|
Post by jarcenas on Mar 17, 2009 16:28:12 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by the sandman on Mar 17, 2009 16:59:27 GMT -5
Well, your first link is dead and the others are all massive necro-threads from at least 2 years ago.
As for why the Academia hate? That's nothing new. The religious-social-political establishment has been fighting academia for centuries.
|
|
|
Post by MozMode on Mar 17, 2009 17:13:58 GMT -5
I think they hate what they fear. They fear Academia because it = intelligence. And intelligence equals free thinking to them and not easily brainwashed by insane dogma.
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 17, 2009 17:24:04 GMT -5
I think they hate what they fear. They fear Academia because it = intelligence. And intelligence equals free thinking to them and not easily brainwashed by insane dogma. It can be a bit of a vicious circle, tho, as there are some people in academia and other places that regard anyone who isn't as "elite" as they are to be unwashed and ignorant. What's really needed is for both sides to get over themselves.
|
|
|
Post by Thejebusfire on Mar 17, 2009 17:48:47 GMT -5
Most people on yahoo answers don't know what their talking about.
|
|
|
Post by schizophonic on Mar 17, 2009 19:32:43 GMT -5
"you think you're better than us?"
|
|
|
Post by perv on Mar 18, 2009 3:55:40 GMT -5
I guess the basic reason is that if you disagree with someone you want them to be wrong and will look for something to support that belief. For "academics" the standard explanation is that they're out of touch with reality, and/or have a sinister liberal agenda. People believe it because it's either that or admit they're wrong.
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Mar 18, 2009 5:46:29 GMT -5
I think they hate what they fear. They fear Academia because it = intelligence. And intelligence equals free thinking to them and not easily brainwashed by insane dogma. It can be a bit of a vicious circle, tho, as there are some people in academia and other places that regard anyone who isn't as "elite" as they are to be unwashed and ignorant. What's really needed is for both sides to get over themselves. Those who consider themselves "elite" are actually quite rare amongst acedemia. Can you name one?
|
|
|
Post by Art Vandelay on Mar 18, 2009 5:56:31 GMT -5
It can be a bit of a vicious circle, tho, as there are some people in academia and other places that regard anyone who isn't as "elite" as they are to be unwashed and ignorant. What's really needed is for both sides to get over themselves. Those who consider themselves "elite" are actually quite rare amongst acedemia. Can you name one? C'mon now, don't you know that Skyfire knows everything there is possibly to know about academia. He'll soon have an MBA after all, which will automatically qualify him to enter the academic elite he speaks of!
|
|
|
Post by Julian on Mar 18, 2009 5:57:15 GMT -5
It can be a bit of a vicious circle, tho, as there are some people in academia and other places that regard anyone who isn't as "elite" as they are to be unwashed and ignorant. What's really needed is for both sides to get over themselves. Those who consider themselves "elite" are actually quite rare amongst acedemia. Can you name one? I daresay Sky could name hundreds in academia who think he's ignorant though!
|
|
|
Post by JonathanE on Mar 18, 2009 6:12:57 GMT -5
Acedemia are just teachers, when you boil it all down. Yes, they do research, publish to support their ideas and so on, but, in the end, are teachers.
I thought teaching was a noble profession. I guess it depends on what you teach, then.
|
|
|
Post by skyfire on Mar 18, 2009 10:18:45 GMT -5
It can be a bit of a vicious circle, tho, as there are some people in academia and other places that regard anyone who isn't as "elite" as they are to be unwashed and ignorant. What's really needed is for both sides to get over themselves. Those who consider themselves "elite" are actually quite rare amongst acedemia. Can you name one? Primary or secondary level? At the primary level I've dealt with more than a few teachers who really didn't need to be teaching; they had a marked superiority complex and so regarded any student as inferior and any parent who didn't automatically side with them as impediments. At the secondary level, my last supervisor when I did paid tutoring was a massive jerk in regards to the job. She started out a nice person, but in time it became apparent that she hit the Peters Principle hard (it's believed that she got the position because she was a willing "yes-woman" to the higher-ups). Given that she was also working as a professor at the same time, I can only pity her students.
|
|
|
Post by Death on Mar 18, 2009 10:36:15 GMT -5
Those who consider themselves "elite" are actually quite rare amongst acedemia. Can you name one? Primary or secondary level? At the primary level I've dealt with more than a few teachers who really didn't need to be teaching; they had a marked superiority complex and so regarded any student as inferior and any parent who didn't automatically side with them as impediments. At the secondary level, my last supervisor when I did paid tutoring was a massive jerk in regards to the job. She started out a nice person, but in time it became apparent that she hit the Peters Principle hard (it's believed that she got the position because she was a willing "yes-woman" to the higher-ups). Given that she was also working as a professor at the same time, I can only pity her students. Did you understand the question?
|
|
|
Post by Julian on Mar 18, 2009 10:36:48 GMT -5
Primary or secondary level? How about kindygiddun you dumbass!* And on a serious note, we have a winner! This is why many people revile academia. They received a lifetime of F's and they're fighting back trying to shoot the messenger, not to mention when feeling inferior, or insecure, putting down the perceived threat is a effective (but stupid) way of dealing with the issue. Very sad...
|
|
|
Post by Death on Mar 18, 2009 10:44:46 GMT -5
It's just not possible that Sky could be this consistently wrong. NO ONE is wrong 100% of the time.
|
|