Journal of Politics is science? Gee whizQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Printable View
Journal of Politics is science? Gee whizQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
That a college education doesn't actually make people more knowledgeable about politics. I do enjoy talking to people like you, who claim that every scientific finding is just common sense. Of course if the finding was the exact opposite of what it was, the likes of you claim it's common sense too.
Say hi to Being for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
Geeze man, what this guy found out is: "You can't teach knowledge in a subject the person in question is not interested in."
That's familiar to all teachers everywhere. Couple that with findings that motivation for learning math is determined during primary school, combine it with basic knowledge about intrinsic/extrinsic motivation and you'll get why your paper is hardly earth-shattering.
You're right. It's better to rely on folk wisdom that to actually attempt to test theories.
Aww, going under the belt this fast? We both know we've had the hard vs soft science disagreement way before Being pissed us both off. But nice of you to use your casual mud-slinging tactics, it really enforces the view of you as an unreasonable piss-slitQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
The irony of you calling someone else unreasonable. We both know you're the most judgmental and closed-minded person here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
This is a bit hilarious after your incessant trolling of the prisoner thread
How would we go about quantifying that?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
From several discussions elsewhere, where Nessus consistently viciously attacks those who don't hold her beliefs.Quote:
Originally Posted by Unheard Of
Do you know what quantifying means?Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Personally, I didn't give a crap about the political process until I graduated from college, and started paying taxes. I paid attention, and read whatever was mainstream media, but beyond that.....couldn't have told you how districts were drawn, or what cloture or reconciliation meant, or.....:noob:
But we can't quantify the social world, tsk. Not going to contradict yourself, are you?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nessus
According to the article, political knowledge does it increase a decent amount throughout a person's life, it just doesn't increase more for college graduates. Apparently the best indicators of someone's political knowledge later in life are their grades in social studies (in high school), overall grades in high school, political participation in high school, and having politically knowledgeable parents. The best negative indicators are being female and being black. :noob:Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
:DQuote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Come on, you're not quite this dumb
Or is it that you expect me to be? I can grant you that much, I suppose
You and Khen would make a great couple.
And now we're back to the mindless mud-slinging. You're an artisan and a poet, you are!Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Uh, actually, they already found out that interests are determined way before college. Several papers in psychology et al. on that. That's why I said that the paper is not the earth-shattering revelation you make it out to be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
The problem here is that you're mixing up cause and effect. You're trying to say that college education has no use in the area of politics. That may be so, however, what you're not asking: How much politics is actually taught at college?
How are you defining "political", Loki?
I didn't take one Poli Sci class at university, but they covered "politics" in management and systems theories....for that matter Econ comes to play in every field, but it's not taught as Econ 101.
"The first is a standard five question index of political knowledge based on answers to questions about the length of a U.S. Senate term, the number of members of the Supreme Court, Franklin Delano Roosevelt’s political party, the country that had concentration camps for the Jews in World War II, and the country that Marshall Tito headed.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
The second scale is based on respondents’ answers to questions about the relative ideological locations of the parties and open ended ones about what they have in mind when they say one party is more conservative (liberal) than the other."
So you're literally meaning our knowledge of US "political systems" and history. Sounds like the test they gave my son in freshman Poli Sci 101....most of his classmates flunked it, even tho it was basically our citizenship test plus some other things. :(
The average result on the above was something like 2.5 out of 5. :p
How can 'the paper' claim our political knowledge doesn't increase much after college, tho? Anyone who has to make a budget, hire or fire employees, apply for a grant, or follow federal and/or local laws eventually gets dragged into it.
How a bill becomes a law used to be standard fodder for kiddies, with a theme song and everything. Maybe things are just too dummied down now for entertainment value? :(
Erm, I said the exact opposite above. Knowledge increases, but it doesn't increase more for people who went to college. And people who go to college tend to be the ones that were more knowledgeable to start with.
It still is standard fodder for kiddies, without the song. 3rd grade social studies here, I'd assume in most other places as well.
I have a dvd of all of Schoolhouse Rock, though, my kiddies have gotten some use of it.
Incidentally, they knew the answers to all of Icky's 5 questions but Tito.
They then continued it by listing Supreme Court Justices.
They shouldn't bother going to college then. :p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
You'd better hope college increases knowledge of Poli Sci if you're teaching Poli Sci!Quote:
Originally Posted by Loki
As for other majors, you mean it's the same quantifiable RATE of learning outside their major as it is for just high school grads....huh?
School House Rock :up: Also, my younger son took that 'test' when he was in 7th grade (administered by his older brother, tho) and aced it. His social studies and history teachers love him, but the district wants him to be more into math and science.....:sour:
The point is that the people who'll major in poli sci are generally the ones who are already interested in politics.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
If people go to college with no knowledge of politics, they generally leave college with no knowledge of politics. :noob:
I think everyone should learn to their strengths, though it's slightly disconcerting when a majority of the chemistry and engineering students and professors here are not American. Also keep in mind that knowing facts is actually not particularly useful (assuming you could learn them when you need it); the point of the social sciences is to teach people how to think and express those thoughts.
Depends on the female. :mad:Quote:
The best negative indicators are being female and being black.
Black gurls don't get enough beef? :haha:
That's probably where culture comes in. It's just not "cool" for those groups to be interested in politics. Both groups make up a disproportionately small number of grad students, too.
I don't know about that....maybe the underlying difference is a Liberal Arts education vs specialized one?
In the US it can also mean the difference (for example) between an RN with an Associate Degree or an RN with a Bachelor Degree.
1) There are many dumb people. No amount of opportunity will change that. Ever.
2) Gullibility. A high number of moderately bright, and even some exceptionally bright people have no critical thinking skills. Either nobody ever tried to teach them, or they just don't have the requisite wiring.
3) Homo rationalicus is great at avoiding inconvenient truths.
Add these up and you get a profoundly ignorant population, many of whom will devote their lives to increasing the level of ignorance in our society. The truly amazing thing is that humanity managed to get as far as it has with that much dead weight.
"Now, i dont know anything about Afghanistan, but, speaking as a mother, i know its full of terrorists."
People LOVE ignorance, as long as it supports their gut instincts. See: anywhere that votes for far right parties like the BNP. "Its the darkies fault that you are poor and scared and your life can easily be summed up by one of Pink Floyds more depressing songs. THE DARKIES! RAAAAAAR!"
Or people just get tired with so many options and choices. So many opportunities to act on ideology that choosing becomes too energy-time consuming. Case in point--Choobs saying he wants the Easy Button for his health insurance.
Fun fact: Conservatism is linked to a lower average IQ :)
... and I always thought it was linked to age.
Atheism, liberalism, and male homosexuality are also loosely linked to higher IQ. Margins are fairly small, so aren't you glad about that when you check your testes?Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Male homosexuality, or admitting to male homosexuality? Don't buy the first, the second seems plausible.Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
I would not consider Choobs, with his attitude towards learning, an example of an intelligent person who's desire to educate themselves being overwhelmed by too many choices... :bored:Quote:
Originally Posted by GGT
So is being black. If you're going to accept one, you're going to have to accept the other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Khendraja'aro
Male same-sex preference. Was a "study" linked in the news recently. Females and lesbians didn't skew the results. Some attempt to correlate changing social norms with neuroscience that didn't quite meet scientific muster (IMO), but was still interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Flixy
*whose*Quote:
Originally Posted by Illusions
Just repeating what he's posted, don't shoot the messenger.
I don't know what more you want or expect from others, Illusions. Intelligent people are often very busy and have to balance many levels of "intellectualism" with their real lives. Some very smart people aren't Type A achievers, so it can look like a laziness. Some really stupid people have determination and social skills that make them appear committed to intellectualism, but they're really not.
Who or what, exactly, are you complaining about again? It got lost in translation. :(