3 ms·

> Eg I had a class that really critically analyzed native American cultures. Today the class would be considered racist, it would have to a priori be an admira

> Eg I had a class that really critically analyzed native American cultures. Today the class would be considered racist, it would have to a priori be an admiration of those cultures, rather than a critical analysis. This is bullshit. The difference is that today, your own culture e.g. (non-native) American society till the modern day is considered fair game for analysis, whereas 20 years ago there was probably a fair bit of "they are savages to be studied, whereas we are civilized" complex going on. Guess what, that tends to temper critical analysis of other cultures as well, and focuses on understanding without judgement. It is dishonest to cast this as "a priori admiration". > The good news is that its much more accessible now days to learn how to think outside a college system. If that's what you are hungry for, college is perhaps even your least likely bet. An unnecessary dichotomy. The Internet is not blocked at a college, you can continue to study outside things while you are at college. The problem for most people seems to be that at a college, these ideas will be subjected to rigorous intellectual analysis, whereas on the Internet it's easier to hide in echo chambers where everyone agrees with you. > I say this as a person with 3 degrees...colleges were more old school then than now. I think this is little more than viewing the past with rose-tinted glasses. Guess what, things change, and usually in a way that society is better off. I highly recommend against the Internet as a substitute for actual college education because it's not "old school" any more.

xyzelement 4y ago
// The difference is that today, your own culture e.g. (non-native) American society till the modern day is considered fair game for analysis These was definitely no shortage of ability to analyze and criticize western civilization in a college 20 years ago. // An unnecessary dichotomy. The Internet is not blocked at a college You are replying to a comment about what is accessible. College does not preclude internet. College however is an extremely large resource and time commitment. Therefore ability to learn outside of that is a great addition. // Guess what, things change, and usually in a way that society is better off. Agreed. Hence the article we are all talking about - people wisely chosing to forego college as a default.
- davidgay 4y ago
  > These was definitely no shortage of ability to analyze and criticize western civilization in a college 20 years ago. Not to mention that the whole 18th century is famous for its criticism of (that time's) western civilization...
meany 4y ago
I can’t speak to what the original poster experienced in college, but your heated response implies a resistance to at least some forms on inquiry as unacceptable or inappropriate or at a minimum worthy of disparagement, which I think undermines your argument a bit.
- quadrifoliate 4y ago
  > but your heated response implies a resistance to at least some forms on inquiry as unacceptable or inappropriate or at a minimum worthy of disparagement I'm trying to engage reasonably by assuming some things here, specifically that the OP has peripheral knowledge of some courses (since they haven't actually attended college recently) and they are categorizing the relatively detached nature of those courses as "a priori admiration". I guess I could also respond by simply asking for specific examples of "a priori admiration" that the OP has seen in college courses recently. I doubt I will get any, but am open to changing my mind if I do.
  - xyzelement 4y ago
    The person you are replying to was onto something when he called your comment "heated" Your first post had none of the things you are talking about in your 2nd post... It simply said "that's bullshit" and suggested that what changed is the openness of western culture to criticism. Your second post (one I am replying to) is more reasonable but if this is somehow what you originally meant that's not what came out..
    - quadrifoliate 4y ago
      > The person you are replying to was onto something when he called your comment "heated" I would probably say blunt, but I think you got the general tone correct. > Your second post (one I am replying to) is more reasonable but if this is somehow what you originally meant that's not what came out.. Well, the original post had no proof and was making wild statements. It's fair game to meet it with a blunt assessment. Do you spend time arguing with the wild-eyed guy on the street who is holding a sign that secret agencies are spying on you? Probably not. On the other hand, see that in a national paper with some references and statistics, and hey, you're actually sitting up and taking notice. Your first comment was much more on the wild-eyed guy side of the scale, hence the (probably overly so, sorry!) blunt engagement.
kortilla 4y ago
> This is bullshit. The difference is that today, your own culture e.g. (non-native) American society till the modern day is considered fair game for analysis, whereas 20 years ago there was probably a fair bit of "they are savages to be studied, whereas we are civilized" complex going on. Emotional temper tantrum - check. Whataboutism referring to other cultures - check. > Guess what, things change, and usually in a way that society is better Unchecked assumption that “new” = “better” - check. Definitely the product of modern academia lacking any critical thinking skills with a knee jerk reaction to any criticism.
- quadrifoliate 4y ago
  This is hilarious. And I'm assuming that a declaration like: "Eg I had a class that really critically analyzed native American cultures. Today the class would be considered racist, it would have to a priori be an admiration of those cultures, rather than a critical analysis." ...that makes rather extreme ad-hoc statements about modern academia without citing even a shred of their own or someone else's experience is chock-full of critical thinking skills and a great way to conduct debate? Definitely the product of an education via Internet Corner Bubble Forum where you can randomly make up controversial statements that get upvoted by like-minded people and expect to not be called out on them. > "Emotional temper tantrum - check." "You're hysterical for giving my Kleenex-thin argument the short shrift it deserves!"
  - kortilla 4y ago
    > like-minded people and expect to not be called out on them. Read the replies. There was a debate. You just weren’t a part of it because you just had a shit fit and didn’t contribute.

xyzelement 4y ago

// The difference is that today, your own culture e.g. (non-native) American society till the modern day is considered fair game for analysis These was definitely no shortage of ability to analyze and criticize western civilization in a college 20 years ago. // An unnecessary dichotomy. The Internet is not blocked at a college You are replying to a comment about what is accessible. College does not preclude internet. College however is an extremely large resource and time commitment. Therefore ability to learn outside of that is a great addition. // Guess what, things change, and usually in a way that society is better off. Agreed. Hence the article we are all talking about - people wisely chosing to forego college as a default.

davidgay 4y ago
> These was definitely no shortage of ability to analyze and criticize western civilization in a college 20 years ago. Not to mention that the whole 18th century is famous for its criticism of (that time's) western civilization...

meany 4y ago

I can’t speak to what the original poster experienced in college, but your heated response implies a resistance to at least some forms on inquiry as unacceptable or inappropriate or at a minimum worthy of disparagement, which I think undermines your argument a bit.

quadrifoliate 4y ago
> but your heated response implies a resistance to at least some forms on inquiry as unacceptable or inappropriate or at a minimum worthy of disparagement I'm trying to engage reasonably by assuming some things here, specifically that the OP has peripheral knowledge of some courses (since they haven't actually attended college recently) and they are categorizing the relatively detached nature of those courses as "a priori admiration". I guess I could also respond by simply asking for specific examples of "a priori admiration" that the OP has seen in college courses recently. I doubt I will get any, but am open to changing my mind if I do.
- xyzelement 4y ago
  The person you are replying to was onto something when he called your comment "heated" Your first post had none of the things you are talking about in your 2nd post... It simply said "that's bullshit" and suggested that what changed is the openness of western culture to criticism. Your second post (one I am replying to) is more reasonable but if this is somehow what you originally meant that's not what came out..
  - quadrifoliate 4y ago
    > The person you are replying to was onto something when he called your comment "heated" I would probably say blunt, but I think you got the general tone correct. > Your second post (one I am replying to) is more reasonable but if this is somehow what you originally meant that's not what came out.. Well, the original post had no proof and was making wild statements. It's fair game to meet it with a blunt assessment. Do you spend time arguing with the wild-eyed guy on the street who is holding a sign that secret agencies are spying on you? Probably not. On the other hand, see that in a national paper with some references and statistics, and hey, you're actually sitting up and taking notice. Your first comment was much more on the wild-eyed guy side of the scale, hence the (probably overly so, sorry!) blunt engagement.

kortilla 4y ago

> This is bullshit. The difference is that today, your own culture e.g. (non-native) American society till the modern day is considered fair game for analysis, whereas 20 years ago there was probably a fair bit of "they are savages to be studied, whereas we are civilized" complex going on. Emotional temper tantrum - check. Whataboutism referring to other cultures - check. > Guess what, things change, and usually in a way that society is better Unchecked assumption that “new” = “better” - check. Definitely the product of modern academia lacking any critical thinking skills with a knee jerk reaction to any criticism.

quadrifoliate 4y ago
This is hilarious. And I'm assuming that a declaration like: "Eg I had a class that really critically analyzed native American cultures. Today the class would be considered racist, it would have to a priori be an admiration of those cultures, rather than a critical analysis." ...that makes rather extreme ad-hoc statements about modern academia without citing even a shred of their own or someone else's experience is chock-full of critical thinking skills and a great way to conduct debate? Definitely the product of an education via Internet Corner Bubble Forum where you can randomly make up controversial statements that get upvoted by like-minded people and expect to not be called out on them. > "Emotional temper tantrum - check." "You're hysterical for giving my Kleenex-thin argument the short shrift it deserves!"
- kortilla 4y ago
  > like-minded people and expect to not be called out on them. Read the replies. There was a debate. You just weren’t a part of it because you just had a shit fit and didn’t contribute.