Post #1,
Is, i would argue, a description of how to move toward 'normalising' and accepting [shocking/disturbing]
non-performance and incompetence within systems of academia.
OR,
Accepting that failing [in systems of learning] is OK, and there is no need to acknowledge incompetence AND,
responsibility.
QUESTION;In 2017, what type of madness do the 'Halls of Academia' [which is, imo, a morally corrupt modern academia] support ?
In 2017, what type of wrongdoing are the 'Halls of Academia' [which is, imo, a morally corrupt modern academia] seeking to legitimise ?
ANSWER;In the example [below] it has to do with teaching [expecting us to] accept ['normalise'] cultural relativism, that relates to the practices within
ISLAMIC 'society'. !!!!!
--------- >
e.g.
Quote:
Columbia University, an Ivy League school and one of the nation’s foremost centers of higher learning, most students are willing to condone female genital mutilation.
"Students were asked if Planned Parenthood should fund and support female genital mutilation (FGM). FGM involves partial or total removal of the clitoris causing injury to the female genital organs for non-medical reasons. It has no health benefits for girls and women, and removes all possibility of sexual pleasure. It is the worst kind of misogyny. Procedures can cause severe bleeding and problems urinating, and later cysts, infections, as well as complications in childbirth and increased risk of newborn deaths."
Geller explained: "We sent AFDI reporter Laura Loomer to Columbia and found the people there remarkably unconcerned about female genital mutilation. Probably because of fear of being called ‘racist’ or ‘Islamophobic,’ they condoned the introduction into the U.S. of this human rights abuse."
Google
.
In
2010, Yadda said...
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1292918320/24#24 Quote:
IMO, there is probably nothing more unethical in the world today, than the 'humanist' worldview, and those who promote so called liberal 'ethics'.
IMO, this generation of mankind has lost the ability to discern between good and evil.
The Judeao-Christian standards and morality, that guided our present culture in its formative period, has been almost entirely abandoned.
Why is that?
Just take a moment, and look at the total moral mess the Western world is in today.
IMO, this is the consequence largely, of the influence of 'academics' and godless social 'theorists'!
IMO, almost all of the 'humanist', and social engineering type areas of academia, are clearly, divorced from reality.
They are living in a la-la-land, and are unethically ignoring the consequences of their own mistaken social experiments.
They are engrossed in a politically correct idiocy, which is a denial of the real world consequences of their own moral 'inadequacy'.
i.e.
These people who promote 'humanist values' are totally, morally corrupt, and they seem to exhibit a hatred for truth.
And why?
Because the truth confronts and exposes the error of their claptrap [<--- that's a technical term] social theories.
Humanist, and liberal ethics seem to embrace an idea, and want to teach us, that man is naturally good.
Today, our children are taught that it is wrong to try to 'discriminate' between good and evil, and to reject what is evil.
Yadda said...
http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1292918320/41#41 Quote:
PROPOSITION...
The criminal and a non-criminal personality will always be in conflict, and will always define 'ethical behaviour' differently.
A criminal personality, and a non-criminal personality, will ALWAYS be in conflict with each other [on some level], because their respective interests do not coincide [concur] - on an 'ethical' level.
+++
IMO, 'freedom', and 'the pursuit of pleasure', to this generation of mankind, means being able to do whatever they like,
...so long as there are no adverse consequences for themselves.
And that is basically what our society actually teaches our children.
[i.e. avoid consequences, at all costs!]
Like their community leaders [i.e. politicians], this generation want to exercise authority and freedom, but, they invariably seek to reject responsibility [for the consequences of their choices].
.
Quote:
Cultural relativism is the principle that an individual's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's own culture.
It was established as axiomatic in anthropological research by Franz Boas in the first few decades of the 20th century and later popularized by his students.
Google