Affirmative Action for Conservative Professors

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Ned
Spiffor, I take it from your post that only religious people can be conservatives.

Nope, but religion plays a strong role in conservatism, even in worldly conservatism, because it has shaped our values and our understanding of the world very, very strongly.

Again, science is about overcoming prejudices, and conservatists being in favor of the status quo / of the old days are less likely to have such a questioning behavior.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara

Originally posted by Ned
Che, so you say.

Jeese Helms, Strom Thurmond, Trent Lott, etc. Why you would deny this, I don't know, since it's a well known fact of history.

Doesn't prove your statement that the South now controls the Republican Party.

[chequita guevara]

Last two Repub prezs were from the South. Most of the congressional leadership is from the South, with the sole exception of Hastert.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon


I'm generally against AA except in the form of giving added weight to good students from disadvantaged backgrounds (and that's just reasonable since the backgrounds do have effects).

But this has nothing to do with Affirmative Action, which, in the US, is solely based on race and has nothing to do with a person's background. Rich black kids have preference over poor white kids under American Affirmative Action.

[Ned]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
Last two Repub prezs were from the South. Most of the congressional leadership is from the South, with the sole exception of Hastert.

Well, GWHB a Southerner?

Can you really consider a person educated at Yale and Harvard to be a Southerner?

While both Bush's are from the South, they are only recently migrated there. If you exclude the Bush's, I don't believe the Republicans have ever even nominated a person from the South as a presidential candidate. In contrast, most of the Democrat presidential candidates of recent vintage are from the South.

But, I agree that Dr. Frist is a Southerner.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Ned
Well, GWHB a Southerner?

Can you really consider a person educated at Yale and Harvard to be a Southerner?

I don't really consider GWHB to be a real Texan, but that's where he made his life and business and was a Congressman. Texas claimed him and his son.

But, I agree that Dr. Frist is a Southerner.

And Cheney, and Gingrich, and Livingston, and Lott, etc.

Democratic leadership seems to vacillate betwen the South, the NorthEast, and California.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by Ramo
Why's that? Morality is the judgement of social interactions as good or bad. The lack of true choice doesn't contradict these judgements in any way.

What is the function of judging?

Why apply value to it?

Personally, I disagree with gravity, and find it immoral.

You don't judge that which is inevitable.

You judge because you have a choice. That is bad, because I could have chosen something else, something better, something good.

[Ned]

I think there is an internal conflict on the left's definition of consevatism. The definition proposed is a mindless, knee-jerk, dogma-driven anti-philosophy that the status quo is better than anything else.

And yet, there is an admission that conservatives are winning the battle of ideas in economics.

By definition, conservativism has no ideas, no thought, no reason and no philosophy. So, by definition, liberals should win the battle of ideas even in economics as they are contending against semi-literate people, obviously unintelligent, uninformed and more than that, bigotted.

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ned

By definition, conservativism has no ideas, no thought, no reason and no philosophy. So, by definition, liberals should win the battle of ideas even in economics as they are contending against semi-literate people, obviously unintelligent, uninformed and more than that, bigotted.

Pretty much.

[The Mad Viking]

Originally posted by Oncle Boris

There is a choice, but that choice is a function of a very complex algorythm. That we could only have made decision X doesn't mean we didn't actually make a decision.

I can't understand how an obviously intelligent person can make such a statement.

Under your argument, we can only THINK we made a decision. That is not the same thing.

With or without free will, that doesn't change much about the absurdity of life.

I'll agree life is absurd either way, but absurd things can still have meaning; if you cannot decide, then life has no meaning for us.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Agathon


Pretty much.

Agathon, of course!

[Agathon]

Originally posted by Ned


Agathon, of course!

[Imran Siddiqui]

And Cheney

Is Wyoming now considered the 'South'?

And GHWB was definetly NOT a Southerner. Everyone knew he was a Connecticut Yankee even as far as when he ran for President.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

And Cheney

Is Wyoming now considered the 'South'?

Ain't he been livin' in Texas?

[Fake Boris]

Originally posted by The Mad Viking
Under your argument, we can only THINK we made a decision. That is not the same thing.

Not the same thing as what? My argument is that we have to assume (act like) we have free will, which doesn't mean we have it.

I'm not sure what's your point here.