Conservatives need not apply? < "stupid people are generally conservative ">

Duke :: Philosophy :: Faculty :: Robert N Brandon


	Professor

	Department Chair


Areas:	Philosophy of Science Philosophy of Biology Logic

Office:	209 West Duke Bldg
Phone:	+1·919·660·3067, +1 919-660-3050
Fax:	+1 919-660-3060
E-mail:	rbrandon@duke.edu

Robert N. Brandon (Ph.D. 1979, Harvard) joined the Duke Faculty in fall of 1979. He holds a joint appointment in Philosophy and Biology . He has published articles in Philosophy of Science, Studies in History and Philosophy of Science, Biology and Philosophy, PSA 1980 and PSA 1982, some of which have subsequently been anthologized. He has co-edited (with Richard Burian) Genes, Organisms, Populations: Controversies over the Units of Selection (Bradford Books, MIT Press, 1984), and his book, Adaptation and Environment was published by Princeton University Press in 1990. His most recent book Concepts and Methods in Evolutionary Biology (Cambridge) was published in 1996. During the spring of 1984 he had a visiting appointment at the Department of History and Philosophy of Science, University of Pittsburgh. Brandon is a member of Duke's Center for the Philosophy of Biology .

If he's so bright, how could he be dim enough not only to believe such an absurd notion, but to hail it publicly?

Furthermore, how could he forget all those buttons on his shirt in that picture.....

I've been hearing variations of this canard for over 10 years, that academics and journalists are liberal because they're "smarter" than everyone else. To me it only proves their own elitist biases -- assuming that anyone who disagrees with you is stupid is one of the most foolish mistakes you can make.

Hiring the "brightest" people? No, I think you hire the biggest bloated blowhards. They can verbally tapdance to their tune but they are without moral fiber.

Members of academia tend to be a bit smarter than average.

Not in my experience.

As our local (Baltimore) radio talkshow host, Ron Smith, says:

"That argument is so ridiculous only an intellectual would believe it!"

Those who can't do, teach! That about sums it up.

John Stuart Mill, letter to the Conservative MP, Sir John Pakington (March, 1866)
I never meant to say that the Conservatives are generally stupid. I meant to say that stupid people are generally Conservative. I believe that is so obviously and universally admitted a principle that I hardly think any gentleman will deny it.

Link

He has a point; conservatives work hard, build businesses, hire people and invent useful things while liberal professors and politicians tax the hard-working conservatives to their undershorts and the conservatives just keep getting up every morning and working that much harder.

Kind of flies in the face of "Conservatives think, Liberals feel", doesn't it?

Robert Brandon, chair of the Duke University Philosophy Department, gives this explanation of why faculties at U.S. universities usually lean to the political left: "We try to hire the best, smartest people available.

Self-selecting elitism wouldn't have anything to do with it, would it? Perfesser?

This is a basic question defining a specific population under study. If he can't see the fallasies involved here, he ain't too smart. His PHD thesis is probably garbage for this reason.

This isn't going to be a popular opinion here, but in a way he's right.

If Free Republic is any indication of the "conservative", almost no one on this site is capable of performing the intricate mental gymnastics and logical contortionism required to arrive at liberal conclusions. We, the great unwashed morons in flyover country, just see things as they are.

Owl_Eagle

”Guns Before Butter.”

Depends on how one defines smarter.

The wonderful Brit Hume grapevined that last night. I boggled.

Shouldn't've, though.

Dan
/c8

...stupid people are generally conservative, then there are lots of conservatives we will never hire.

Prof. Brandon doesn't scruple, however, to cash his Duke paycheck, meagre though it may be. If he investigated further, he would find that his pay comes largely from endowment income. Should he call the Development Office, he would find that donations to that endowment come largely from conservatives that, stupid though they may be, managed to build successful businesses and amass large fortunes.

I invite Prof. Brandon to give a crack at making a fortune himself, if he is so very smart.

And as the air whistled in and out of his empty head it softly sang" And they called the wind Moriah". instead of pontificating mr.Brandon why dont you just do your job? thanks.

Ivy League Pompous University of New Jersey at Durham, NC/ Postmodern Ping

http://www.physics.nyu.edu/faculty/sokal/dawkins.html

Crisis in the Humanities

Notwithstanding the egg all over their faces, and despite their feminist pretensions, these editors are dominant males in the academic establishment. Ross has the boorish, tenured confidence to say things like, "I am glad to be rid of English departments. I hate literature, for one thing, and English departments tend to be full of people who love literature"; and the yahooish complacency to begin a book on 'science studies' with these words: "This book is dedicated to all of the science teachers I never had. It could only have been written without them."

He and his fellow 'cultural studies' and 'science studies' barons are not harmless eccentrics at third-rate state colleges. Many of them have tenured professorships at some of the best universities in the United States.

Men of this kind sit on appointment committees, wielding power over young academics who might secretly aspire to an honest academic career in literary studies or, say, anthropology. I know -- because many of them have told me -- that there are sincere scholars out there who would speak out if they dared, but who are intimidated into silence. To them, Sokal will appear as a hero, and nobody with a sense of humour or a sense of justice will disagree. It helps, by the way, although it is strictly irrelevant, that his own left-wing credentials are impeccable.

I could accept this premise, that the majority of ultra-bright people are liberal, but on the other hand, I think I could come up with data that would allow one to draw the inference that majority of stupid people (a MUCH larger pool) are liberal.

For example, I have the theory that people with an IQ over, say, 135 tend to be liberals. Thats pretty far up the bell curve however. On the other hand, people with IQ's of 90 or less tend to be (vote) liberal.

Check out the demographics of the last Election, see who voted for whom. You can draw your own conclusions.

My Democrat family always likes to say how dumb Republicans are. I bet them that if there were an IQ test at the polls, and only people with an IQ of 95 or above were allowed to vote, that a Democrat would never again win the Presidency. I tell them my reasoning (I WONT get into it here), and they pretty much end up having to agree.

There's a very simple answer for this. There are many more liberals on college campuses because most of them aren't bright enough to find a job in the private sector. Ergo, they are content to while away their days navel-gazing and asking each other "what is truth?" while the conservatives actually work. Voila.

Duke? Ph.D. 1979, Harvard ?

Well....that explains it. He probably thinks Nietzsche is a "philosopher" as well...