Posted on 10/17/2013 5:33:57 AM PDT by Beave Meister
Dan Kahan, the Elizabeth K. Dollard Professor of Law and Professor of Psychology at Yale Law School was curious about the relationship between ”science comprehension“ and political outlooks. His findings shocked him: tea party supporters are actually more scientifically literate than the non-tea party population
I’ve got to confess, though, I found this result surprising. As I pushed the button to run the analysis on my computer, I fully expected I’d be shown a modest negative correlation between identifying with the Tea Party and science comprehension.
But then again, I don’t know a single person who identifies with the Tea Party. All my impressions come from watching cable tv — & I don’t watch Fox News very often — and reading the “paper” (New York Times daily, plus a variety of politics-focused internet sites like Huffington Post & Politico).
I’m a little embarrassed, but mainly I’m just glad that I no longer hold this particular mistaken view.
(Excerpt) Read more at culturalcognition.net ...
That was it! Thanks!
It is true. People who are directly connected through prayer, meditation and openness to the Holy Spirit are channels for a higher level of intelligence -- a spring of "living water". On its way through the mind of the faithful to inspire God's purposes, some of the Divine Mind rubs off.
The puzzling part of this is he admitted he made a judgment about the intelligence of Tea Party people from the media- yet he does not seem to be aware that the disturbing things he still believes about the Tea Party also came from the media.
check out
This reminds me of a dreck of a study published a few years ago called “conservatism as motivated social cognition” by Kruglanski, et. al.
Except that this prof’s at least dimly aware of his own biases.
I have invited intelligent liberals with more degrees than a thermometer to meeting, and they won't go. One noted he might if no one in his social circles didn't find out.
Cowards, one and all....
They would have to challenge their epistemological basis when they find everyone in the room has as many degree's, kids, wealth etc and they have more in common than they ever flippin' believed....
The hostess for this group had a doctorate degree in something or other and introduced herself as Dr. Lang. Guess her parent’s didn’t give her a first name. She had two cats, one draped across the top of the door frame and another one on the fireplace hearth. I have cats but I have never seen anything like hers. After a couple of hours I remarked how well behaved they were because they hadn’t so much as twitched their tail the entire evening. Everyone in the room laughed. She had had them stuffed after they died so they would be with her forever. Just bizarre.
BTW, someone quoted to me yesterday Lenin’s dictum that “Give us a child for 8 years and we’ll have him for life.” Didn’t seem to work out with the USSR, which had those commie kids a helluva lot longer than eight years.
Actually it did work out, but the system came to its inevitable implosion.
The US is following the path, but a fair bit to go before the implosion....
When a college professor lives in the bubble world of academia, it isn’t at all surprising that they know damned little of the outside world.
There is something staring the author in the face and he can't see it.
The author says that nineteen percent of respondents identify with the Tea Party.
If the author knows 100 people who could be Tea Party members, but in fact none are, then the hypothesis that his circle of acquaintance is randomly distributed is provably false.
Each of his 100 acquaintances has a probability of NOT being a Tea Partier of about 80%. If he had one acquaintance then it would be very much more likely than not that such acquaintance would not be a Tea Partier.
If he had TWO acquaintances, then the probability, assuming that "Tea Partiness" is randomly distributed, would be the product of two probabilities, each of which would be 80%. So the probability of his two acquaintances both being non-Tea Partiers would be 0.8 * 0.8, or 0.64, which is 64%. This makes it more likely than not that his two acquaintances would both be non-Tea Partiers.
The problem arises if we assume that he has 100 acquaintances any one of whom might be a Tea Partier. The calculation of the probability that all 100 would be non-Tea Partiers is 0.8 to the 100th power; that is, 0.8 multiplied by itself 100 times. According to my calculator, this value is 2.04E-10, which is scientific notation for a probability which is 2 in TEN BILLION.
The hypothesis that the author's acquaintances represent a random sample of the nation's population is therefor statistically almost IMPOSSIBLE.
The author should give some thought to identifying the source of his isolation from this segment of the population. Whatever this mechanism is, its statistical significance is liable to be so large as to make his other statistical observations irrelevant.
Wow. "How could Nixon have won? I don't know a single person who voted for him!"
And these people have the gall to say I'm provincial and backward?
Bingo. You got one here.
And I used YOUR book to teach US history.
I’ll bet that most Lib profs live in a very insular world that extends little beyond their ivy-covered walls. Being overpaid wear tweed suits, spout commie trash and bang gullible co-eds — what a life!
Well, the very fact that there is an implosion then suggests that Lenin is wrong and that it doesn’t work out. Otherwise, the implosion would never come.
Thank you. We just got the green light to do a new 10th anniversary edition and update through 2012!
Yes, and we’re on our way.
The challenge (from an investor standpoint) is getting the timing right.
Timing is everything.
speaking as a teapartier with a four year degree and a masters certificate in project management. IQ >110.
its the tea party folks who are informed and who execute RATIONAL thinking.
we spend our time productively.
sitcoms bore me.
discovery channel learning channel history channel military channel. books internet etc
I primarily watch news, science and history but I do have my diversions. Right now I’m watching the ALCS and loved Breaking bad and have returned to watching The Walking Dead.
Funny thing is that even watching Breaking Bad or Walking Dead I found plenty to ponder within the shows.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.