U of T profs alarmed by Jordan Peterson's plan to target classes he calls 'indoctrination cults'

[Rion]

I'd wager it, too. Peterson is a panicky little man, however, so I see no need to overindulge him.

You don't see why those things are counter to the scientific method?

I'd wager you're smarter than *starlight*

No need to insult others.

 

[TLK Valentine]

You don't see why those things are counter to the scientific method?

Certainly -- which is why it's a good thing that the passages were quoted and properly cited, so we can see that the shortcomings are not the author's own.

No need to insult others.

How is it an insult? *starlight* is probably smart. You are smarter. It's a compliment.

Get a room full of people, whether it's 5 people, 50, or 500... and, statistically speaking, one of them must be the literal and proverbial "smartest man in the room."

Who does that man owe an apology to?

 

[*Starlight*]

If the author -- or in this case, the author's source, since it was cited -- honestly believes that, then the intention is not malicious. We should always endeavor to tell what we believe to be the truth, should we not?

So, if the author honestly believes in an "us vs them" ideology regarding gender relations, and promotes that ideology in his textbook, then we're back to the original claim that an extremist ideology (one that promotes conflict between people) is being promoted in classes.

But it is strong. How many female presidents can you name? How many women have even attempted to run -- Hillary Clinton being of course the most recent example. Victoria Woodhull is the only other one I can think of, and that's going back over 100 years. Do women simply not want to be President? Why not?

Quick -- name as many CEOs and financial geniuses you can -- I'll bet you come up with a lot more men than women. Do you suppose they're just not interested in wealth and success?

I can run off a dozen action heroes in popular culture -- Wayne, Eastwood, Stallone, Schwazenegger, Willis, Smith, Bronson, Connery, etc... off the top of my head. You could probably add a dozen more without breaking a sweat.

How many action heroines? Well now, not so easy, is it?

Why is that?

Since Rion has already listed some, I'll just mention that I think we've gone totally off topic here, because this conversation has stopped being about ideological bias in college a few posts ago.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So, if the author honestly believes in an "us vs them" ideology regarding gender relations, and promotes that ideology in his textbook, then we're back to the original claim that an extremist ideology (one that promotes conflict between people) is being promoted in classes.

The author's source does this, and the author cites it... Specifically in a section clearly labeled as being about feminism.

Without reading more of the text for context, how can we know what the author is promoting in the book?

Furthermore, I want to point out your error of saying the author was promoting it in class. As an educator myself, I can assure you the author doesn't run the class; the professor does. Second, it's a sad fact that teachers, even professors, don't always get to choose their texts.

So the truth is that we'd have to observe the individual professor to know exactly what's being "promoted."

Since Rion has already listed some, I'll just mention that I think we've gone totally off topic here, because this conversation has stopped being about ideological bias in college a few posts ago.

And I'll point out that an ideological bias, in a college or anywhere else, can only exist in an individual's mind... In this case, the professor's. Red flagging classes , therefore, is a pointless gesture unless it's the specific teacher you want out.

 

[*Starlight*]

The author's source does this, and the author cites it... Specifically in a section clearly labeled as being about feminism.

That's the case with some other scans posted in this thread, but it wasn't like that in the one I posted. It specifically mentioned the "men stare at women to claim social dominance" thing as a fact, not as "this is what followers of some ideology believe".

Without reading more of the text for context, how can we know what the author is promoting in the book?

Furthermore, I want to point out your error of saying the author was promoting it in class. As an educator myself, I can assure you the author doesn't run the class; the professor does. Second, it's a sad fact that teachers, even professors, don't always get to choose their texts.

So the truth is that we'd have to observe the individual professor to know exactly what's being "promoted."

And I'll point out that an ideological bias, in a college or anywhere else, can only exist in an individual's mind... In this case, the professor's. Red flagging classes , therefore, is a pointless gesture unless it's the specific teacher you want out.

I think Jordan Peterson's plan is to do something like that, and point out specific cases of professors preaching ideology to students.

 

[TLK Valentine]

That's the case with some other scans posted in this thread, but it wasn't like that in the one I posted. It specifically mentioned the "men stare at women to claim social dominance" thing as a fact, not as "this is what followers of some ideology believe".

Then your issue is with the editors of that textbook -- as is mine. Plagiarism is a serious offense.

I think Jordan Peterson's plan is to do something like that, and point out specific cases of professors preaching ideology to students.

Fair enough -- Peterson is targeting people, not classes, not universities. Let's be clear on that.

 

[*Starlight*]

Then your issue is with the editors of that textbook -- as is mine. Plagiarism is a serious offense.

What plagiarism?

Fair enough -- Peterson is targeting people, not classes, not universities. Let's be clear on that.

I think the phrase "targeting people" isn't good here, it makes an innocent thing sound ominous and evil.

 

[TLK Valentine]

What plagiarism?

Did your textbook cite a source or claim the info as its own?

I think the phrase "targeting people" isn't good here, it makes an innocent thing sound ominous and evil.

Would you prefer "red flagging" people?

 

[*Starlight*]

Did your textbook cite a source or claim the info as its own?

I don't think there was a citation there. But textbooks normally don't include citations for every claim.

Would you prefer "red flagging" people?

Kind of better, but I think it's still missing the point, because people aren't the focus, it's about pointing a case of indoctrination in colleges. So the focus is on specific actions/events, not a person as a whole.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I don't think there was a citation there. But textbooks normally don't include citations for every claim.

Every other scan cited that claim... your book was poorly edited.

Kind of better, but I think it's still missing the point, because people aren't the focus, it's about pointing a case of indoctrination in colleges. So the focus is on specific actions/events, not a person as a whole.

If people aren't the focus, who or what is doing the indoctrination?

I shouldn't have to remind anyone that actions are caused by people. If you're not going to focus on them, how do you plan to stop the indoctrination?

 

[HannahT]

I thinking 'focusing' is better than 'targetting' or 'red flagging'.

 

[TLK Valentine]

I thinking 'focusing' is better than 'targetting' or 'red flagging'.

It would be more politically correct -- depending on what happens after the person is in focus...

 

[*Starlight*]

Every other scan cited that claim... your book was poorly edited.

So was it just poor editing, or plagiarism?

If people aren't the focus, who or what is doing the indoctrination?

I shouldn't have to remind anyone that actions are caused by people. If you're not going to focus on them, how do you plan to stop the indoctrination?

I'm not planning anything, it's Jordan Peterson who's doing it. I think his approach is to pointing out specific classes where indoctrination is happening. It can mean professor personally indoctrinating the students, textbooks that contain ideological claims presented as facts, and probably other things too. What would your approach be?

 

[HannahT]

I just saying when I was in college? If you had to take a subject you tended to 'focus' on the professor for that subject. Some were better than others. I had a sociology professor that I loved! Yet, he was to monotone for some people. He was indeed, but if he didn't have the 'put you to sleep' factor on you personally? lol which he didn't with me - you loved him!

We had another theology professor that was extremely narrow minded, and another one that could handle difference of viewpoints. The narrow minded one was the head of the department sadly, and I didn't want to take his class.

 

[HannahT]

It would be more politically correct -- depending on what happens after the person is in focus...

I wouldn't say politically correct. More common use maybe.

 

[TLK Valentine]

So was it just poor editing, or plagiarism?

Could be both -- accidental plagiarism is still plagiarism.

I'm not planning anything, it's Jordan Peterson who's doing it.

That's "you" in the general sense. But of course you (specifically) already knew that.

I think his approach is to pointing out specific classes where indoctrination is happening.

Specific classes means specific professors. Change the teacher and the indoctrination ends.

It can mean professor personally indoctrinating the students, textbooks that contain ideological claims presented as facts, and probably other things too.

You weren't listening. The Professor runs the class, not the textbook. if there is indoctrination, then the professor, either through ideology or incompetence, is responsible.

What would your approach be?

Audit the classes. Have undercover "students" investigate the professors' methods; see how the educators react to the "ideology" being challenged. Compare the individual professor's grading to other educators in the same field to look for signs of bias.

if this sounds like a lot of work, it is. Rooting out radical ideologues is not a simple process...

 

[TLK Valentine]

I wouldn't say politically correct. More common use maybe.

I would say politically correct. Why wouldn't you?

 

[HannahT]

I would say politically correct. Why wouldn't you?

'Focused on' is a more common use for communication. As I mentioned.

 

[TLK Valentine]

'Focused on' is a more common use for communication. As I mentioned.

But we're not just talking about communication, we're talking about action. "Targeted" was even in the OP, and yet nobody seemed to mind until I started using it. Why is that?

 

[HannahT]

But we're not just talking about communication, we're talking about action. "Targeted" was even in the OP, and yet nobody seemed to mind until I started using it. Why is that?

When I was in school - College? They used the term 'focused on'. For example, Sociology focused on theological prospective. Yes, it was actually a class! It was one of those short termed classes that we had to 2 of in order graduate - in addition to electives. It would about 6 weeks. They had plenty of classes like this that focused on something. You either took them between the Holiday break between semesters, or summer class.

Professors would also explain at the beginning of the term what they plan on focusing on. We got off the rails? lol we had professors that would remind us of the focus. It happens - we are human!

The term can be used for more than one approach. People may like to use the terms you mentioned, but from an academic angle? They tend to use that term rather than targeting or red flagging.

Although, I thought we were speaking of a website. Just like rate a professor is one. I wish we had that when I was going to school. I know a couple of professors I would have avoided, and chosen different ones. I'm speaking about from a new student's point of view. Heck, even ones with very large campuses too.

From the description I read about the proposed website? They would be communicating what they have learned from certain classes or professors. What the class product is about, etc. People would know what they are getting into if they decide to go for it, or move on to something else. I know my theology class was different compared to the description.

They hint on this in reviews on rate a professor as well, and no one is having an issue with that. That's why I don't understand all the uproar. You can read about this information already, but if you can verify it a bit more - or decide its a mock site? Or if you DON'T care - you don't have to use. Just like you don't have to use rate a professor.

I suppose we could say rate a professor targets or red flags professors too. Although, both sites to me do just about the same thing that we did in college. We talk about the classes and professors - and you learn which to avoid. Kids are just luckier than I was - you have the internet to do that beforehand.