115
What Constitutes a Liberally Educated Person Does It Have Anything to w-becoming More Liberal : Swingers Discussion 97860
Busy Swingers Forum - everything you always wanted to know about swingers.
SwingLifeStyle Swingers Personal Ads. | SwingLifeStyle Swingers Clubs

Busy Swingers Forum

Everything you always wanted to know about swingers.

Create A Free Account

HELP
FORUMSGeneral DiscussionsPoliticsWhat Constitutes a Liberally Educated Person Does It Have Anything to w-becoming More Liberal
TOPIC: What Constitutes a Liberally Educated Person Does It Have Anything to w-becoming More Liberal
Created by: sappholovers
Original Starting post for this thread:
Colleges are called "liberal arts" institutions.

(I've not heard of colleges being called "conservative arts" institutions or the humanities described as part of the conservative arts.)

But do college faculty tend to pursue a politically liberal agenda in such liberal arts institutions?

I'd say no if were are using the Conservative concept of "liberal agenda."

So how do I, as a political liberal, and a teacher of the liberal arts, conceive of my agenda in the classroom? This is a question that can't be answered shortly.

My favorite description of what liberal arts teachers should try to teach students is the following description by William Cronon, a professor of history, of what constitutes a liberally educated person:

1. They listen and they hear.

They work hard to hear what other people say. They can follow an argument, track logical reasoning, detect illogic, hear the emotions that lie behind both the logic and the illogic, and ultimately empathize with the person who is feeling those emotions.

2. They read and they understand.

Educated people can appreciate not only the front page of the New York Times but also the arts section, the sports section, the business section, the science section, and the editorials....

3. They can talk with anyone.

4. They can write clearly and persuasively and movingly.

5. They can solve a wide variety of puzzles and problems.

6. They respect rigor not so much for its own sake but as a way of seeking truth.

7. They practice humility, tolerance, and self-criticism.

This is another way of saying that they can understand the power of other people's dreams and nightmares as well as their own. They have the intellectual range and emotional generosity to step outside their own experiences and prejudices, thereby opening themselves to perspectives different from their own. From this commitment to tolerance flow all those aspects of a liberal education that oppose parochialism and celebrate the wider world: studying foreign languages, learning about the cultures of distant peoples, exploring the history of long-ago times, discovering the many ways in which men and women have known the sacred and given names to their gods. Without such encounters, we cannot learn how much people differ--and how much they have in common.

8. They understand how to get things done in the world.

9. They nurture and empower the people around them.

Liberally educated people understand that they belong to a community whose prosperity and well-being are crucial to their own, and they help that community flourish by making the success of others possible. If we speak of education for freedom, then one of the crucial insights of a liberal education must be that the freedom of the individual is possible only in a free community, and vice versa. It is the community that empowers the free individual, just as it is free individuals who lead and empower the community. The fulfillment of high talent, the just exercise of power, the celebration of human diversity: Nothing so redeems these things as the recognition that what seem like personal triumphs are in fact the achievements of our common humanity.

10. They follow E. M. Forster's injunction from Howards End: "Only connect." More than anything else, being an educated person means being able to see connections that allow one to make sense of the world and act within it in creative ways. Every one of the qualities I have described here--listening, reading, talking, writing, puzzle solving,

GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... More 
 1 to 10 of 112   End
User Details are only visible to members.
Marxism failed, so why try to bring it back with hitlary and hussein?

Destin FL
Username hidden
(14562 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
From Exposing America’s Enemies: the ‘Social Justice Seeking’ Communist Left, comes this relevant quote: “For over forty years the New Left has been waging a Gramscian ‘quiet’ revolution for the overthrow of America’s Constitution, Rule of Law, sovereignty, and our way of life. Today the subversives call themselves liberals, progressives, and Democrats (and) as David Horowitz attested to (the majority are) social justice seeking communists.

“The Democratic Party is very close to being the (Communist-controlled Progressive) party of Henry Wallace…the vast bulk of the American Left is a communist left.” (How Marxism Dominates the Left, Phil Brennan, NewsMax, June 1, 2005)

The Backbone Campaign is a communist front group in the lefts vast interconnected matrix of revolutionary groups. On its website it declares its goal is to: “empower citizens to nominate, comment on, and rate progressive leaders to serve as a virtual Progressive Parallel Administration…we are not content running campaigns, but preparing to run the country.” (www*backbonecampaign*org/cabinet/)

Chief among Backbone Campaign sponsoring organizations is the Progressive Democrats of America, who are committed to: “dismantling the military industrial complex.” (ibid)

“The Progressive Caucus is made up of the most Far-Left members of Congress and best represents the socialist wing of the Democratic Party.” (Radical Road Maps, James H. Hansen, p. 186) Progressive Democrats are responsible for installing Howard Dean as Democratic National Chairman. In Feb. 2005, Dean was quoted by U.S. News and World Report as exclaiming: “I hate the Republicans and everything they stand for.” Deans power base, according to DiscoverTheNetwork*org, are a bunch of “campus communists.” The Progressive Caucus will be the focus of this article. Linda Kimball

Destin FL
Username hidden
(14562 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
I am partial to:

The Second IndoChina War William S Turley

Aftermath Frederick Downs

The Limits of Intervention Townsend Hoopes

Growing Up American Min Zhou

Chickenhawk Robert Mason

And not on Vietnam but war in general

Thank God for the Atomic Bomb Paul Fussell

particular attention to page 118 (paperback edition) A Well Regulated Militia

Cheers

Fullerton CA
Username hidden
(17357 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
debjack:

What do you know about Petraeus' dissertation on Vietnam?

What are the best books about the Vietnam War in your opinion.

Here are some of my favorites:

Frances Fitzgerald, "Fire in the Lake. Neil Sheehan, "A Bright, Shining Lie: John Paul Vann and Vietnam" Jonathan Schell, "A Village Called Ben Suc" Jack Lannguth, "Vietnam" Michael Herr, "Dispatches" Daniel Lang, "Casualties of War" Gloria Emerson, "Winners and Losers"

The Pentagon Papers is highly valuable as it offers previously classified information and intelligence reports about evaluations of the war and the chances of winning it. It gives us an inside story about the LBJ administration's thinking about the war.

To dismiss the Pentagon Papers for its insights and information about the Vietnam War is to show that you have no respect for intelligence....or intelligence reports..... But you've convinced me about that in other ways as well.

Dream on about bombing Vietnam back to the stone age.

The documentaries, "Hearts and Minds" and "Year of the Pig"

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Perfect Match:

General Petraeus is saving Bush's ass in Iraq. I wish he had been commander of the forces in Iraq since the invasion, and the war wouldnot have been subject to as much tragedy as it has, and the USA would be in less of a quagmire.

Perhaps one of the best examples of a successful counter-insurgency or winning hearts and minds is what the USA accomplished in the Philippines at the end of the 19th century from 1899-1902.

President William McKinley declared:

"It should be the earnest and paramount aim of the military administration to win the confidence, respect, and affection of the inhabitants of the Philippines ... and by proving to them that the mission of the United States is one of benevolent assimilation, substituting the mild sway of justice and right for arbitrary rule."

President Bush has shown himself, time and again, at Yale and as President, to be a terrible student of history, at best a C student, and with Iraq, closer to a D-.

He failed Vietnam History 101 and Political Science 101 with his Iraq War. He was expecting that the overthrow of tyranny would lead to a glorious outburst of liberty and democracy. He never learned what is taught by any study of the classics or history or politics: Overthrow a tyrant and expect anarchy and licentiousness or civil war to follow in its wake.

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
debjack: "The bombing of North VN would have worked had the congress and the president let the military do it's job properly."

It seems as if you have never read the Pentagon Papers or many an analysis of the Vietnam War by military experts, including General Daniel Petraeus, who wrote a dissertation (he has a PhD in history) on the Vietnam War and counter-insurgency strategy.

Petraeus recognizes that America had to fight a counter-insurgency war in Vietnam, just as he is trying to do in Iraq, and he knows that to win such a ar, you need to win the "hearts and minds" of the people, and that heavy bombing is not the way to win such a war--it produces opposition, or it "saves" a country by destroying it.

We can't stabilize or counter insurgents in Iraq just by dropping bombs. We could not win in Vietnam by dropping more bombs. The bombing helped turn more people against the USA.

Yes, we could have bombed North Vietnam back to the Stone Age, as some military men in Vietnam might have hoped we would do.

But people like Petraeus are much smarter in their tactics than you and Brig. General Jack Ripper from "Dr. Strangelove."

You have a mythical vision of the Civil War and the Vietnam War, and like too many in America, and unlike General Petraeus, you have not learned the right lessons from the tragedy of the Vietnam War.

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
Speaking of "dunderheads."

Your hero "W" (aka: Fortunate Son -- Great Credance tune) was still over hear protecting a few bars in southeast Texas while all that military stuff was being done by the "less fortunate" in Vietnam.

Key West FL
Username hidden
(2881 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
djack "Of course I was not in North Vietnam, the people who did that are the traitors you adore, John Kerry and Jane Fonda."

I know Jane Fonda was in N Vietnam but I didn't know that John Kerry was. I believe he was in the Navy stationed in the South on the Delta running Swiftboats up and down the Mekong --- while your hero "W" was guarding Texas from Louisiana part-time.

You really enjoy sitting there in your own little alternate universe typing away. But every once in a while you need to stick your head up out of you hole and check the real world.

Did you hear that on Rush?

Key West FL
Username hidden
(2881 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
The United States tried to break the will of the North Vietnamese, including by dropping more bombs on them then were dropped on Germany. It didn't work. We had the best army in the world, with the best arms and equipment, and we could not defend or prop up the South Vietnamese government.

Perhaps the only things harder to prop up than the South Vietnamese government by the time we left are some of debjack's posts.....

Called upon to provide fact, evidence, specifics to back up his charges, Debjack replies with ad hominem attack. He's seems to have failed to learn what is at the heart of a liberal education: Arguments need to be supported with facts, evidence, specifics and an ability to see things from more than one point of view.

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
User Details are only visible to members.
deback:

Your posts, like an impotent cock, can't stand up on their own. You have no facts or knowledge to back them up.

Go do some googling or reading to get the Viagra of hard facts and solid information so your posts are not so limp.....like a dead worm.

Los Angeles CA
Username hidden
(4376 posts)
GoTo Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... More 
 1 to 10 of 112   End
TOPIC: What Constitutes a Liberally Educated Person Does It Have Anything to w-becoming More Liberal