Tenure Ending Blog Post

[Terxpahseyton]

Let me clarify, then. If in spite of you best efforts you come forth as a jerk, then this is not what I mean by being a jerk. What I mean are people who for a lack of effort come forth as jerks. In the case discussed, people who in a (more or less) private conversation invoke their 'right' to say whatever they want lack effort. Not lacking effort would for instance mean to merely seek understanding for ones own POV. It means to try to establish a mutual exchange on personal terms rather than avoiding such an effort by invoking an entitlement. That is how productive exchanges work and always have. Else you create advisory attitudes and power struggles.

Put differently, when it comes to taming the power of the one holding the monopoly of force, entitlements or rights are due and shall be invoked when necessary. When it comes to personal disagreements, the sensible and mature thing to do is to seek mutual understanding. Especially since usually freedom of speech will legally not even apply.

 

[Farm Boy]

Eh, jerks is jerks accidentally, unintentionally, and on, purpose.

Higher education is a bit of a halfway point. Faculty and staff do possess the prerogative to squash speech in their classrooms and quads, but assuming a classroom setting discourse is intended to being forth education in the students present. Declaring an issue decided and silenced, when it may be relevant(of course), before discussed when there a people present for whom the issue is not decided alienates at least one person and robs other of the exercise in an issue of the time. State Universities thread a finer line.

 

[hangman]

The relevant issue here is that the professor publicized and (apparently) misrepresented what happened. Whatever transpired with the student seems to be relatively minor. It's odd, because this thread starts off complaining about "free speech," and ignores the intellectual dishonesty sneaking around the back. Even if you consider it free speech, all teachers have the right to create an environment conducive to learning, and that includes telling disruptive students to GTFO. Keep in mind there are many many other students who frankly don't want to hear some ideologue blather on, and would rather at least get their money's worth in class.

 

[aelf]

intellectual dishonesty

See: Modern conservatism.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

The relevant issue here is that the professor publicized and (apparently) misrepresented what happened. Whatever transpired with the student seems to be relatively minor. It's odd, because this thread starts off complaining about "free speech," and ignores the intellectual dishonesty sneaking around the back. Even if you consider it free speech, all teachers have the right to create an environment conducive to learning, and that includes telling disruptive students to GTFO. Keep in mind there are many many other students who frankly don't want to hear some ideologue blather on, and would rather at least get their money's worth in class.

Ignores it? I thought the opening post clearly mimicked it.

 

[hangman]

See: Modern conservatism.

Basically... for all the studies showing that conservatism is essentially a psychological construct rooted in fear and an inability to deal with complexity rather than a real philosophy, it sure has a lot of staying power. Maybe that's why conservative politicians seem eager to crush education at every opportunity.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Eh, jerks is jerks accidentally, unintentionally, and on, purpose.

This is getting sillier and sillier. Let's put it this way: There is jerkish behavior and there is being a Jerk.

Higher education is a bit of a halfway point. Faculty and staff do possess the prerogative to squash speech in their classrooms and quads, but assuming a classroom setting discourse is intended to being forth education in the students present. Declaring an issue decided and silenced, when it may be relevant(of course), before discussed when there a people present for whom the issue is not decided alienates at least one person and robs other of the exercise in an issue of the time. State Universities thread a finer line.

For what it is worth I think it was pretty crude to say "Well everyone agrees with that". And I even applaud the student for talking to the teacher about that (even if I share the point of view of the teacher rather than the student). All I laughed about was the way he did it.

 

[Farm Boy]

This is getting sillier and sillier. Let's put it this way: There is jerkish behavior and there is being a Jerk.

How is the distinction important? Just about every Jerk is the hero of his own story. If he's not the hero of his own story that's a self-esteem issue, not an abundance or absence of jerkishness.

 

[Kyriakos]

Background to this post:

Spoiler :

Hm, just got back from the second and final meeting in the fifth week of the current run of my lib philosophy program, and for the first time there was some tension when two people started talking about politics. I (thankfully) managed a couple of min later to calm things down, mentioning that some issues are just not meant as part of the program which is already set in 120 pages & bibliography anyway (politics and religion being the main issues which are not really meant for the course there)/ presocratics and platosocrates mainly).

Imagine what would happen if they then started saying: I have a right to say what i want to say! You can't silence me! ^^

Yesterday i actually mentioned this exact web story, in my own program, when the discussion got to refer to the previous issue with the problematic speaking/friction on a political subject which is not part of the program anyway..
I think that - despite myself not meaning to- the one person tied to this ended up not feeling i was not trying to speak against what was said. Which is sad, of course, given i am not there so as to preach or cancel people's views...
I am there so as to increase my sources of revenue

-

Anyway, what i said- but in a 5 min monologue :\ ) was that i cannot present other issues not in the 120 pages of the 'course' there, cause i have not looked into them in such a setting (eg politics tied in some way to philosophy) and so would not be helpful.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

How is the distinction important?

One can have the attitude of a jerk or one can merely happen to come forth / behave as one under certain circumstances. The former implies more jerk behavior and greater responsibility for it.
I still don't understand why we even need to argue this or why you are so bend on this relativistic angle of yours.

 

[Farm Boy]

It'll color our perception of the whole shebang. Whether or not that distinction really exists to the extent that it's meaningful.

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Well, I am pretty sure it is meaningful to go beyond "everyone is a jerk"

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Well, I am pretty sure it is meaningful to go beyond "everyone is a jerk"

Meaningful? Maybe. Accurate?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

It is merely a heuristic. It can only be meaningful, not accurate. Anyway, I am grown really wary of this discussion since it feels to me like I am arguing things that are obvious and that for no reason.

 

[Farm Boy]

Once we come to realize that we're going to be jerks, largely independent of our intent, often independent of accuracy of personal assessment, then we can with a greater degree of accuracy actually manage to not be jerks. Sort of like the first step to significant amounts of knowledge is an admission of how much we in fact do not know?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

If we realize we can not help being jerks we can help being jerks.

 

[Farm Boy]

Seems about right. Yes?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

Erm... I guess it is good to be mindful of the ways one can be a jerk. I wouldn't think of disputing that.
Help me out. Why are we discussing this again?

 

[Farm Boy]

Because we enjoy each other's brains and because we're having fun? Next topic?

 

[Terxpahseyton]

I am burned out I am afraid.