Intellectualism is dead or dying, in Australia.
And, imo, it was the faux 'institutions of higher learning' in Australia who killed [true] intellectualism, in Australia.
Prime Minister for Canyons wrote on Sep 16
th, 2019 at 9:41am:
Ahhh classic anti-intellectual clap trap.
-----------------
longweekend58 wrote on Sep 18
th, 2019 at 7:54am:
anti-intellectualism is the biggest problem we face.
Ironically, longweekend58 statement, is correct, imo !
-----------------
ARGUMENT;It is not honest, to describe as an 'intellectual' or to describe as an 'academic', any person or any 'church' of persons,
...who seek to pontificate on what truth may be spoken in the public square,
...who seek to shun and reject all scepticism [coming from outside of their 'church'],
...who seek to shut down all debate, where such debate, may undermine their own 'intellectual' positions and
professional authority.
Let us all bow down to the
High Priests, of scientific enquiry in Australia !
sceptic = =
1 a person inclined to question or doubt accepted opinions. a person who doubts the truth of Christianity and other religions; an atheist.
2 a philosopher who denies the possibility of knowledge, or even rational belief, in certain spheres..
WWW search....
CONVERSATION web site - to ban climate deniers Quote:
The Conversation
website
theconversation.com
The Conversation is an independent, not-for-profit media outlet that uses content sourced from the academic and research community.
Since the Australian website's launch in March 2011, it has expanded into six editions, with the addition of a United Kingdom version in 2013, United States in 2014, Africa in May 2015, France in September 2015, and Global in September 2016.
- wiki
Quote:The Conversation’s ban on climate change ‘deniers’ fails basics of academic rigour
Chris Kenny September 19, 2019
Comments
Conversations are like sex, when they are solo, they are hardly the same thing.
But The Conversation website, which claims to offer “academic rigour” with “journalistic flair”, has decided that on climate change the discussion should be all one way.
It will ban what it calls “denier” viewpoints from its articles and comments and goes even further saying
it will ban “sceptics” too.
Apart from being
a fundamental assault on freedom of speech and intellectual integrity, this action
flies in the face of scientific endeavour,
...where the scientific method is founded on the presumption of rigorous scepticism.
......"....As a publisher, giving them a voice on our site contributes to a stalled public discourse,” says Ketchell on behalf of The Conversation.
“That’s why
the editorial team in Australia is implementing a zero-tolerance approach to moderating climate change deniers, and sceptics.
Not only will we be removing their comments,
we’ll be locking their accounts.”
So that’s how
this academically-inclined outfit deals with
the battle of ideas and scientific debate, it unilaterally shuts down the voices, facts, theories and opinions it disagrees with.
Who will decide what level of scepticism is acceptable?
www.theaustralian.com.au WWW search
.
Kenny is right. ....
and correct too.
Australian academics and intellectuals, intellectually, are akin to masturbaters.
i.e.
"We're doing just fine!"
"We have constructed an unassailable hypothesis, and we will not entertain any other views being expressed or examined, which does not agree with our expert opinion!"
"And we don't need any further outside input on that particular issue thank you."Intellectuals ?
Resident, within Australian universities, 2019 ?
BULL SHITE !Faux 'intellectuals' and 'academics', is what the institutions of higher learning in Australia, in 2019, HAVE PRODUCED.
They are, ....deceitful, DIS-HONEST, 'intellectual' and 'academic' IMPERSONATORS.
intellectual = = of, relating to, or appealing to the intellect. having a highly developed intellect.
academic = = of or relating to education and scholarship.
impersonate = = pretend to be (another person) for entertainment or fraud..
QUESTION;Why is the pursuit of [pure] truth so comforting to some people,
and yet, so objectionable to some others ?
Truth is almost always a casualty, when it competes with the
mercenary self-interest of men.
"I don't like sherrifs. They're elected. Their goal is being re-elected, not the truth."
- Temperance Brennan [character]
Bones - The Boy in The Tree