No, I would not say every academic has done this. Certainly the diversity-cultists have inculcated a culture of corruption. Many fields have been utterly corrupted, and may fields were corrupt from day one. "Justice studies," "black studies," "diversity studies," were morally void and corrupt from day one. They are empty by design.
History, English, philosophy, and many others have been infected--badly--but we can still fight back.
I said "every liberal arts discipline" for a reason. We are saying the same thing.
Sociology is just as bad if not worse than the spinoff "____ studies" fields. Psychology around 2010 was starting to move towards STEM and the Bio-Psycho-Social model that was fueled by empirical evidence and rigorous standards. As far as I can tell that has largely fallen by the wayside, as well.
But sitting here and saying "it's not all disciplines" is a farce, because unless we finally start addressing the problem, this is going to become the norm throughout the academy.
There is no penalty for plagiarism if you are in the favor of the powers that be. They will help you plagiarize, sign off on it, and elevate you to do the same thing. You really think that isn't already happening in the medical field? Do we need to repeat 2020-2022 for you to understand?
The same people that said "trust the experts" are the ones who made sure the "experts" were sycophantic lapdogs incapable of independent or critical thinking.
You didn't say "every liberal arts discipline," you said "Every liberal arts academic in a position of power has done this."
I don't disagree that the problem exists in almost every department at the every university and college. What I did say is that many departments (e.g., women's studies, ethnic studies, justice studies, queer studies, etc.) are irredeemable--they are corrupt, rotten, and empty BY DESIGN--many academically solid pursuits, such as history, may yet be saved.
It may indeed take burning everything down to get there..
This may be a controversial opinion around these parts (not with you, I surmise):
I think Philosophy needs to return to the bedrock of education. I am in favor of a true liberal arts education, as it does produce critical and independent thinkers, and that alone lends itself to a diverse range of professions.
But that is not feasible in the current paradigm. It has to be rigorous and there has to be failure.
The problem is not in the disciplines themselves. Sociology is not useless -- in a more sane world sociologists would have been at the forefront of the fatherlessness crisis, instead of egging it on. Human society is inherently complicated and does merit study and inquisition -- but it should be rigorous and empirical and unbiased.
I don't see how where get from where we are to where we need to be without completely starting over. I hope I'm wrong, but -- I think the rot is too deep.
I am 100% on the same page with you. I completely believe in the value of a traditional and true liberal arts education.
I know how I would start the burning down process. Three step process.
First. Leftists love wealth tax. Start tax university endowments based on their value. 1% of all endowments over 1 billion. 2% over 5 billion. 4% over 10 billion. etc
Second. these schools want to pay football coaches millions a year, make tens of millions from ESPN contracts, etc. Great, you are welcome to participate in that environment, but if you choose to do so, you are now a for-profit institution.
Third. Raise interest rates on government backed student loans. Make laws that forbid ever forgiving student loan debt.
Remove universities with low student loan payback rates from being eligible for student loans.
Critical studies is pseudo-scholarship, or what I like to call "scholarshit." Most if not all citations in this academic grift niche are from the same circle of retards. There is an industry, pointed out decades ago by Camille Paglia, in her great essay "Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiders": a hermetic circle of critical studies citations in papers used exclusively to gain tenure and to present at schmoozing conferences like the MLA, not to add anything new or even interesting to their batshit crazy, unreadable literature, since they make the same arguments with the same sources over and over again, with small permutations.
No, I would not say every academic has done this. Certainly the diversity-cultists have inculcated a culture of corruption. Many fields have been utterly corrupted, and may fields were corrupt from day one. "Justice studies," "black studies," "diversity studies," were morally void and corrupt from day one. They are empty by design.
History, English, philosophy, and many others have been infected--badly--but we can still fight back.
I said "every liberal arts discipline" for a reason. We are saying the same thing.
Sociology is just as bad if not worse than the spinoff "____ studies" fields. Psychology around 2010 was starting to move towards STEM and the Bio-Psycho-Social model that was fueled by empirical evidence and rigorous standards. As far as I can tell that has largely fallen by the wayside, as well.
But sitting here and saying "it's not all disciplines" is a farce, because unless we finally start addressing the problem, this is going to become the norm throughout the academy.
There is no penalty for plagiarism if you are in the favor of the powers that be. They will help you plagiarize, sign off on it, and elevate you to do the same thing. You really think that isn't already happening in the medical field? Do we need to repeat 2020-2022 for you to understand?
The same people that said "trust the experts" are the ones who made sure the "experts" were sycophantic lapdogs incapable of independent or critical thinking.
Burn. It. Down.
Salt the earth.
Rebuild it and never forget.
You didn't say "every liberal arts discipline," you said "Every liberal arts academic in a position of power has done this."
I don't disagree that the problem exists in almost every department at the every university and college. What I did say is that many departments (e.g., women's studies, ethnic studies, justice studies, queer studies, etc.) are irredeemable--they are corrupt, rotten, and empty BY DESIGN--many academically solid pursuits, such as history, may yet be saved.
It may indeed take burning everything down to get there..
This may be a controversial opinion around these parts (not with you, I surmise):
I think Philosophy needs to return to the bedrock of education. I am in favor of a true liberal arts education, as it does produce critical and independent thinkers, and that alone lends itself to a diverse range of professions.
But that is not feasible in the current paradigm. It has to be rigorous and there has to be failure.
The problem is not in the disciplines themselves. Sociology is not useless -- in a more sane world sociologists would have been at the forefront of the fatherlessness crisis, instead of egging it on. Human society is inherently complicated and does merit study and inquisition -- but it should be rigorous and empirical and unbiased.
I don't see how where get from where we are to where we need to be without completely starting over. I hope I'm wrong, but -- I think the rot is too deep.
I am 100% on the same page with you. I completely believe in the value of a traditional and true liberal arts education.
I know how I would start the burning down process. Three step process.
First. Leftists love wealth tax. Start tax university endowments based on their value. 1% of all endowments over 1 billion. 2% over 5 billion. 4% over 10 billion. etc
Second. these schools want to pay football coaches millions a year, make tens of millions from ESPN contracts, etc. Great, you are welcome to participate in that environment, but if you choose to do so, you are now a for-profit institution.
Third. Raise interest rates on government backed student loans. Make laws that forbid ever forgiving student loan debt.
Remove universities with low student loan payback rates from being eligible for student loans.
Critical studies is pseudo-scholarship, or what I like to call "scholarshit." Most if not all citations in this academic grift niche are from the same circle of retards. There is an industry, pointed out decades ago by Camille Paglia, in her great essay "Junk Bonds and Corporate Raiders": a hermetic circle of critical studies citations in papers used exclusively to gain tenure and to present at schmoozing conferences like the MLA, not to add anything new or even interesting to their batshit crazy, unreadable literature, since they make the same arguments with the same sources over and over again, with small permutations.