ARGH! Welfare queen! BOOTSTRAPS!!!
I wuv you!!
This is the question that I've never liked:
It is a significant advantage, so I vote that I agree with the statement, but I wonder if they take that vote to mean I would approve of such a state.
Making peace with the establishment is an important part of maturity
- Thread starter Elta
- Start date
I wuv you!!
This is the question that I've never liked:
I wuv you!!
This is the question that I've never liked:
It is a significant advantage, so I vote that I agree with the statement, but I wonder if they take that vote to mean I would approve of such a state.
I've long wanted to make a thread dedicated to picking apart the test and giving scenarios to each question.
Elta
我不会把这种
It boils down to what 'making peace' means. I went with the somewhat agree option, because I would think that it's better to take a rational approach towards problem solving than simply opposing the establishment because it is the establishment. The 'somewhat' part of my answer comes from the fact that it's always important to hold the establishment accountable, or question them, and not just go to the other extreme and accept them because they are the establishment.
Ziggy Stardust
Absolutely Sane
"The Establishment" is a little broad to make general statements about.
Enkidu Warrior
Ultramagnetic
I rather like the question. Granted, it captures sentiment rather than anything specific, but it does represent a conservative viewpoint towards rebellious youth rather well, and the wording is fairly neutral, as opposed to say 'selling out', or talk of childish hippies or the like.
I voted strongly disagree, and I hope my answer never changes. Accepting what is established just because it is established is a common enough phenomenon, but the very concept disgusts me.
The one-party state question did initially bug me, but I suppose the point is that by agreeing you would be accepting that arguments that occur in democracies are something that it would be advantageous to avoid. Arguments, in one form or another, are the very fabric of a democracy, and autocracy is certainly not better off without them. I think the wording is done as it is because a more bare-faced endorsement of despotism would not attract any votes at all, at least in most of the developed world.
I voted strongly disagree, and I hope my answer never changes. Accepting what is established just because it is established is a common enough phenomenon, but the very concept disgusts me.
The one-party state question did initially bug me, but I suppose the point is that by agreeing you would be accepting that arguments that occur in democracies are something that it would be advantageous to avoid. Arguments, in one form or another, are the very fabric of a democracy, and autocracy is certainly not better off without them. I think the wording is done as it is because a more bare-faced endorsement of despotism would not attract any votes at all, at least in most of the developed world.
azzaman333
meh
How can I make peace with the establishment if I was never at war with the establishment?
And what the hell actually is the establishment?
And what the hell actually is the establishment?
Born in 1977, strongly disagree. The questions seems to presuppose that the "war" on establishment is war for war's sake. But what if there's some real reason for it?
I don't like the thought that some idea of maturity should overrule people's reasoning and moral judgment.
What a surprise
I don't like the thought that some idea of maturity should overrule people's reasoning and moral judgment.
What a surprise
I was wondering how soon someone would make that reference.What a surprise
Mise
isle of lucy
There are things that people should learn to accept, and there are things that people should never accept.
