philosophy meta-forum

Daily Nous Post Demonstrating Conservatives are Discriminated Against in Philosophy is Taken Down

Gerbert

8 day(s) ago

http://dailynous.com/2018/04/10/philosophers-less-willing-hire/

Perhaps it's only temporary. But all the other posts on DN are working just fine. It's not like the whole site is down. Just this one damning post. What's the explanation?

(And let's be fair, the study also showed that transgender people are discriminated against, too.)

Susan

8 day(s) ago

I have no problem accessing it.

Mulla

8 day(s) ago

And now the post is back up, so I guess you can ignore this thread. (Or did this thread CAUSE the post to be put back up? We'll never know.)

Jacopo

8 day(s) ago

Don't forget communists.

Also, it says nothing about conservatives. It does say some things about Republicans, libertarians, etc.

Lynne

8 day(s) ago

Don't forget communists.

Also, it says nothing about conservatives.

Jacopo

Lol, quite right, Jacopo. It said that Republicans (23.5%), Libertarians (19%), NRA members (31.4%), Mormons (29.2%), Evangelicals (34%), and Fundamentalists (54.2%). But NOT conservatives. It never said THAT, everyone. So don't you dare draw THAT conclusion. Thanks for your helpful comment Jacopo.

Fazang

7 day(s) ago

So, what I would have thought all along: about 40% of philosophers are morally bankrupt assholes. Hire the transgenders, hire the republicans.

Christopher

7 day(s) ago

Pretty crazy that being a libertarian (19%) counts against you almost as much as being a communist (20%). I mean, neither should count against you, but I didn’t realize libertarians were hated so much.

Susan

7 day(s) ago

Pretty crazy that being a libertarian (19%) counts against you almost as much as being a communist (20%). I mean, neither should count against you, but I didn’t realize libertarians were hated so much.

Christopher

have you ever met a libertarian

Jacopo

7 day(s) ago

Don't forget communists.

Also, it says nothing about conservatives.

Jacopo

Lol, quite right, Jacopo. It said that Republicans (23.5%), Libertarians (19%), NRA members (31.4%), Mormons (29.2%), Evangelicals (34%), and Fundamentalists (54.2%). But NOT conservatives. It never said THAT, everyone. So don't you dare draw THAT conclusion. Thanks for your helpful comment Jacopo.

Lynne

1. Lynne doesn't like earl grey.

2. Lynne doesn't like lady grey.

3. Lynne doesn't like english breakfast.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

4. :: Lynne doesn't like tea.

Does that look like a valid inference pattern where you're from?

Ruth

7 day(s) ago

Jacopo. Stop being a dumbass. Here's your inference pattern, dumbass.

1. Lynne doesn't like green tea.

2. Lynne doesn't like black tea.

3. Lynne doesn't like herbal tea.

4. Lynne doesn't like fermented tea.

5. Lynne doesn't like oolong tea.

6. Lynne doesn't like white tea.

Hmm, Lynne doesn't seem to like any of the major tea groups. What's the best explanation for that? Oh, I got it.

____________________________

7. Lynne probably doesn't like tea.

Allan

7 day(s) ago

Don't forget communists.

Also, it says nothing about conservatives.

Jacopo

Lol, quite right, Jacopo. It said that Republicans (23.5%), Libertarians (19%), NRA members (31.4%), Mormons (29.2%), Evangelicals (34%), and Fundamentalists (54.2%). But NOT conservatives. It never said THAT, everyone. So don't you dare draw THAT conclusion. Thanks for your helpful comment Jacopo.

Lynne

1. Lynne doesn't like earl grey.

2. Lynne doesn't like lady grey.

3. Lynne doesn't like english breakfast.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

4. :: Lynne doesn't like tea.

Does that look like a valid inference pattern where you're from?

Jacopo

Arguing that inductive and abductive inference aren't legitimate forms of reasoning probably isn't your best strategy here.

Jacopo

7 day(s) ago

"Conservative" doesn't boil down to a disjunction of libertarian, Republican, NRA, evangelical, or fundamentalist. There are lots more ways of being conservative, most of them far more reputable. None of these disjuncts carves conservatism at its joints.

I mean, for fuck's sake. There are more countries in the world than just the US, and most (all?) have at least one "conservative" party. And for most of these, the disjuncts above just don't apply. Besides which, we don't even know how many of the nays are themselves conservatives with bones to pick with various factions.

I don't care if you're conservative, as long as you aren't a woe-is-me dumbass. At least learn a little math while you're getting your PhD.

Panaetius

7 day(s) ago

Fine, Yancey demonstrates that *American* conservatives are discriminated against in philosophy. Does that accommodate all your reservations, Jacopo?

Jacopo

7 day(s) ago

Fine, Yancey demonstrates that *American* conservatives are discriminated against in philosophy. Does that accommodate all your reservations, Jacopo?

Panaetius

No, because I don't believe that NRA membership, libertarianism, being a Republican (especially at this moment in time), etc. carve American conservatism at its joints, let alone exhaust it. What they may do is clump a large swathe of self-identified conservatives, but even then there's probably significant overlap between categories, so we can't just add em all up.

But we also don't know anything about who's doing the naysaying (what share comes from fundamentalists who think Libertarians are godless pansies?), or about base rates of representation in the total academic population. Or, indeed, base rates of naysaying across all categories.

Plus, Yancey's categories don't do a good job of carving out American "liberals" as a comparison class, either.



Allowed tags: 'p', 'b', 'em', 'blockquote'. URLs are automatically linkified.
posts per page.