Remember that link I put up recently from Bill Maher in which he mentioned Johnathan Krohn? Well, young Mr. Krohn has apparently outgrown his adolescent power fantasy and is now an Obama supporter. Why? check out the clip.
So, he started....reading? Interesting.
Actually, it reminds me of this quote from a recent Op/Ed piece in my hometown paper.
Conservatives decry the liberal bias in the universities. It is true that most college professors are liberals, but I don't think it has anything to do with bias. It is because college professors are intelligent people, and intelligent people tend to be liberal.
I have had many conversations with colleagues about why so many people vote against their own best interests, and the only conclusion that is ever reached is that those people are swayed by emotional arguments, not by intelligent thought.
Young Jonathan thankfully has discovered this as well and grown up.
26 comments:
I have had many conversations with colleagues about why so many people vote against their own best interests, and the only conclusion that is ever reached is that those people are swayed by emotional arguments, not by intelligent thought.
That is funny! Apparently, your 'intelligence' fails you.
It would be in my best interest to support a law that confiscates all of Markadelphia's income and gives it to me. God knows, Mark deserves it for the kind of hubris displayed by this post and others, and the taxpayers who pay his salary certainly aren't getting anything worthwhile out of the salary he extracts from them, unless horrific reasoning skills counts.
However, I would not vote for such a law. Wait! OMG! That would be.. voting against my best interest!@## Clearly I have been swayed by emotional arguments.
You just don't get tired of trying to rationalize the superiority of your wordview, do you? Have you ever wondered why you feel the need to do that?
and the taxpayers who pay his salary certainly aren't getting anything worthwhile out of the salary he extracts from them
Of course they are. They are getting an instructor who does a good job of getting kids to give a shit and be critical thinkers. The former is the tough part, btw, and if you spent any sort of significant time with young people, you would know that's 90 percent of the battle these days.
I know that you have this (paranoid) vision of teachers like me indoctrinating children into communism but that's completely erroneous. It's not my job to spout opinions. It's my job to listen and encourage higher levels of Bloom's in every student.
Of course that means telling all sides of the story and, clearly, that's where you have a problem. Sometimes there are several sides, two or three sides, or just one as is the case with evolution or climate change. For you, there is always just one.
You just don't get tired of trying to rationalize the superiority of your wordview, do you? Have you ever wondered why you feel the need to do that?
I deal in facts, Hap...facts and critical thinking. You lead with cynicism and paranoia about the government. That's an emotional argument and that's why a kid like Krohn was ultimately turned off by conservatism. Did you watch the interview? He's chief complaint was that conservatives aren't interested in changing. That's a real fucking problem in a dynamic world and it's why you continue to make personal insults about me and other liberals. You don't have any answers to many of these problems because your ideology doesn't leave room for change.
Seriously, Mark? He's gone from being more or less a political tool of his parents at age 13 to having achieved a measure of real wisdom at age ... 17? Srsly? No chance it's a case of teen rebellion now, is it? Or that idiotic phrase "adolescent power fantasy" which from searches on Google seems only to be a bit of pop psychology relating only to the world of ... comic books. Then again, that does fit in perfectly with your comic book view of reality.
>I know that you have this (paranoid) vision of teachers like me indoctrinating children into communism
No, I have this vision of poor teachers (like you) giving children the same reasoning disabilities that you yourself possess. Much like I don't expect a teacher who is poor at math to be able to effecively transmit math skills to students, I don't expect someone who has poor reasoning skills to transmit good reasoning skills to students.
>That's a real fucking problem in a dynamic world and it's why you continue to make personal insults about me and other liberals.
Mark, when you spew insults, you get insults in return. It's not hard.
>The former is the tough part, btw, and if you spent any sort of significant time with young people, you would know that's 90 percent of the battle these days.
See, I'm actually somewhat sympathetic to the point that parents are the main problem, but it's hard not to notice arrant nonsense being passed to students from teachers. If a student got an interview in my field (yes, I do a lot of interviews) and displayed reasoning skills like yours, he would be thrown out of the room. He'd spout some bullshit about "synthesis" or "eclectic approaches to solving problems" or some other buzzword without actually saying anything meaningful, then would have no idea why he failed so miserably at the interview. That is on teachers such as yourself Mark. There is no excuse for substituting noble sounding pablum and pretty sounding words for actual, solid reasoning.
Anyway, you missed the point of my comment; you got distracted by my being so mean to poor Mark who was busy claiming, without irony, that everyone who doesn't think in the same emotive, stroking-my-own-ego-comes-first style as he does is guided by emotions instead of intelligent thought. I identified a law that would be in my best interest, yet, I would not support it. Why wouldn't I support it? Would you support it, if the targets were reversed? Why so or why not?
Anyway, you missed the point of my comment
If I could get a quarter for every time that's been said to Mark.....
....of course that's all our fault....not his at all.....
How do you know what kind of teacher I am? Since you've never been in one of my classes, it's all pure conjecture.
Oh wait, that's right...it's my "faulty reasoning." (AKA things that Mark says that are unfortunately accurate and, since I am a juvenile adolescent, I'm going to tease him).
Mark, when you spew insults, you get insults in return. It's not hard.
Nothing I've said is an insult. It's an accurate assessment of your political ideology. You are unwilling to change and base your beliefs on emotion. To an absolute fault, you will admit no fault in your philosophy and no strength whatsoever in democratic ideology.
Until this changes, we aren't going to get anywhere. Step one is admitting you have a problem. Simply put, the right is going to have to give....think that'll happen?
He'd spout some bullshit about "synthesis" or "eclectic approaches to solving problems" or some other buzzword without actually saying anything meaningful
"Anti-intellectualism has been a constant thread winding its way through our political and cultural life, nurtured by the false notion that democracy means that 'my ignorance is just as good as your knowledge.'”
― Isaac Asimov
"You are unwilling to change and base your beliefs on emotion."
That's right, Haplo9! If only you would discard your intellect and go with the Liberal emotional menstrual flow, then we can make some progress. Until you engage in some real Maoist self-criticism, we're not going to get anywhere!
I deal in facts, Hap...facts and critical thinking.
And I'm the Queen of England. [Which is substantially less outrageous than your claim.]
It always happens - I post and then wander off and find something dead on topic. This is keeping with the topic of stupid assumptions about conservatives and liberals - you should love it M.
Nothing I've said is an insult. It's an accurate assessment of your political ideology. You are unwilling to change and base your beliefs on emotion. To an absolute fault, you will admit no fault in your philosophy and no strength whatsoever in democratic ideology.
Defense sequences
The narcissist typically runs through a sequence of defenses to discharge painful feelings until he or she finds one that works:
1. unconscious repression
2. conscious denial
3. distortion (including exaggeration and minimization) and lies
4. projection (blaming somebody else)
5. enlisting the help of one or more of his or her codependent friends who will support his or her distorted view.
Speaking of number 5 there, ya'll notice how the YLDP has pretty much given up the cause. Wonder if the wife cleaned out the old sock drawer?
>Nothing I've said is an insult.
I always wonder when you say stuff like this - do you really manage to believe this, or are you aware that you are completely full of shit? It's actually hard to tell, you really seem to think your choirboy routine is genuine, but then I think nobody could be that dumb.
>How do you know what kind of teacher I am?
Simple - someone who is incompetent cannot teach competence, except perhaps as an example of what not to be. Just as you would have no chance of passing an engineering interview, a student who reasons like you would have no chance either. I can only hope that students are able to figure out just how blinkered you are, either through family or some other mentor who doesn't speak bullshittese. Fortunately, I had a few in my life.
>It's an accurate assessment of your political ideology.
Heh. Oh, ok. Apparently saying so is all that is necessary - guess that means my assessment of your ideology as an exercise in narcissism (GD said it first in this thread, a much less vebose summation than mine) is an accurate assessment too, just by my saying so! Sweet!
A pity though - I was really looking forward to episode 14 of the "Mark Explains How He Is Omnipotent: Why He Knows What Is In Everyone Else's Best Interest Better Than They Do" show. I even set you up with a nice hypothetical you could use to explain my own reasoning to me!
GD, heading me off at the pass again, are we, Hap? Makes sense when you think about it as that phrase fits right in to where you'd like to return: The Gilded Age.
but then I think nobody could be that dumb.
One would think that after trying this stuff for so long, you'd try something new. Ah, well...
Just as you would have no chance of passing an engineering interview
Wow, you're really going out on limb here, Hap. I'm not an engineer so it's quite obvious that I wouldn't pass an engineering interview. I guess you "win" that one. Congrats!
either through family or some other mentor who doesn't speak bullshittese.
(yawn) Still avoiding and denying...:)
Whenever you are ready to cease the redirect-clouding the issue routine and begin admitting fault with your ideology (hence the reason why young Mr. Krohn left the Cult), you know where to find me.
What is so very frustrating, Mark, among a host of other things, is that you aren't even original.
You didn't use the terms projection, hand-waving, etc, etc, etc until after you had been accused of said trait or activity. Then all of a sudden it pops into your lexicon for use upon us. Claiming after that point that when used against you it is projection. Then you portray others as the ones redirecting in your very own re-direct. The 'head em off at the pass' is your very own redirect - and it don't fool nobody.
The rubber-glue gambit may have been a hit in third grade. Don't you think it's time to grow out of it?
You didn't use the terms projection, hand-waving, etc, etc, etc until after you had been accused of said trait or activity.
It quickly became very evident to me what the overall tactic was (heading off at the pass) and so it really doesn't matter what you say. You can't counter with evidence or a few points of your own solutions because you don't really have any. So, you resort to the personal attacks and say I'm _______ (insert latest catch phrase here of which you are actually guilty).
Don't you think it's time to grow out of it?
Yes, it would be great if we stopped talking about this nonsense and got back to the ideological flaws of conservative ideology. I'm ready to hear them when you are ready to discuss them:)
>Makes sense when you think about it as that phrase fits right in to where you'd like to return: The Gilded Age.
Strange, I don't recall advocating for this. You, on the other hand, seem to regularly advocate for a return to something around the 1950s, or maybe the 30's, when unions were strong and the Coulee dam was built. I think this is another example of projection on your part I'm afraid.
>I'm not an engineer so it's quite obvious that I wouldn't pass an engineering interview. I guess you "win" that one.
You see Mark, regardless of the schooling you have, being an engineer requires the ability to process information in a clear manner without getting confused. Ie reason. This isn't something you learn in engineering school, this is something you learn from when you are a kid. You harm your students by helping to destroy this ability by teaching them your own disability in the area. Like I said - hopefully their exposure to you is limited, but it's why I can't pin the crappy education system entirely on parents - it just doesn't seem possible that someone as hideously incompetent as you has no effect either.
You harm your students by helping to destroy this ability by teaching them your own disability in the area.
Since you've never been in any one my classes nor have you seen any of the data as to how my students perform, this statement has no validity whatsoever. For someone who claims to rely so heavily on evidence and facts, where are they here?
But, again, the redirect. You are personally insulting me in the hopes of keeping me off topic. The failings of conservative and/or libertarian ideology, Hap...tick tock:) Why do you suppose Krohn would turn commie on you?
but then I think nobody could be that dumb.
I have to think that M isn't nearly as dumb as he is dishonest. Which is sad, because addressing the former is far easier than remedying the latter.
>Why do you suppose Krohn would turn commie on you?
Er.. I dunno, because he's young maybe? Remember the old saw about if you are conservative when you are young you have no heart, if you are liberal when you are old you have no brain? That has been very true in my experience, and describes me well. It describes you quite well too.
>For someone who claims to rely so heavily on evidence and facts, where are they here?
Um, every time you post and one or multiple of us point out just how awful your reasoning is, whereupon you commence blowing smoke? Mountains of evidence Mark, both here and at Kevin's blog. That doesn't just disappear when you step into a classroom.
Old Unix fortune: A libertarian is a liberal who learned economics.
True dat.
Is it only me, or does it seem from both Mark and Nikto's descriptions of their families, that maybe they're just stuck in a mindless rut of teen rebellion that they never outgrew? Or, in Mark's vacuous idiom, "adolescent power fantasy"? Hmm, what better job for a really minor character power fantasy than high school teacher? Ranks right up there with "changing the world" as a "journalist". Or should I say, "journolist"?
Old Unix fortune: A libertarian is a liberal who learned economics
Well, Unix never grasped the concept of demand either so that makes sense:) I guess John Maynard Keynes and Paul Krugman are stupid idiots, are fat, and don't know nuthin about no economics with all their evidence, facts and stuff.
every time you post and one or multiple of us point out just how awful your reasoning is
And yet you don't actually refute any of the evidence. You simply say that my reasoning sucks, launch into a mini-spiel about my teaching, and call me a socialist. It's almost as if you...(wait, heading me off at the pass, again:))
whereupon you commence blowing smoke?
Exactly.
I'm still waiting on the flaws of conservative and/or libertarian ideology.
And yet you don't actually refute any of the evidence. You simply say that my reasoning sucks, launch into a mini-spiel about my teaching, and call me a socialist.
Maybe that is all you hear/read but reasoning flaws and evidence has been presented to you both here and SM yet it never seems to sink in. All you can remember is the invective you get from frustration with your 'facts' and 'logic'.
All of the focus is on me, 6Kings, never on the issue itself. That's how it was at SM and that's how it is with you guys here. I've been trying (and have thus far failed) to keep the conversation on the topic of the flaws of conservative and/or libertarian ideology-the reason why Krohn is now a liberal. I've had no responses as of yet.
What I have had is personal attacks which tells me that you don't want to admit the faults and simply want to say, "We're perfect." Obviously, if you say this, then the whole reason and logic angle flies out the window and you will be revealed for what you are: the emotional maturity of a teenager.
Please stop projecting M.
It ends up being about you because you can't answer simple direct questions that would create understanding of what you are saying. Instead you bitch and scream that we won't just sit there and holler "amen" every time you pause for a breath.
I'll see your Keynes (who wouldn't recognize the shit being peddled as 'Keynesianism' nowadays) and squirrelly-eyed Krugman, and raise you Friedrich Hayek, Milton Friedman, Hernando de Soto, Thomas Sowell, Walter Williams, Peter Schiff, Tyler Cohen, Daniel Mitchell.
And what "evidence"? That a teenager changed his mind between 13 and 17? And odds are he will change it again by 25. Other than that, I've seen nothing from you that might count as evidence except as evidence against your ability to coherently argue a point.
Post a Comment