Donald Trump Talks at a 4th-Grade Level.
Donald Trump Talks at a 4th-Grade Level. Maybe Thats Why the Fox News Audience Loves Him
The culture of anti-intellectualism in America is fueling hateful, racist demagogues -- in politics and on TV.
By Phil Torres / Salon
January 12, 2016
Sen. Tim Scott and Donald Trump held a Town Hall Meeting at the Koger Center on September 23, 2015 in Columbia S.C. Trump successfully connected to the full audience using his trademark humor.
Photo Credit: Crush Rush / Shutterstock.com
Its a cliché to say that democratic states cant function properly without an informed electorate. But its absolutely true. And this is why, heading into the 2016 election year, Im nervous about the future. With Donald Trump leading the Republican presidential contenders, even many Republican die-hards are shaking in their boots.
But Trump isnt the cause, just the symptom. The deeper cause is a strain of anti-intellectualism that runs through the roots of American culture. And while this strain is found on both sides of the political spectrum (see some liberals on vaccines and chemtrails), its mostly concentrated among religious conservatives on the political right. For those who espouse anti-intellectualism, conspiracy theories have the same clout as legitimate science, the opinions of non-experts are just as credible as those of the experts, and ideology takes precedence over the cold hard facts.
The US has fostered a culture of anti-intellectualism more than most other Western countries. While traveling through Europe and the UK for extended periods of time, Ive often been quite envious of how respectful other countries are toward those with knowledge in the fields of science and the humanities. In the UK, for example, its generally not seen as uncool to have a higher degree from a good university. Often, it confers the degree-holder a certain social respect and admiration. Many of the top comedians in the UK have attended institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, including Michael Palin, Eric Idol, John Cleese, David Mitchell, Richard Ayoade and Stephen Fry. And shows such as QI, which combines academic discussions with uproarious, irreverent humor, are popular hits.
Not only is the U.S. unique for its love affair with anti-intellectualism, but this romantic relationship appears to have grown stronger over the past few decades. A primary reason for this is no doubt the huge influence that conservative media have had on American culture, such as Fox News, which is currently the most trusted news network in the country. The problem is that Fox News is a misnomer. The network is, to quote Jon Stewart, more of a relentlessly activist organization for conservative causes than an intellectually honest conveyor of information. Indeed, there are to date at least seven academic studies that have found that Fox News viewership constitutes the most misinformed audience out there.
From climate change to healthcare, the Iraq War to the country of Obamas birth (no, its not Kenya), denizens of Fox News are more confident about falsehoods than viewers of any other news network. Several studies even found a positive correlation between how often one watches Fox News and the degree to which ones worldview is misinformed.
Whats most dangerous about Fox News, though, isnt its cynical use of Orwellian doublespeak, as in Fair and Balanced and No Spin Zone, to conceal a conservative agenda. Nor is it the networks repeated failure to accurately report the facts. Rather, the most dangerous consequence of Fox News is that it discourages that most important form of rigorous curiosity called critical thinking. If people want a single phenomenon to blame for the gradual decline of the American empire, direct your wagging finger at the devaluation of critical thinking skills.
Its not an accident that Fox News wants an audience that isnt preoccupied with carefully dissecting complex social, political, economic and religious issues. Critical thinking is perhaps our very best strategy for apprehending the true nature of reality, and as the great comedian Stephen Colbert once declared, reality has a well-known liberal bias. In other words, critical thinking could lead to liberalism or worse, to that most dreaded form of liberal fanaticism called secular progressivism.
Scientific studies actually back up this line of reasoning. Consider a 2012 studypublished in Science, one of the most prestigious journals in the world. This study found that when people are prompted to use their critical faculties, they become less likely to affirm religious statements. In other words, theres a causal link between analytical thinking and religious disbelief. Perhaps this is why the Republican Party of Texas literally wrote into its 2012 platform that, We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs [that] have the purpose of challenging the students fixed beliefs. God forbid children start questioning their fixed beliefs about religion or politics.
Yet another peer-reviewed paper found that people who think deliberately and effortfully about certain topics tend to express more liberal views. As the authors put it, political conservatism may be a
consequence of low-effort thought, meaning that, when effortful, deliberate thought is disengaged, endorsement of conservative ideology increases. Moving from how people use their brains to the brains innate capacity, multiple studies have reported that liberals (and atheists) have higher average IQs than conservatives. One study even found that low childhood IQ predicts conservative and racist beliefs later in life. It follows from such data that the divide between right and left isnt just about differing social, political, and economic philosophies. Its also about the the role of the intellect in determining our normative worldviews.
The point is that when a large portion of the electorate is fooled into adopting an ideology of ignorance, spaces open up for charlatans, frauds and demagogues to gain political power over the masses. This is precisely what weve seen with the rise of Trump in 2015, and its why hes a symptom of the disease rather than a cause, as mentioned above. Indeed, according to a recent poll, Trumps support base consists of the least educated Americans. As a Washington Post article put it, Even when pollsters took race out of the equation to the extent that that is possible since the Republican base is overwhelmingly white and looked at all Republicans, the relationship between education and Trump support was pretty clear.
This conclusion is consistent with a Boston Globe analysis that found that Trump talks at a fourth-grade level. And it fits with the observation that the more outrageous, harebrained, foolish, and asinine Trumps claims from John McCain not being a war hero to shutting down parts of the Internet to violating the Geneva Convention by killing terrorists families to temporarily keeping Muslims out of America the more Trumps poll numbers seem to rise. Holding beliefs that are properly tethered to reality via the best available evidence doesnt matter much to the army of quasi-fascist conservatives whove been hypnotized by Trumps shallow charisma.
Even more, Trump ended his year of media domination by receiving Politifacts 2015 Lie of the Year award for the long catalog of erroneous statements that he made, and often stood by even after they were shown wrong. Its amazing that a whopping 76 percent of the statements by Trump that Politifact checked were judged to be Mostly False, False, or Pants on Fire. By comparison, 71 percent of Bernie Sanders statements were rated Half True, Mostly True, or True. What an extraordinary contrast, yet one thats not surprising given Sanders more academic approach to politics. Indeed, Sanders is the sort of rare and rarefied politician whos actually paid attention to scholars over the year. He once even invited Noam Chomsky to give a talk at Burlington City Hall, in Vermont, in which Chomsky wasted no time presenting an incisive critique of U.S. foreign policy.
The real menace of Trumps presidential campaign, though, isnt that hes a pathological liar with 39 percent of the Republican vote. Its that he along with Fox News works to actively undercut the perceived trustworthiness of facts, expertise, and science. For example, in response to receiving Politifacts dubious award for lying, he responded on Fox News by attempting to delegitimize the organization, calling them a totally left-wing group thats bad news, I mean as far as checking. You could tell something 100 percent and they will make it out to a lie if youre a certain person. Once again, Trump gets it wrong Pants on Fire! In fact, 29 percent of the statements by Sanders are rated Mostly False or False, meaning that even a totally left-wing politician has been shown to misquote the truth on occasion. Its not Politifacts fault that Sanders happens to be better at getting the facts right.
What makes Politifact a reliable, although not infallible, source of knowledge is that its founded on the solid ground of epistemology. Its completely transparent aboutwhy it rates some claims true and others false, and its methodology involves consulting genuine experts (such as professors) and identifying verifiable facts (along with links) to substantiate its rulings. Most importantly, Politifacts approach recognizes that beliefs about the world must always be the destinations of a truth-seeking journey and never the points-of-departure. This is precisely why critical thinking is so important: its what enables us to proceed from a state of ignorance to one of knowledge, using evidence as our guide to truth. In contrast, ideology whether social, political, economic, or religious in nature assures us that we already have the knowledge we need and that further thought is therefore unnecessary.
How do we solve the growing scourge of anti-intellectualism in America? Theres no easy answer. I suspect that the Fox News generation a demographic thats on the way out, I should add is a lost cause. No amount of evidence-based argumentation will ever convince them that their views are factually incorrect or morally misguided. In fact, a 2010 study found that presenting political partisans with contradictory facts often only solidifies their erroneous convictions. The reality is that our country is facing a number of huge problems, such as global warming, immigration, gun violence, terrorism, health care, and biodiversity loss. All of these are solvable, yet as Ive explored elsewhere one finds the conservative right consistently denying the problems and obstructing the solutions. The fundamental difficulty with changing the culture of anti-intellectualism is that the anti-intellectual position is self-reinforcing. It suppresses critical thinking, which is precisely whats needed to see the folly of anti-intellectualism. (Incidentally, John Cleese makes a similar point about stupidity in a hilarious Monty Python video.)
Although the older generation is on its way out, I just hope they dont do too much damage before the younger, more progressive generations have a shot at making the world a better place.
moldyoldy wrote:
Donald Trump Talks at a 4th-Grade Level. Maybe Thats Why the Fox News Audience Loves Him
The culture of anti-intellectualism in America is fueling hateful, racist demagogues -- in politics and on TV.
By Phil Torres / Salon
January 12, 2016
Sen. Tim Scott and Donald Trump held a Town Hall Meeting at the Koger Center on September 23, 2015 in Columbia S.C. Trump successfully connected to the full audience using his trademark humor.
Photo Credit: Crush Rush / Shutterstock.com
Its a cliché to say that democratic states cant function properly without an informed electorate. But its absolutely true. And this is why, heading into the 2016 election year, Im nervous about the future. With Donald Trump leading the Republican presidential contenders, even many Republican die-hards are shaking in their boots.
But Trump isnt the cause, just the symptom. The deeper cause is a strain of anti-intellectualism that runs through the roots of American culture. And while this strain is found on both sides of the political spectrum (see some liberals on vaccines and chemtrails), its mostly concentrated among religious conservatives on the political right. For those who espouse anti-intellectualism, conspiracy theories have the same clout as legitimate science, the opinions of non-experts are just as credible as those of the experts, and ideology takes precedence over the cold hard facts.
The US has fostered a culture of anti-intellectualism more than most other Western countries. While traveling through Europe and the UK for extended periods of time, Ive often been quite envious of how respectful other countries are toward those with knowledge in the fields of science and the humanities. In the UK, for example, its generally not seen as uncool to have a higher degree from a good university. Often, it confers the degree-holder a certain social respect and admiration. Many of the top comedians in the UK have attended institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, including Michael Palin, Eric Idol, John Cleese, David Mitchell, Richard Ayoade and Stephen Fry. And shows such as QI, which combines academic discussions with uproarious, irreverent humor, are popular hits.
Not only is the U.S. unique for its love affair with anti-intellectualism, but this romantic relationship appears to have grown stronger over the past few decades. A primary reason for this is no doubt the huge influence that conservative media have had on American culture, such as Fox News, which is currently the most trusted news network in the country. The problem is that Fox News is a misnomer. The network is, to quote Jon Stewart, more of a relentlessly activist organization for conservative causes than an intellectually honest conveyor of information. Indeed, there are to date at least seven academic studies that have found that Fox News viewership constitutes the most misinformed audience out there.
From climate change to healthcare, the Iraq War to the country of Obamas birth (no, its not Kenya), denizens of Fox News are more confident about falsehoods than viewers of any other news network. Several studies even found a positive correlation between how often one watches Fox News and the degree to which ones worldview is misinformed.
Whats most dangerous about Fox News, though, isnt its cynical use of Orwellian doublespeak, as in Fair and Balanced and No Spin Zone, to conceal a conservative agenda. Nor is it the networks repeated failure to accurately report the facts. Rather, the most dangerous consequence of Fox News is that it discourages that most important form of rigorous curiosity called critical thinking. If people want a single phenomenon to blame for the gradual decline of the American empire, direct your wagging finger at the devaluation of critical thinking skills.
Its not an accident that Fox News wants an audience that isnt preoccupied with carefully dissecting complex social, political, economic and religious issues. Critical thinking is perhaps our very best strategy for apprehending the true nature of reality, and as the great comedian Stephen Colbert once declared, reality has a well-known liberal bias. In other words, critical thinking could lead to liberalism or worse, to that most dreaded form of liberal fanaticism called secular progressivism.
Scientific studies actually back up this line of reasoning. Consider a 2012 studypublished in Science, one of the most prestigious journals in the world. This study found that when people are prompted to use their critical faculties, they become less likely to affirm religious statements. In other words, theres a causal link between analytical thinking and religious disbelief. Perhaps this is why the Republican Party of Texas literally wrote into its 2012 platform that, We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs [that] have the purpose of challenging the students fixed beliefs. God forbid children start questioning their fixed beliefs about religion or politics.
Yet another peer-reviewed paper found that people who think deliberately and effortfully about certain topics tend to express more liberal views. As the authors put it, political conservatism may be a
consequence of low-effort thought, meaning that, when effortful, deliberate thought is disengaged, endorsement of conservative ideology increases. Moving from how people use their brains to the brains innate capacity, multiple studies have reported that liberals (and atheists) have higher average IQs than conservatives. One study even found that low childhood IQ predicts conservative and racist beliefs later in life. It follows from such data that the divide between right and left isnt just about differing social, political, and economic philosophies. Its also about the the role of the intellect in determining our normative worldviews.
The point is that when a large portion of the electorate is fooled into adopting an ideology of ignorance, spaces open up for charlatans, frauds and demagogues to gain political power over the masses. This is precisely what weve seen with the rise of Trump in 2015, and its why hes a symptom of the disease rather than a cause, as mentioned above. Indeed, according to a recent poll, Trumps support base consists of the least educated Americans. As a Washington Post article put it, Even when pollsters took race out of the equation to the extent that that is possible since the Republican base is overwhelmingly white and looked at all Republicans, the relationship between education and Trump support was pretty clear.
This conclusion is consistent with a Boston Globe analysis that found that Trump talks at a fourth-grade level. And it fits with the observation that the more outrageous, harebrained, foolish, and asinine Trumps claims from John McCain not being a war hero to shutting down parts of the Internet to violating the Geneva Convention by killing terrorists families to temporarily keeping Muslims out of America the more Trumps poll numbers seem to rise. Holding beliefs that are properly tethered to reality via the best available evidence doesnt matter much to the army of quasi-fascist conservatives whove been hypnotized by Trumps shallow charisma.
Even more, Trump ended his year of media domination by receiving Politifacts 2015 Lie of the Year award for the long catalog of erroneous statements that he made, and often stood by even after they were shown wrong. Its amazing that a whopping 76 percent of the statements by Trump that Politifact checked were judged to be Mostly False, False, or Pants on Fire. By comparison, 71 percent of Bernie Sanders statements were rated Half True, Mostly True, or True. What an extraordinary contrast, yet one thats not surprising given Sanders more academic approach to politics. Indeed, Sanders is the sort of rare and rarefied politician whos actually paid attention to scholars over the year. He once even invited Noam Chomsky to give a talk at Burlington City Hall, in Vermont, in which Chomsky wasted no time presenting an incisive critique of U.S. foreign policy.
The real menace of Trumps presidential campaign, though, isnt that hes a pathological liar with 39 percent of the Republican vote. Its that he along with Fox News works to actively undercut the perceived trustworthiness of facts, expertise, and science. For example, in response to receiving Politifacts dubious award for lying, he responded on Fox News by attempting to delegitimize the organization, calling them a totally left-wing group thats bad news, I mean as far as checking. You could tell something 100 percent and they will make it out to a lie if youre a certain person. Once again, Trump gets it wrong Pants on Fire! In fact, 29 percent of the statements by Sanders are rated Mostly False or False, meaning that even a totally left-wing politician has been shown to misquote the truth on occasion. Its not Politifacts fault that Sanders happens to be better at getting the facts right.
What makes Politifact a reliable, although not infallible, source of knowledge is that its founded on the solid ground of epistemology. Its completely transparent aboutwhy it rates some claims true and others false, and its methodology involves consulting genuine experts (such as professors) and identifying verifiable facts (along with links) to substantiate its rulings. Most importantly, Politifacts approach recognizes that beliefs about the world must always be the destinations of a truth-seeking journey and never the points-of-departure. This is precisely why critical thinking is so important: its what enables us to proceed from a state of ignorance to one of knowledge, using evidence as our guide to truth. In contrast, ideology whether social, political, economic, or religious in nature assures us that we already have the knowledge we need and that further thought is therefore unnecessary.
How do we solve the growing scourge of anti-intellectualism in America? Theres no easy answer. I suspect that the Fox News generation a demographic thats on the way out, I should add is a lost cause. No amount of evidence-based argumentation will ever convince them that their views are factually incorrect or morally misguided. In fact, a 2010 study found that presenting political partisans with contradictory facts often only solidifies their erroneous convictions. The reality is that our country is facing a number of huge problems, such as global warming, immigration, gun violence, terrorism, health care, and biodiversity loss. All of these are solvable, yet as Ive explored elsewhere one finds the conservative right consistently denying the problems and obstructing the solutions. The fundamental difficulty with changing the culture of anti-intellectualism is that the anti-intellectual position is self-reinforcing. It suppresses critical thinking, which is precisely whats needed to see the folly of anti-intellectualism. (Incidentally, John Cleese makes a similar point about stupidity in a hilarious Monty Python video.)
Although the older generation is on its way out, I just hope they dont do too much damage before the younger, more progressive generations have a shot at making the world a better place.
Donald Trump Talks at a 4th-Grade Level. Maybe Tha... (
show quote)
I have read this assessment before.
It makes sense, doesn't it? Many of his supporters complain that other candidates are condescending.
The true issue is that his supporters are not nimble enough to understand intelligent discourse.
moldyoldy wrote:
Donald Trump Talks at a 4th-Grade Level. Maybe Thats Why the Fox News Audience Loves Him
The culture of anti-intellectualism in America is fueling hateful, racist demagogues -- in politics and on TV.
By Phil Torres / Salon
January 12, 2016
Sen. Tim Scott and Donald Trump held a Town Hall Meeting at the Koger Center on September 23, 2015 in Columbia S.C. Trump successfully connected to the full audience using his trademark humor.
Photo Credit: Crush Rush / Shutterstock.com
Its a cliché to say that democratic states cant function properly without an informed electorate. But its absolutely true. And this is why, heading into the 2016 election year, Im nervous about the future. With Donald Trump leading the Republican presidential contenders, even many Republican die-hards are shaking in their boots.
But Trump isnt the cause, just the symptom. The deeper cause is a strain of anti-intellectualism that runs through the roots of American culture. And while this strain is found on both sides of the political spectrum (see some liberals on vaccines and chemtrails), its mostly concentrated among religious conservatives on the political right. For those who espouse anti-intellectualism, conspiracy theories have the same clout as legitimate science, the opinions of non-experts are just as credible as those of the experts, and ideology takes precedence over the cold hard facts.
The US has fostered a culture of anti-intellectualism more than most other Western countries. While traveling through Europe and the UK for extended periods of time, Ive often been quite envious of how respectful other countries are toward those with knowledge in the fields of science and the humanities. In the UK, for example, its generally not seen as uncool to have a higher degree from a good university. Often, it confers the degree-holder a certain social respect and admiration. Many of the top comedians in the UK have attended institutions like Oxford and Cambridge, including Michael Palin, Eric Idol, John Cleese, David Mitchell, Richard Ayoade and Stephen Fry. And shows such as QI, which combines academic discussions with uproarious, irreverent humor, are popular hits.
Not only is the U.S. unique for its love affair with anti-intellectualism, but this romantic relationship appears to have grown stronger over the past few decades. A primary reason for this is no doubt the huge influence that conservative media have had on American culture, such as Fox News, which is currently the most trusted news network in the country. The problem is that Fox News is a misnomer. The network is, to quote Jon Stewart, more of a relentlessly activist organization for conservative causes than an intellectually honest conveyor of information. Indeed, there are to date at least seven academic studies that have found that Fox News viewership constitutes the most misinformed audience out there.
From climate change to healthcare, the Iraq War to the country of Obamas birth (no, its not Kenya), denizens of Fox News are more confident about falsehoods than viewers of any other news network. Several studies even found a positive correlation between how often one watches Fox News and the degree to which ones worldview is misinformed.
Whats most dangerous about Fox News, though, isnt its cynical use of Orwellian doublespeak, as in Fair and Balanced and No Spin Zone, to conceal a conservative agenda. Nor is it the networks repeated failure to accurately report the facts. Rather, the most dangerous consequence of Fox News is that it discourages that most important form of rigorous curiosity called critical thinking. If people want a single phenomenon to blame for the gradual decline of the American empire, direct your wagging finger at the devaluation of critical thinking skills.
Its not an accident that Fox News wants an audience that isnt preoccupied with carefully dissecting complex social, political, economic and religious issues. Critical thinking is perhaps our very best strategy for apprehending the true nature of reality, and as the great comedian Stephen Colbert once declared, reality has a well-known liberal bias. In other words, critical thinking could lead to liberalism or worse, to that most dreaded form of liberal fanaticism called secular progressivism.
Scientific studies actually back up this line of reasoning. Consider a 2012 studypublished in Science, one of the most prestigious journals in the world. This study found that when people are prompted to use their critical faculties, they become less likely to affirm religious statements. In other words, theres a causal link between analytical thinking and religious disbelief. Perhaps this is why the Republican Party of Texas literally wrote into its 2012 platform that, We oppose the teaching of Higher Order Thinking Skills (HOTS) (values clarification), critical thinking skills and similar programs [that] have the purpose of challenging the students fixed beliefs. God forbid children start questioning their fixed beliefs about religion or politics.
Yet another peer-reviewed paper found that people who think deliberately and effortfully about certain topics tend to express more liberal views. As the authors put it, political conservatism may be a
consequence of low-effort thought, meaning that, when effortful, deliberate thought is disengaged, endorsement of conservative ideology increases. Moving from how people use their brains to the brains innate capacity, multiple studies have reported that liberals (and atheists) have higher average IQs than conservatives. One study even found that low childhood IQ predicts conservative and racist beliefs later in life. It follows from such data that the divide between right and left isnt just about differing social, political, and economic philosophies. Its also about the the role of the intellect in determining our normative worldviews.
The point is that when a large portion of the electorate is fooled into adopting an ideology of ignorance, spaces open up for charlatans, frauds and demagogues to gain political power over the masses. This is precisely what weve seen with the rise of Trump in 2015, and its why hes a symptom of the disease rather than a cause, as mentioned above. Indeed, according to a recent poll, Trumps support base consists of the least educated Americans. As a Washington Post article put it, Even when pollsters took race out of the equation to the extent that that is possible since the Republican base is overwhelmingly white and looked at all Republicans, the relationship between education and Trump support was pretty clear.
This conclusion is consistent with a Boston Globe analysis that found that Trump talks at a fourth-grade level. And it fits with the observation that the more outrageous, harebrained, foolish, and asinine Trumps claims from John McCain not being a war hero to shutting down parts of the Internet to violating the Geneva Convention by killing terrorists families to temporarily keeping Muslims out of America the more Trumps poll numbers seem to rise. Holding beliefs that are properly tethered to reality via the best available evidence doesnt matter much to the army of quasi-fascist conservatives whove been hypnotized by Trumps shallow charisma.
Even more, Trump ended his year of media domination by receiving Politifacts 2015 Lie of the Year award for the long catalog of erroneous statements that he made, and often stood by even after they were shown wrong. Its amazing that a whopping 76 percent of the statements by Trump that Politifact checked were judged to be Mostly False, False, or Pants on Fire. By comparison, 71 percent of Bernie Sanders statements were rated Half True, Mostly True, or True. What an extraordinary contrast, yet one thats not surprising given Sanders more academic approach to politics. Indeed, Sanders is the sort of rare and rarefied politician whos actually paid attention to scholars over the year. He once even invited Noam Chomsky to give a talk at Burlington City Hall, in Vermont, in which Chomsky wasted no time presenting an incisive critique of U.S. foreign policy.
The real menace of Trumps presidential campaign, though, isnt that hes a pathological liar with 39 percent of the Republican vote. Its that he along with Fox News works to actively undercut the perceived trustworthiness of facts, expertise, and science. For example, in response to receiving Politifacts dubious award for lying, he responded on Fox News by attempting to delegitimize the organization, calling them a totally left-wing group thats bad news, I mean as far as checking. You could tell something 100 percent and they will make it out to a lie if youre a certain person. Once again, Trump gets it wrong Pants on Fire! In fact, 29 percent of the statements by Sanders are rated Mostly False or False, meaning that even a totally left-wing politician has been shown to misquote the truth on occasion. Its not Politifacts fault that Sanders happens to be better at getting the facts right.
What makes Politifact a reliable, although not infallible, source of knowledge is that its founded on the solid ground of epistemology. Its completely transparent aboutwhy it rates some claims true and others false, and its methodology involves consulting genuine experts (such as professors) and identifying verifiable facts (along with links) to substantiate its rulings. Most importantly, Politifacts approach recognizes that beliefs about the world must always be the destinations of a truth-seeking journey and never the points-of-departure. This is precisely why critical thinking is so important: its what enables us to proceed from a state of ignorance to one of knowledge, using evidence as our guide to truth. In contrast, ideology whether social, political, economic, or religious in nature assures us that we already have the knowledge we need and that further thought is therefore unnecessary.
How do we solve the growing scourge of anti-intellectualism in America? Theres no easy answer. I suspect that the Fox News generation a demographic thats on the way out, I should add is a lost cause. No amount of evidence-based argumentation will ever convince them that their views are factually incorrect or morally misguided. In fact, a 2010 study found that presenting political partisans with contradictory facts often only solidifies their erroneous convictions. The reality is that our country is facing a number of huge problems, such as global warming, immigration, gun violence, terrorism, health care, and biodiversity loss. All of these are solvable, yet as Ive explored elsewhere one finds the conservative right consistently denying the problems and obstructing the solutions. The fundamental difficulty with changing the culture of anti-intellectualism is that the anti-intellectual position is self-reinforcing. It suppresses critical thinking, which is precisely whats needed to see the folly of anti-intellectualism. (Incidentally, John Cleese makes a similar point about stupidity in a hilarious Monty Python video.)
Although the older generation is on its way out, I just hope they dont do too much damage before the younger, more progressive generations have a shot at making the world a better place.
Donald Trump Talks at a 4th-Grade Level. Maybe Tha... (
show quote)
these debates are for lawyers who are taught the art of debate.they practice fro hours on what to say and how to say it.trump goes to a debate and says what he believes and thats that.and i firmly believe that this so called intellectualism to be nothing more that avoiding the true character of the speaker,so sit on your snooty behind and complain because he isnt as polished as the trained criminals.
vernon wrote:
these debates are for lawyers who are taught the art of debate.they practice fro hours on what to say and how to say it.trump goes to a debate and says what he believes and thats that.and i firmly believe that this so called intellectualism to be nothing more that avoiding the true character of the speaker,so sit on your snooty behind and complain because he isnt as polished as the trained criminals.
Which side is Donald Trump on?
Trump once endorsed a massive surtax on the rich. But he now wants the top income tax rate cut in half.
He opposed the war in Iraq, but says he now has a foolproof plan to defeat ISIL.
Hes praised single-payer health care, yet loathes Obamacare. But a decade ago he proposed health marts that sound suspiciously like todays Obamacare exchanges.
Over the past two decades he was a Republican, then an independent, then a Democrat, then a Republican. Now, registered as an independent, he leads the Republican 2016 presidential field.
But what does Donald Trump really believe on policy? Its hard to tell his campaign will identify no policy director, he has no issues tab on his campaign website and he hasnt given any substantive policy speeches on the campaign trail.
His hair has been more permanent than his political positions, said Thomas P. Miller, a health care policy expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Its a total random assortment of whatever plays publicly.
Voters are drawn to Trump more for his Ill-say-anything style than for his policy views. But a close inspection of Trumps two published policy tomes, The America We Deserve (2000) and Time To Get Tough (2011), along with Trumps public statements in interviews, on Twitter and in public appearances, indicate that Trumps policy preferences are eclectic, improvisational and often contradictory.
Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump signs an autograph before addressing the Republican Party of Arkansas Reagan Rockefeller dinner in Hot Springs, Ark., Friday, July 17, 2015. (AP Photo/Danny Johnston)
Some of his policy stances are flatout disqualifying to the Republican establishment, but that doesnt seem to matter. The inconsistencies may even be an asset in assembling a coalition.
To a large extent Trumps policy contradictions reflect his rapidly shifting political alliances over the past 15 years.
In 1999, Trump quit the Republican Party, saying I just believe the Republicans are just too crazy right. Trump was then conferring with political consultant Roger Stone about a possible presidential run as a candidate of the Reform Party, the political organization founded by his fellow billionaire Ross Perot.
In 2001, Trump quit the Reform Party to register as a Democrat. It just seems that the economy does better under Democrats, he told CNNs Wolf Blitzer
Read more:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/will-the-real-donald-trump-please-stand-up-120607#ixzz3xX9Plrwh
vernon wrote:
these debates are for lawyers who are taught the art of debate.they practice fro hours on what to say and how to say it.trump goes to a debate and says what he believes and thats that.and i firmly believe that this so called intellectualism to be nothing more that avoiding the true character of the speaker,so sit on your snooty behind and complain because he isnt as polished as the trained criminals.
For heaven's sake, those are not debates. You know that.
moldyoldy wrote:
Which side is Donald Trump on?
Trump once endorsed a massive surtax on the rich. But he now wants the top income tax rate cut in half.
He opposed the war in Iraq, but says he now has a foolproof plan to defeat ISIL.
Hes praised single-payer health care, yet loathes Obamacare. But a decade ago he proposed health marts that sound suspiciously like todays Obamacare exchanges.
Over the past two decades he was a Republican, then an independent, then a Democrat, then a Republican. Now, registered as an independent, he leads the Republican 2016 presidential field.
But what does Donald Trump really believe on policy? Its hard to tell his campaign will identify no policy director, he has no issues tab on his campaign website and he hasnt given any substantive policy speeches on the campaign trail.
His hair has been more permanent than his political positions, said Thomas P. Miller, a health care policy expert at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Its a total random assortment of whatever plays publicly.
Voters are drawn to Trump more for his Ill-say-anything style than for his policy views. But a close inspection of Trumps two published policy tomes, The America We Deserve (2000) and Time To Get Tough (2011), along with Trumps public statements in interviews, on Twitter and in public appearances, indicate that Trumps policy preferences are eclectic, improvisational and often contradictory.
Republican presidential hopeful Donald Trump signs an autograph before addressing the Republican Party of Arkansas Reagan Rockefeller dinner in Hot Springs, Ark., Friday, July 17, 2015. (AP Photo/Danny Johnston)
Some of his policy stances are flatout disqualifying to the Republican establishment, but that doesnt seem to matter. The inconsistencies may even be an asset in assembling a coalition.
To a large extent Trumps policy contradictions reflect his rapidly shifting political alliances over the past 15 years.
In 1999, Trump quit the Republican Party, saying I just believe the Republicans are just too crazy right. Trump was then conferring with political consultant Roger Stone about a possible presidential run as a candidate of the Reform Party, the political organization founded by his fellow billionaire Ross Perot.
In 2001, Trump quit the Reform Party to register as a Democrat. It just seems that the economy does better under Democrats, he told CNNs Wolf Blitzer
Read more:
http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/will-the-real-donald-trump-please-stand-up-120607#ixzz3xX9PlrwhWhich side is Donald Trump on? br br Trump once ... (
show quote)
well it seems the economy does better under dems.WELL OBAMA HAS CHANGED THAT.
vernon wrote:
well it seems the economy does better under dems.WELL OBAMA HAS CHANGED THAT.
You must never come out of your bunker. Everything you say is stupid.
moldyoldy wrote:
You must never come out of your bunker. Everything you say is stupid.
every thing you put down is wrong.but if you think consumer confidence is so high why did december spending go down the first time in 50 yrs. quit living in that fantasy world and look at the truth.
vernon wrote:
every thing you put down is wrong.but if you think consumer confidence is so high why did december spending go down the first time in 50 yrs. quit living in that fantasy world and look at the truth.
Maybe people are getting smarter credit card debt is way down
moldyoldy wrote:
Maybe people are getting smarter credit card debt is way down
spending is down that means a lot of unsold goods and that slower production which means layoffs.
vernon wrote:
every thing you put down is wrong.but if you think consumer confidence is so high why did december spending go down the first time in 50 yrs. quit living in that fantasy world and look at the truth.
Maybe people remembered to celebrate Xmas for what it is and didn't spend so much.
moldyoldy wrote:
Yes china is having problems now
Funny how quickly people forget that a slow down in manufacturing doesn't affect us as much these days.
jelun wrote:
Maybe people remembered to celebrate Xmas for what it is and didn't spend so much.
well from what you put forth you dont celebrate anything but pagan rituals.om sure you dont spend much.
vernon wrote:
spending is down that means a lot of unsold goods and that slower production which means layoffs.
Yes, it is just terrible that US residents spent just shy of $450 BILLION in the month of December.
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/us-retail-sales-decline-01-in-december-20160115-00272Friday's report also showed consumers stepped up spending at furniture stores, building supply and garden centers, bars and restaurants and online retailers.
Other recent data has suggested Americans may be starting to open their wallets as their incomes continue to pick up.
A separate Commerce Department report released last month showed consumers boosted their spending in November. Personal spending, which measures how much Americans pay for everything from shelter to shaving cream, rose 0.3% in from a month earlier, while personal income rose 0.3%.
Meanwhile, the Labor Department's monthly employment report released last Friday showed wages rose 2.5% from a year earlier in December.
Read more:
http://www.nasdaq.com/article/us-retail-sales-decline-01-in-december-20160115-00272#ixzz3xYOCW6yo
If you want to reply, then
register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.