4 ms·
Certainly if you only read one third of one paragraph of the article it would seem shoddy. You even paraphrased that snippet to delete the part that clearly st
by tempestn 10y ago
Certainly if you only read one third of one paragraph of the article it would seem shoddy. You even paraphrased that snippet to delete the part that clearly states it's only a partial explanation: "The growing number of women with advanced degrees is part of it, as well-educated women tend to be especially left-leaning."
- nickysielicki 10y agoI didn't edit the snippet at all. But let's look at the whole paragraph: What explains the consolidation of the highly educated into a liberal bloc? The growing number of women with advanced degrees is part of it, as well-educated women tend to be especially left-leaning. Equally important is the Republican Party’s move to the right since the 1980s — at odds with the social liberalism that has long characterized the well educated — alongside the perception that conservatives are anti-intellectual, hostile to science and at war with the university. He posed the question "What explains the consolidation of the highly educated into a liberal bloc?" Then answered it by saying that it could be because of more highly-educated women, because they tend to be particularly left-leaning. What does that "explain"? The core question is why education tends towards left political views. A related question is why this is seen moreso in women. But suggesting that this tendency is explained, even partially, by the demographics on which the tenancy is seen is tautological... Unless there's some obvious reason I'm missing that women should be more susceptible to this bias?