Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

joseduarte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 380 posts

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#281

Post by someguydave »

linkregister wrote: post #66
FussyZeus wrote: post #5

As someone who grew up in a strongly red area and with beliefs in that vein, I know EXACTLY the kind of exclusion that the author is talking about to a painful degree. For anyone who wants to experience it, walk into any Reddit discussion and tell everyone you're a devout Christian and watch the pseudo intellectuals exercise their "openness." And yes it's true I'm far from the most religious person there is, and I st…

It's amazing to me that the top-rated comment in this thread broadly generalizes both "coastal intellectuals" and "Middle America" with insulting stereotypes. I'm embarrassed that the upvoters of this comment actually agreed with this comment. One trip to Houston or Minneapolis is enough to verify the presence of a thriving arts and culture scene. The anti-intellectual Middle America trope is not factual. One trip to…

Having lived around Davidsonville, MD for awhile, I'm pretty certain that the 'pragmatic' folk you referenced feel absolutely trampled by the establishment in the nearby megalopolis. I know a farmer there, he barely scratches out a living - much of the local farmland was bought up by rich lawyers to build large homes.

My point being that I think you actually unwittingly identified this 'midwest/coastal divide' in your own backyard.

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#282

Post by garrettgrimsley »

tangled_zans wrote: post #278
cglace wrote: post #275

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Actually it did. . . I don't see the need for outrage.

What outrage? Simply teaching you some respect, as well as some factual accuracy.

>Simply teaching you some respect, as well as some factual accuracy.

The author of the parent comment has established that they made a mistake. Maybe you weren't outraged before but now there is some readily apparent hostility.

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#283

Post by someguydave »

cmurf wrote: post #95
FussyZeus wrote: post #5

As someone who grew up in a strongly red area and with beliefs in that vein, I know EXACTLY the kind of exclusion that the author is talking about to a painful degree. For anyone who wants to experience it, walk into any Reddit discussion and tell everyone you're a devout Christian and watch the pseudo intellectuals exercise their "openness." And yes it's true I'm far from the most religious person there is, and I st…

Me -> 0-18 Kansas. 18-35 Colorado. 35-42 NYC and Aspen. There are friendly people everywhere. There are assholes everywhere. The notion middle America has disdain for culture and intellectual achievement is two parts in conflict: 1. quite a few people in middle America are poorly educated because of their religion and politics, and the political system, permit them to elect ideological morons to school councils, and…

"So it's a circular problem that the American education system is itself political."

Out of curiosity, do you think it is possible that a government-monopolized school system could be anything other than political?

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#284

Post by someguydave »

BellsOnSunday wrote: post #79
FussyZeus wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speaking as someone who does: Those of us who do are often raised in a very religious place among very religious people, it's a big part of our lives. Rationally, I have no reason to believe in any God. That's why it's called a belief. It's a lot more to do with the culture one grows up with than the belief itself, and anything you learn at such a young age is difficult to shake loose of completely. Personally, I use…

I was brought up amongst and by religious people too, so I don't automatically assume people are stupid for having beliefs. But I'm aware that is really just a rhetorical position on my part, and when faced with someone who claims to be a scientist, living in the west in the 21st century, and who actually believes this stuff (e.g. the afterlife) then it is just difficult to take them seriously. That makes me vulnerab…

Is it actually irrational to believe in something if your evidence is 'I just know it because God told me'?

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#285

Post by someguydave »

FussyZeus wrote: post #61
BellsOnSunday wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't recognise the prejudice against practical skills in my neck of the woods (CS dept in a UK university) but religious colleagues are quietly looked down upon and sometimes mocked. (Not that there are many of them.) I try as hard as I can not to judge such people myself but will admit to finding it hard to take someone seriously who believes in such stuff. Being able or unable to change a tyre doesn't come close…

Speaking as someone who does: Those of us who do are often raised in a very religious place among very religious people, it's a big part of our lives. Rationally, I have no reason to believe in any God. That's why it's called a belief. It's a lot more to do with the culture one grows up with than the belief itself, and anything you learn at such a young age is difficult to shake loose of completely. Personally, I use…

As a fellow Lutheran from the Midwest I think you've done a good job in this thread at representing a minority opinion on this forum.

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#286

Post by 0x5f3759df-i »

FussyZeus wrote: post #5

As someone who grew up in a strongly red area and with beliefs in that vein, I know EXACTLY the kind of exclusion that the author is talking about to a painful degree. For anyone who wants to experience it, walk into any Reddit discussion and tell everyone you're a devout Christian and watch the pseudo intellectuals exercise their "openness." And yes it's true I'm far from the most religious person there is, and I st…

As a progressive liberal who grew up and spent many adult years in a a "deep red" religious state, I received similar treatment when people discovered I was a damn liberal atheist. I was called communist, lazy, and entitled for supporting social programs.

This isn't a thing only liberals do to conservatives, it goes the the other way when conservatives are in the majority. I experienced it first hand.

Most people treat politics like sports teams, you're born a republican/democrat the same way you're born a fan of the local football team. So they automatically divide the world into the "in-group" and "out-group" and just blindly rage against the other "team" like the home crowd boos the opposing team.

There is a reason the founders were fearful of tyranny of the majority.

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#288

Post by robotresearcher »

rantanplan wrote: post #238
stefantalpalaru wrote: post #203

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Believing in something without proof is contrary to being skeptical. You underestimate the number of scientists with absurd beliefs. There are people who believe in parallel universes, dark matter, spooky action at a distance, wormholes, time travel, simulating the human brain in silico, more than 3 spatial dimensions, strong artificial intelligence, aliens, etc. Dealing with the absurd is a fundamental part of the…

What the hell are you talking about? Scientists do not believe in parallel universes, dark matter and all the other stuff you mentioned. They hypothesize about them, then they try to formulate theories and then they try to test these theories, by means of experiments. When they do get to perform comprehensive experiments then, depending on the results, finally know what the truth is. Not so much the same as with the…

> finally know what the truth is.

Not quite. The current substantiated hypothesis is always provisional until a better idea or contrary evidence turns up. That's not what most people call truth, and certainly not the kind of truth religious people have in mind.

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#289

Post by [deleted] »

aaronem wrote: post #63
creshal wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To an European it's always amusing when Americans pretend they have a left wing.

To an American it's always amusing when a European tells us our political system is unsatisfactory. Over and over and over again. Never gets old. No, really. Keep it up.

[deleted]

Re: I was denied admission to a PhD program because of my perceived political views

#290

Post by fleitz »

jolux wrote: post #152
fleitz wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's fairly well understood that most organizations exist to perpetuate themselves. If GW doesn't exist a whole tonne of organization cease to exist, just as if GW does exist a whole tonne of organizations cease to exist. Oddly, you'll find that organizations opinions on GW align fairly well with their source of funding. GW is a hugely political topic, and in my estimation has little to do with hard science anymore.

You've provided no evidence of anything you've laid out here and you're trying to disprove a theory agreed upon by 99% of scientists with indirect arguments about their source of funding. Why exactly should I believe you? I'd love to hear more about all of these points but find it hard to trust them currently.

I find it very hard to believe that 99% of scientists are credible experts on GW.

Consensus is a political term not a scientific one, no one disproves the null consensus.

In science we cite experts, papers and a refutable hypothesis, in politics we cite the opinions of non expert masses to questions that have no refutable hypothesis.

I feel you on the trust though both sides feel like they are lying through their teeth to protect their POV/livelihoods. Most topics in science to me have easy experiments like here's a terrarium with 200ppm and here's 400ppm this one is Z degrees hotter therefore we must take any actions we can to sequester co2 like ocean seeding, etc. instead of here's a bunch of massaged data our only choice is to not use fossil fuels.

Post reply on HN