11–20 of 62 posts
Is it just me or is education being slowly but steadily subverted in many countries at once?
Sort of. But it's more pernicious than that. What is the purpose of going to a University/College? The purpose SHOULD be education and enlightenment. The purpose has BECOME vocational training for a job.
The real tragedy is that university used to be a place where you could be convinced that some of the ideas you had going in might be wrong . Now the only thing that's being taught is that certain people just aren't allowed to speak at all. People who used to have their ways of thinking changed at university are now leaving silent, angry, and still wrong .
When moral relativism is your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced. What's most pitiful is the cowardice displayed by all who should know better. University trustees and professors, business leaders, entertainers, and every last one of us who has ever surrendered to this tyranny in our schools, our jobs, or our communities. Instead of fighting back, we capitulate and cower in fear…
What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You left out an important dimension. The modern trend is to run everything "more like a business." The heads of universities come decreasingly from academia, and re instead MBA and politically connected people. This is justified by the need to bring in more money, because the states no longer want to fully fund the university. My belief is that businesses don't like controversy unless it brings profit. Free speech at…
I'm inclined to agree that "running things like a business" is part of the reason why no one wants to make a stand. But I have to disagree with this: > Or to repurpose your phrase, "When business and profits are your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced." It's not the businessmen who are trying to shut down free speech and debate on college campuses. > See, that's the sort of sexi…
When moral relativism is your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced. What's most pitiful is the cowardice displayed by all who should know better. University trustees and professors, business leaders, entertainers, and every last one of us who has ever surrendered to this tyranny in our schools, our jobs, or our communities. Instead of fighting back, we capitulate and cower in fear…
Okay, I'm lost: why the downvotes? This sounds like reasonable comment, even useful (the first sentence is a good summary of the article's subject). I see no attack to any particular group. What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm inclined to agree that "running things like a business" is part of the reason why no one wants to make a stand. But I have to disagree with this: > Or to repurpose your phrase, "When business and profits are your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced." It's not the businessmen who are trying to shut down free speech and debate on college campuses. > See, that's the sort of sexi…
Idioms are a bitch. I'm no native speaker, but I see no good alternative to "good men". "Good People", maybe? But I bet native ears would cringe a bit.
1) Keep using "he" as the gender-generic third-person singular pronoun. This was the only accepted option for a long time. I think this is the best sounding, but some crowds might give you grief for it.
2) Use "he or she" every time. This is the worst.
3) Use a mix of both "he" and "she", but obviously be consistent when referring to the same abstract person. I like this in theory, but in practice, the "she"s pops out of the page and direct attention away from what you're trying to say.
4) Use "they". This seems to be winning, though many find it to be a grammatical abomination, since "they" is supposed to be plural.
5) Always use "she". This is how you let everyone know that you have a political agenda.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You left out an important dimension. The modern trend is to run everything "more like a business." The heads of universities come decreasingly from academia, and re instead MBA and politically connected people. This is justified by the need to bring in more money, because the states no longer want to fully fund the university. My belief is that businesses don't like controversy unless it brings profit. Free speech at…
I'm inclined to agree that "running things like a business" is part of the reason why no one wants to make a stand. But I have to disagree with this: > Or to repurpose your phrase, "When business and profits are your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced." It's not the businessmen who are trying to shut down free speech and debate on college campuses. > See, that's the sort of sexi…
I think "the SJW language police" probably know that Neil Armstrong is not a "womyn".
When moral relativism is your religion, anyone with moral conviction is your enemy and must be silenced. What's most pitiful is the cowardice displayed by all who should know better. University trustees and professors, business leaders, entertainers, and every last one of us who has ever surrendered to this tyranny in our schools, our jobs, or our communities. Instead of fighting back, we capitulate and cower in fear…
Okay, I'm lost: why the downvotes? This sounds like reasonable comment, even useful (the first sentence is a good summary of the article's subject). I see no attack to any particular group. What in this comment could possibly rub HN the wrong way?
Happens all the time here, unfortunately, but questioning why is a waste of time. Half the posts in this thread - ironically about free speech - are grey. The surprising thing is that your post isn't, simply for mentioning the D-word.