Dean's "Conservatives Without Conscience"

[John_Mace]

@Lemur866

Take a deep breath, and admit that if kids don’t learn about evolution society will go on, but if they don’t learn to read we’re back to hitting antelope with sharp rocks.

Devolution!

The fact is, most people learn about evolution in school and retain approximately 0% of that knowledge into adulthood (if they even believe it in the first place). I’d actually go so far as to say most of what they “remember” is wrong-- eg, humans evolved from chimps.

[Lemur866]

They remember about as much about evolution as the remember about french. “Bon Jour” means “hello”, “oui” means yes, and French people wear berets. They remember as much as they remember about algebra…that there are these x’s and y’s and you can add or subtract them in funny ways. They remember about as much as they remember about American history…George Washington was the first president, the Indians attacked the pioneers, Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, WWII was declared.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Mace

In order to function in society you need to know how our government works. It’s probably a lot easier to teach about that government if you do so in a historical context, but I’d agree that that history itself is not so important.

I’m not sure I’d agree that knowing how the government works is essential to functioning in society in any practical way. Christ knows plenty of native born Americans can’t name the three branches of government or their own Congressional representatives or even the Vice President. Knowing the LAWS is important, but plenty of people get along just fine without knowing anything about the mechanics of their own government. I wish it wasn’t like that (and it’s one of the reasons I have such hardcore attitudes about how public education should work) but that’s how it is.

Why is it “hugely important” or “essential” to know about the origin of the human species? Saying it’s part of a complete education is circular reasoning-- it’s important because it’s important.

How are you defining “essential?” What’s essential about geometry or algebra or knowing anything about the Civil War? If you don’t think the origin of human beings is a significant part of human history or that evolution is not a crucial part of biology then I don’t know what to tell you. That’s the same as saying that history and biology themselves are unimportant parts of education. Like I said above, if you’re going to define what is “essential” to education down to only the most immediately practical level, you might as well stop at 6th grade.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Lemur866

Diogenes, please.

You’re backing yourself into a corner and saying silly things.

Learning evolution is more important than learning to read?

I didn’t say that. I said it’s AS important, not MORE important.

Even if I were to stipulate for the sake of argument that learning evolutionary theory is less essential than learning to read, does that automatically mean it’s dispensible. Should a mandatory curriculum only include elements which are as important as reading. Ranking subjects by their relative importance to reading is a bit of a red herring here.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Mace

Devolution!

The fact is, most people learn about evolution in school and retain approximately 0% of that knowledge into adulthood (if they even believe it in the first place). I’d actually go so far as to say most of what they “remember” is wrong-- eg, humans evolved from chimps.

You can say the same thing about history, geography, algebra and Shakespeare. Does that mean they shouldn’t belong on a mandatory curriculum?

[John_Mace]

@Diogenes the Cynic

How are you defining “essential?”

You’re the one using the word-- I’m asking you to define it.

What’s essential about geometry or algebra or knowing anything about the Civil War?

Nothing. I didn’t say they were essential. Most people don’t know anything about geometry or algebra, and very little about the civil war.

If you don’t think the origin of human beings is a significant part of human history or that evolution is not a crucial part of biology then I don’t know what to tell you.

Evolution is not a crucial part of biology at the HS level. But let’s not have that debate again… You can teach all about biology (at the HS level) without once mentioning evolution. That’s usually just one chapter in the book anyway-- you just skip that chapter. Most people don’t remember anything about it anyway.

That’s the same as saying that history and biology themselves are unimportant parts of education. Like I said above, if you’re going to define what is “essential” to education down to only the most immediately practical level, you might as well stop at 6th grade.

Yes, you would. But that’s what “essential” means.

[Common_Tater]

@Diogenes the Cynic

When it comes to SOCIAL liberals, pretty much all of them.

I think maybe I haven’t been clear enough about my own distinction between social philosophies and economic philosophies. I’m throwing out economic philosophies for both sides. People can be fiscal conservatives but social libertarians. I would not consider thiose people to be authoritarian. I think that social libertarians (whether they be fiscally liberal or conservative) are pretty much the polar opposite of authoritarians. I guess I’d even say that fiscal conservatism combined with social libertarianism is the LEAST authoritarian political philosophy.

Social conservatives, though, especially when fueled by the high dudgeon of self-righteous religiosity (which is a distinct TYPE of religious personality, I don’t mean that all religious people are self-righteous. “Religiosity” is a term I use to designate an attitude where religion becomes a political banner or a club to bludgeon dissent) definitely fit the profile for both authoritarian leaders and followers, and that particular subsect of American conservatives seem to have become a majority in the last decade or so. They ARE uncritical of their chosen authorities, they ARE aggressive on behalf of that authority, they ARE prejudiced and provincial. They ARE self-righteous and intolerant. Look at their major mouthpieces – Ann Coulter (don’t tell me she’s not representative. Her books routinely go to #1 on the bestseller lists. My inlaws, who I think are extremely representative social conservative, Bush loyalists buy every one of her books as soon as they come out), Bill O’Reilly, Fox News in general.

I don’t see how this correlation can be denied and I DON’T see any kind of parallel on the social left.

You didn’t answer the question.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Lemur866

They remember about as much about evolution as the remember about french. “Bon Jour” means “hello”, “oui” means yes, and French people wear berets. They remember as much as they remember about algebra…that there are these x’s and y’s and you can add or subtract them in funny ways. They remember about as much as they remember about American history…George Washington was the first president, the Indians attacked the pioneers, Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, WWII was declared.

It’s easy to mock and you’re not wrong about the level of retention but the point remains that realistic retention levels have never had anything to do with how we decide which subjects are or are not important to a high school curriculum. You guys are raising the bar for evolutionary theory to a riduculously high standard (it MUST be as important as reading or it can’t be on the list) just because it’s evolutionary theory. You guys wouldn’t say that about all the other mandatory subjects that are not quite as important as reading.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Common Tater

You didn’t answer the question.

WTF was your question?

[John_Mace]

@Lemur866

They remember about as much about evolution as the remember about french. “Bon Jour” means “hello”, “oui” means yes, and French people wear berets. They remember as much as they remember about algebra…that there are these x’s and y’s and you can add or subtract them in funny ways. They remember about as much as they remember about American history…George Washington was the first president, the Indians attacked the pioneers, Abraham Lincoln freed the slaves, WWII was declared.

Who is Abraham Lincoln. Wasn’t he in the Bible? Is he the guy who led the slaves out of Egypt-- I thought he was the guy who almost killed his son?

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Mace

You’re the one using the word-- I’m asking you to define it.

I would define it as what ever is necessary to have a working understanding of our own universe, planet, history and cultures as well as some of the vital tools which humans use to acquire this knowledge (such as mathematics, scientific method and reading).

Nothing. I didn’t say they were essential. Most people don’t know anything about geometry or algebra, and very little about the civil war.

So you don’t think they should be required parts of a high school curriculum, then? And anyone who thinks they should be is an authoritarian?

Evolution is not a crucial part of biology at the HS level. But let’s not have that debate again… You can teach all about biology (at the HS level) without once mentioning evolution. That’s usually just one chapter in the book anyway-- you just skip that chapter. Most people don’t remember anything about it anyway.

What can I say? I completely disagree. I think biology STARTS with evolution. It IS evolution. Anyone who doesn’t know anything about evolution doesn’t know anything about biology.
Yes, you would. But that’s what “essential” means.
[/QUOTE]

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

Yes, you would. But that’s what “essential” means.

I’m not getting you. Are you arguing that only (what you consider) the most practical tools SHOULD be part of a required curriculum? If your answer is no, then what would be your criteria for deciding what should be required?

[John_Mace]

Authoritarian social liberals* are all over the place. They want to tell you what you have to teach your kids, what kind of motorcycle helmet you have to wear, how much water your toilet is allowed to have per flush, how much mileage your car can get, how many people you have to have in your car to drive in certain lanes, where you can smoke even if you’re outside, whether you can serve water in a restaraunt without the customers asking for it (that’s actually against the law in CA), and the list goes on…

*“liberal” in the sense of being on the political left

[baronsabato]

@John Mace

Evolution is not a crucial part of biology at the HS level. But let’s not have that debate again… You can teach all about biology (at the HS level) without once mentioning evolution. That’s usually just one chapter in the book anyway-- you just skip that chapter. Most people don’t remember anything about it anyway.

I hate to continue this hijack, but why exactly isn’t it a crucial part of biology at the high school level? As complicated as evolutionary theory is, the basics of it, especially natural selection and basic genetics, is easily understood by any reasonably intelligent high school student.

Without evolution, biology is no longer biology. Evolution is just too essential to biology. Here’s what TalkOrigins has to say about the matter:

Biology without evolution is natural history, not biology. There is a great deal of important information in natural history that should be taught, but evolution is the unifying idea that ties it all together, allowing one not only to know the facts but to understand them and to know where the facts come from. Teaching biology without evolution would be like teaching chemistry without the periodic table of the elements.

If high school teachers aren’t doing a good enough job emphasizing the importance of evolution, then that is a huge problem. It wasn’t too long ago that I was in high school, and I learned quite a lot about evolution in basic 9th grade biology. It made so much sense to me and turned me from hard-core YEC fundamentalism into the evolutionary biology major I am today.

I don’t think home-schooled kids should not be allowed a diploma if they don’t learn evolution. However, I think it should be well-emphasized in the tests they take, at least as much as, to use the example put forth by TalkOrigins, the Periodic table is emphasized in a chemistry portion of the test.

[baronsabato]

@John Mace

whether you can serve water in a restaraunt without the customers asking for it (that’s actually against the law in CA), and the list goes on…

Really? Can I ask for a cite for that? I’m not challenging you, I’d just like to read more about it, especially since I usually get water without asking for it. What’s the rationale for a law like that?

[John_Mace]

@baronsabato

I don’t think home-schooled kids should not be allowed a diploma if they don’t learn evolution.

Then you agre with me, and not Diogenes. That’s the whole crux right there.

BTW, I read about the water law in the Merc last week. It was in an article that had a list of all the laws we have that no one ever obeys.

[Sarahfeena]

@John Mace

Authoritarian social liberals* are all over the place. They want to tell you what you have to teach your kids, what kind of motorcycle helmet you have to wear, how much water your toilet is allowed to have per flush, how much mileage your car can get, how many people you have to have in your car to drive in certain lanes, where you can smoke even if you’re outside, whether you can serve water in a restaraunt without the customers asking for it (that’s actually against the law in CA), and the list goes on…

*“liberal” in the sense of being on the political left

Thanks for bringing everyone back to the point, John Mace. It is very typical of lefties to decide that they know the right way to live and that they can mandate these things to everyone. Anyone who decides that they know what is best for everyone, and forces people to conform to that rule IS authoritarian. You give some excellent examples.

[John_Mace]

I forgot one of the most egregious acts of left-wing authoritarianism: school busing. Fortunately, we don’t have much (any?) of that going on anymore.

Now, I’ll admit that social righties tend to be more authoritarian than are social lefties. But that kinda comes with the territory. After all, conomic lefties tend to be more authoritarian than economic righties. (Using “right” and “left” instead of “conservative” and “liberal”.) Which is why us true non-authoritarian types are libertarians.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@Sarahfeena

Thanks for bringing everyone back to the point, John Mace. It is very typical of lefties to decide that they know the right way to live and that they can mandate these things to everyone. Anyone who decides that they know what is best for everyone, and forces people to conform to that rule IS authoritarian. You give some excellent examples.

His list was mostly bullshit strawmen. The only thing I’d agree with is maybe helmet laws. The rest of it is either environmental or community necessity (water conservation, pollution standards) or smoking laws which are not a left-right issue (do only conservatives smoke? Do only liberals not like to breathe it?). I’d like to know how the hell carpool lanes have anything to do with liberals or how they’re authoritarian.

[Diogenes_the_Cynic]

@John Mace

I forgot one of the most egregious acts of left-wing authoritarianism: school busing. Fortunately, we don’t have much (any?) of that going on anymore.

Forced busing was ordered by the courts, not legislated by liberals.