Society/Culture The distrust of education

[Gethelred]

This is an almost ever present conversational topic on the SRP, so it probably should have a thread to discuss it isolated from everything else.

Certain groups and politicians like referring to 'Inner city elites', 'Latte sipping', 'Acacdemic/theoretical understanding'; in short, they evince a distrust of education. They dismiss studies, the value of education for wider society. This thread is to discuss why; the philosophy, specific occurrences, etc.

This is not a thread for partisan shittakes. I get that this is the SRP and partisanship is almost a necessary component of all discourse here, but let's try and find a legitimate basis for conversation.

Do you distrust education? Is it limited to fields you feel are unscientific? Can you explain why or what has lead you to this position? Do you feel too much money is spent on education?

Have at it.

 

[ElectricG]

Not what? Biological fact?

The acceptance of words within activist/academic circles vs the wider population.

 

[gouki88]

The acceptance of words within activist/academic circles vs the wider population.

Lol at wider population. That is completely dependent upon where you live and who you associate with.

I'll also add in that the "wider population" thinking something gives it no inherent value.

 

[Gethelred]

The acceptance of words within activist/academic circles vs the wider population.

I think it's interesting that you inherently don't trust academic circles, or at least view their opinions as worthy of doubt.

 

[gouki88]

I think it's interesting that you inherently don't trust academic circles, or at least view their opinions as worthy of doubt.

Distrusting higher education is a fairly common hallmark of the populist right (and further along). Makes ya think!

 

[Schneebly11]

Distrusting higher education is a fairly common hallmark of the populist right (and further along). Makes ya think!

Anti climate change
Anti vaccine
Anti evolution

There’s a definite link between being right wing and science denial.

I’ve heard right wingers bash universities (“all unis are about these days is brainwashing with a Marxist agenda”) in order to de-legitimise them.

 

[gouki88]

Anti climate change
Anti vaccine
Anti evolution

There’s a definite link between being right wing and science denial.

I’ve heard right wingers bash universities (“all unis are about these days is brainwashing with a Marxist agenda”) in order to de-legitimise them.

It's easier to do that than to acknowledge the correlation between education and progressivism

 

[TheBigHorne]

Anti climate change
Anti vaccine
Anti evolution

There’s a definite link between being right wing and science denial.

I’ve heard right wingers bash universities (“all unis are about these days is brainwashing with a Marxist agenda”) in order to de-legitimise them.

There was also some RW person who thinks psychology isn't real.

 

[morningbrown]

The acceptance of words within activist/academic circles vs the wider population.

Are you trying to say that the general population knows more about this stuff than people who's lives are dedicated to studying it? Cool dude.

 

[ElectricG]

I think it's interesting that you inherently don't trust academic circles, or at least view their opinions as worthy of doubt.

Do we really have to have this conversation all over again? I’m not doubting the validity of research. I’m saying the public don’t have to apply it in the way the activists or researchers want, or use their nomenclature.

 

[Gethelred]

Do we really have to have this conversation all over again? I’m not doubting the validity of research. I’m saying the public don’t have to apply it in the way the activists or researchers want, or use their nomenclature.

... because you don't trust them, their outcomes, what they're saying to have a resemblance to reality.

You're absolutely doubting the validity of research. You're doubting the merits of the process by which these people - the ones who are actually experts - arrive at their conclusions.

Let's ask a different question: why should the public get to ignore expertise?

 

[ElectricG]

... because you don't trust them, their outcomes, what they're saying to have a resemblance to reality.

You're absolutely doubting the validity of research. You're doubting the merits of the process by which these people - the ones who are actually experts - arrive at their conclusions.

Let's ask a different question: why should the public get to ignore expertise?

I’m not saying they should ignore expertise, nor am I doing the things you accuse me of.

Words with longstanding precedent don’t change because of research outcomes. People know exactly what they mean to say when they use a word like “male”. They aren’t conflating anything.

 

[Gethelred]

I’m not saying they should ignore expertise, nor am I doing the things you accuse me of.

Words with longstanding precedent don’t change because of research outcomes. People know exactly what they mean to say when they use a word like “male”. They aren’t conflating anything.

Yes, they do. Etymology is nothing but the study of words and meaning drift; how and why it occurs.

Academics have absolutely changed how things are viewed, including words and definitions.

 

[Gethelred]

More to the point though: why shouldn't society change definitions to better meet desirable outcomes for wider society?

 

[The Punter]

Partisan is a fact. You either are one or you are not.

Shittake is a judgement. So whose judgement are we going on?

 

[Mofra]

More to the point though: why shouldn't society change definitions to better meet desirable outcomes for wider society?

Language does change with time regardless, this is irrespective of political persuasion or education.
Railing against this is about as effective as standing on the beach demanding the tide not come in that day.

In b4 Shakespeare reference...

 

[Lethality]

I'm all about trusting the science. This means non political and respected experts. Yet the jury is still out on areas where many claim moral certainty.

For example reports are now coming out which claim that the lockdowns were too extreme. Yet despite this Dan Andrews reiterates that his decisions weren't about popularity, but about "doing the right thing".

Also I saw an expert on trans science on Q&A who seemed completely apolitical who says that M2F trans people retain certain advantages after transition. An inadmissible or transphobic view in many people's eyes.

In other words the people who say 'listen to the science" dont always listen to the science.

 

[Rusty Brookes]

The vast majority of people IMHO don't even understand the scientific/research process and how it's meant to work. Let alone, the vast majority seem to be statistically illiterate. Science is a process which produces evidence which is open to critique from experts. Out of that process, models are built which explains the natural world.

Education allows you to evaluate evidence and make conclusions based on that evaluation. Not everyone will agree but when the consensus is agreed to by a vast majority of experts then there's a high probability that what the consensus says, is a pretty accurate reflection of what is trying to be measured.

That's a bloody long-winded and slightly wanky way of saying, yes I trust education.

 

[Gethelred]

Partisan is a fact. You either are one or you are not.

Shittake is a judgement. So whose judgement are we going on?

Mine.

If you wanna play games, take it to another thread and leave this one alone.

 

[Evolved1]

I'm all about trusting the science. This means non political and respected experts. Yet the jury is still out on areas where many claim moral certainty.

For example reports are now coming out which claim that the lockdowns were too extreme. Yet despite this Dan Andrews reiterates that his decisions weren't about popularity, but about "doing the right thing".

Also I saw an expert on trans science on Q&A who seemed completely apolitical who says that M2F trans people retain certain advantages after transition. An inadmissible or transphobic view in many people's eyes.

In other words the people who say 'listen to the science" dont always listen to the science.

Can we say that Dan Andrews doesn't trust aspects of academia then? It's a fair critique.

'There are always learnings, and there are many, many reports,' he said. 'There was nothing academic about this event, it was very, very real. 'This is all a continuous process of improvement and learning.'

Moment Dan Andrews boasts about how Victoria tackled Covid pandemic

Victorian Premier Dan Andrews doubled down on his Covid decision making despite a new report shining a light on pandemic failures, including long lockdowns and school closures.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It's virtually impossible to have a rational discussion on trans rights from a scientific basis in the current climate due to differing agendas at play.

 

[gouki88]

Can we say that Dan Andrews doesn't trust aspects of academia then? It's a fair critique.

'There are always learnings, and there are many, many reports,' he said. 'There was nothing academic about this event, it was very, very real. 'This is all a continuous process of improvement and learning.'

Moment Dan Andrews boasts about how Victoria tackled Covid pandemic

Victorian Premier Dan Andrews doubled down on his Covid decision making despite a new report shining a light on pandemic failures, including long lockdowns and school closures.

www.dailymail.co.uk

It's virtually impossible to have a rational discussion on trans rights from a scientific basis in the current climate due to differing agendas at play.

I would say that many of Andrews' decisions, as we inch towards the election, have been less about science

 

[Home Alone]

This is an almost ever present conversational topic on the SRP, so it probably should have a thread to discuss it isolated from everything else.

Certain groups and politicians like referring to 'Inner city elites', 'Latte sipping', 'Acacdemic/theoretical understanding'; in short, they evince a distrust of education. They dismiss studies, the value of education for wider society. This thread is to discuss why; the philosophy, specific occurrences, etc.

This is not a thread for partisan shittakes. I get that this is the SRP and partisanship is almost a necessary component of all discourse here, but let's try and find a legitimate basis for conversation.

Do you distrust education? Is it limited to fields you feel are unscientific? Can you explain why or what has lead you to this position? Do you feel too much money is spent on education?

Have at it.

Absolutely there is a distrust.

Personally, I think it comes down to your view of what is the purpose of education. It is now taking on a distinct reference to vocational training.

Once we move past that into the academia part of discovery of knowledge and you are asked to question your original 'known facts' of vocational education the distrust begins.

 

[Grin]

This is an almost ever present conversational topic on the SRP, so it probably should have a thread to discuss it isolated from everything else.

Certain groups and politicians like referring to 'Inner city elites', 'Latte sipping', 'Acacdemic/theoretical understanding'; in short, they evince a distrust of education. They dismiss studies, the value of education for wider society. This thread is to discuss why; the philosophy, specific occurrences, etc.

This is not a thread for partisan shittakes. I get that this is the SRP and partisanship is almost a necessary component of all discourse here, but let's try and find a legitimate basis for conversation.

Do you distrust education? Is it limited to fields you feel are unscientific? Can you explain why or what has lead you to this position? Do you feel too much money is spent on education?

Have at it.

In my opinion education is distrusted because people are convinced by vested interests to distrust it.

Educated people are more likely to be critical thinkers and harder to manipulate. Right wing media and commentary portrays educated people as 'elites' who are "not to be trusted because they think they're better than you and want to harm you. Anyway you know more than them on any topic including anything they have expertise in, because you've got a degree in life from the university of hard knocks."
Hey presto a year 8 educated 30 year old shelf stacker at Woolworths knows more about climate science (for example) than the combined knowledge of all the worlds experts.

 

[Hoops]

It's the "facts don't care for your feelings" mob that tend to have issues with scientific facts.

 

[Sir_Loin]

Tend to find those that “distrust education” often haven’t completed formal tertiary qualifications. So they distrust the very thing they are incapable of completing. Weird.