That may very well be true – I personally agree with you. Given that you quoted the poster, the only possible conclusion one could reasonably draw was that what you posted referred back to that quotation.</p>
<p>I agree with Baelor. Most of the dissension appears to come when a conservative student seeks a conservative school, and I too don’t see the opposite occurring.
I also agree that ND may not be considered “conservative” compared to the schools in post #2. However, I do think it would be much right of many other schools in the country–particularly if the OP is looking at top 30. IMO</p>
<p>I started college as a religious fundamentalist, and an active member of New York State’s Conservative Party, planning to major in philosophy. The essays in my application spoke of being willing to test my views (religious as well as political).</p>
<p>A third of a century later, I’m a registered Democrat, and an atheist. I tested my views, and found them wanting.</p>
<p>How confident are you in your convictions? Are you really willing to put them to the test, knowing you could actually change your mind about things that are important to you now? </p>
<p>Is the strength of your faith such that you are not willing to put it to the test?</p>
<p>There’s nothing facetious about these questions, by the way. My own journey (intellectual and religious) was extremely painful, but necessary, in my view.</p>
<p>There are safer things to study in college, if you’re afraid you’re not really up to the test.</p>
<p>Absolutely…typically when a liberal wants liberal school suggestions, he’s just happily told where to apply. However, when a conservative expresses interest in seeking a school compatible with his beliefs, he’s often scolded for being “close-minded” and lectured on the benefits of “hearing the other sides.” (The “other side” is code for the “correct side.”)</p>
<p>I understand the Op’s concerns completely. Our D and S are moderate Republicans-I believe that is probably an oxymoron these days. Even at Furman during the 2008 Presidential election they felt as though they were in the minority. Our two want an open dialogue with anyone with different views from theirs, but do not want to be “shouted down”.</p>
<p>What about Boston College ( though am not sure of merit aid), or Marquette? Both Jesuit, but my impression is neither school has the Georgetown feel. Perhaps consider looking at something totally “outside the box” Georgia Tech’s Ivan Allen College of Liberal Arts has several schools with Philosophy minors and international designators, where students spend about one year abroad studying in areas such as philosophy. Also take a look at Pepperdine-probably a closer fit with your philosophical views-an abundance of majors, and for many students, a lot of merit aid.</p>
<p>There is actually a fairly broad range of viewpoints among Americans who call themselves “Conservatives”. From William F. Buckley and Bary Goldwater to David Brooks, Bill Kristol, Pat Buchanan, Pat Robertson, Sarah Palin, etc., a lot of ground is covered.</p>
<p>For example, it should go without saying that not all Conservatives by any means are young earth creationists. That viewpoint is quite difficult to square with modern science, and let’s face it, does invite a caricature of conservatives among many liberals and intellectuals. If you believe that, and are vocal and touchy about it, then yes you are likely to have a hard time at virtually any selective, non-religious institution. </p>
<p>If you are primarily a small government, low taxes kind of conservative, you probably won’t have a hard time fitting in on most campuses. If you are a neo-con who believes in an aggressive, America-first foreign policy, you may have some spirited conversations but are unlikely to be ostracized just for that belief. A pro-gun, anti-abortion conservative? If you are vocal and in-your-face about it, then some people with the opposite view will be vocal and in-your-face right back. A lot may depend on your style.</p>
<p>I don’t think your personal belief about the existence (or non-existence) of God should play significantly into your social standing, as long as you are respectful toward other beliefs.</p>
<p>As for my statement about atheist philosophy profs at many secular schools annoying or insulting students who believe in God…</p>
<p>No, I haven’t polled every philosophy dept. But, I have nearly 50 nieces and nephews, and many of them are either currently attending or have attended top schools across this country - including ivies. So, while my statement may be based on anecdotal evidence, it’s not without some merit.</p>
<p>I don’t need to poll every school to be concerned about this issue. There is nothing wrong with having the debate of whether God exists (that should even happen at religious schools). But, students should not be made to feel stupid, shallow-thinking, or brain-washed for believing in God. It suggests an agenda; not one of teaching, but of increasing atheist numbers.</p>
<p>Also, when a prof fervently puts forth his opinion in a way that suggests that only his view is “right” and “intelligent,” it will shut down discussion out of fear of being dismissed or put-down. Profs should put forth ideas/theories/thoughts out there for debate, but not dominate the debate in a tyranical way. A prof can and should play “devils advocate” at times, and that’s fine. But, never in a way that suggests that those who think differently are stupid - because that stifles debate.</p>
<p>I grew up in a predominantly Catholic neighborhood (one nearby section was known locally as “Rabbit Hill”), so I can relate to that. Can’t quite measure up to 50 though …</p>
<p>Anyway, I dunno about the domineering atheist professors. I’d like to hear some current philosophy students from “suspect” schools weigh in. I can’t help thinking it is something of an urban legend. </p>
<p>We’ve mentioned the Socratic method a few times. If a class is following this approach, the professor shouldn’t even be doing all that much talking, let alone bloviating about his own personal doctrine. Now, if a student starts doing that - using the class as a sounding board - then the professor has an obligation to intervene (and may do so in a sarcastic, impatient, even dismissive tone). Is it possible this is what some kids report as “put downs”?</p>
<p>I’m sure that many college students who’ve taken philosophy classes at secular colleges could present examples of what I’ve described. And, no, I’m not referring to that silly urban legend with the chalk. This isn’t something that comes up in all philosophy classes - certainly not deductive logic - but in basic philosophy classes which are sometimes also taken to fulfill GE requirements.</p>
<p>And, I agree, using the Socratic method, the professor shouldn’t even be doing much talking; he should put forth a question/thought/theory and ask for answers/opinions/defenses.</p>
<p>I have great respect for teachers/profs who can facilitate a lively debate without ever really revealing which side he/she is personally on. I have great respect for my kids’ AP Gov teacher (a former longtime CSPAN employee) who told parents that “students will not know what my politics are - we will have lively discussions, but the students will not know my personal positions.” What a relief from another teacher who used her classroom as a soapbox to stridently put forth every left-leaning idea out there (except for abortion because it was a Catholic school, and she’d be fired for that).</p>
<p>Hwwever, the point of mentioning the whole issue in the first place was so that the OP could avoid the possible scenario by going to one of the suggested Catholic U’s, where the subject will be debated, but not in a demeaning way.</p>
<p>This is irrefutably true. You do not have to be conservative to see that this is what happens over and over again on CC. It can often make those who are helpful and well-meaning appear smug and sanctimonious.</p>
<p>“Short version: Choosing to go to a place where you’re the majority makes you go to extremes. Its better for you, AND the liberals, to be in a more mixed, balanced situation.”</p>
<p>Going to a balanced school, not liberal nor conservative, would seem the best for philosophy.</p>
<p>“Grounded in the same values” can be loosely interpreted. For example, going to a school where the students value faith in general is different from going to a school where people value Catholicism, Judaism, Islam, LDS, or whatever specific religion with which the school is affiliated.</p>
<p>Similarly, there are constant complaints from sexually traditional students, parents, faculty, and alumni of Princeton about the hookup culture on campus. “Grounded in the same values” in this case could refer to a school that has some institutional support for an abstinent lifestyle (e.g., dorm systems in many Catholic universities). Say what you will, I hardly find wanting to be around other people who are abstinent and thus cut out sex as a factor in college is a bad thing for those who wish it.</p>
<p>Point is, uniformity of thought is not the same as having common values run through the student body.</p>
<p>Its not the same, but one can certainly lead to the other. Moreover, call me skeptical but I’ve seen “grounded in the same values” used a euphimism for extremists far of all walks, but especially religious people (not just Christians) too often to read that as anything but the same or VERY similar religion. After all, belief or non belief in God is just one value, and for some people believing in the wrong god, or in the wrong way, doesn’t count. (I have had no indication this applies to the OP or anyone in the thread, just saying).</p>