• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Academia vs Joe Sixpack

.

  • Total voters
    51
Universal Truth said:
I'm going to be honest 535 random individuals. That would clear out all this corruption and insanity currently going on, sure our nation would economically collapse, but that's just waiting to happen. The sooner the better. After that we could rebuild.

All the people saying intellectuals. Ivy League does not = intellectual. Ivy League = rich family (in most cases)
Click to expand...

Not necessarily so for the faculties of top-level universities - they don't make as much money as their students tend to at 10 years past graduation.
 
Cephus said:
Anyone who is actually qualified for the job probably wouldn't want to do it in the first place.
Click to expand...

Which is why we're stuck with the wonderful US Government we have today. Embezzelers, liars, crooks, cheats, morality cops, money chasers, and weak pandering idiots.
 
Fiddytree said:
Bureaucracy is great. Reorganization attempts are what suck. The people listen to their politicians feeding them the same nonsense about bureaucracy when it's not really true. It's one of the best things to happen.
Click to expand...

I would call it more a necessary evil that must be constantly watched to keep it from going out of control.
When bureaucracy works right it is very advantageous way of getting things organized. Often it gets to a point where it spends more time trying to grow itself than actually accomplishing anything, or stuck on following bureaucratic procedure despite the obvious mal application to the situation at hand, etc etc...
 
celticwar17 said:
Average joes by a long-shot. They would most likely be more grounded with reality of human nature and have had more experience with real life.
Click to expand...

What makes you think academia does not have experience with real life?
 
Fiddytree said:
More simplistic populist, mass democratic nonsense meant to stroke your egos.

Joe Sixpack doesn't live in the consequential real-world of complex financial institutions, international diplomacy, and so forth. They are stuck to their localities, if that. How much more fantasy-land can you get than that? Is it any wonder why we had bred people like Henry Stimson?



Wilson is practically the Godfather for modern bureaucratic structure and civil service. He wasn't just some idealistic schmuck that screwed over the Fourteen Points and made the hopelessly naive sentiments about the last Great war among men.
Click to expand...

Joe Sixpack as you are want to call him run most of the small and mid sized buisness in the US, it would be unwise to dicount their capablitity. I will take randomly selected people out of the directory than what we have now. I have found that Academic types must be tempered with the us regular types, as they tend to focus too narrorowly to be as effective as their their potential to be. As far Woodrow Wilson, Fiddy the man was a sadst. If he was alive today I would personaly take steps to remove him from the world permanately. He jailed people for speach and opposing his views. The Nazi party took their cues from him. That aint hyperbole they said it themselves they took their cues from him. That SOB was as anti Constitution as Obama and probably more so. He was a pox on our country.
 
Hare said:
A recent quip by a fellow poster here inspired me to create this poll. Bear with me, while it may seem patently absurd to some, it is strictly for my own amusement and serves only as a sociopolitical barometer of sorts. Would you rather our governing body be comprised of the faculty of various Ivy league and highly accredited academic institutions (i.e. Harvard, MIT, Stanford etc.) or the first 535 individuals selected at random from your local phonebook?
Click to expand...

I do value the idea that your political body can't be completly removed from the population it governs. I think there does need to be some kind of mix but this idea that education and experience doesn't matter when running the largest economy in the world or coming up with policy that affects 300 million plus individuals is just crazy.
 
Fiddytree said:
More simplistic populist, mass democratic nonsense meant to stroke your egos.

Joe Sixpack doesn't live in the consequential real-world of complex financial institutions, international diplomacy, and so forth. They are stuck to their localities, if that. How much more fantasy-land can you get than that? Is it any wonder why we had bred people like Henry Stimson?



Wilson is practically the Godfather for modern bureaucratic structure and civil service. He wasn't just some idealistic schmuck that screwed over the Fourteen Points and made the hopelessly naive sentiments about the last Great war among men.
Click to expand...

Well God bless governing by civil service. :roll:

The premise of democracy is that the ordinary salt of the earth person ultimately is the wisest about him/herself. Obviously you disagree.
 
Hare said:
A recent quip by a fellow poster here inspired me to create this poll. Bear with me, while it may seem patently absurd to some, it is strictly for my own amusement and serves only as a sociopolitical barometer of sorts. Would you rather our governing body be comprised of the faculty of various Ivy league and highly accredited academic institutions (i.e. Harvard, MIT, Stanford etc.) or the first 535 individuals selected at random from your local phonebook?
Click to expand...

Academia for sure.
 
PirateMk1 said:
As far Woodrow Wilson, Fiddy the man was a sadst. If he was alive today I would personaly take steps to remove him from the world permanately. He jailed people for speach and opposing his views. The Nazi party took their cues from him. That aint hyperbole they said it themselves they took their cues from him. That SOB was as anti Constitution as Obama and probably more so. He was a pox on our country.
Click to expand...

Please. Washington, Adams, Lincoln also did the same. Don't be so ridiculous.
 
Hare said:
A recent quip by a fellow poster here inspired me to create this poll. Bear with me, while it may seem patently absurd to some, it is strictly for my own amusement and serves only as a sociopolitical barometer of sorts. Would you rather our governing body be comprised of the faculty of various Ivy league and highly accredited academic institutions (i.e. Harvard, MIT, Stanford etc.) or the first 535 individuals selected at random from your local phonebook?
Click to expand...

I'd prefer to have a mix, as a strictly academic body would lack in practicality and sense, but a strictly Joe Sixpack body would lack some understanding of intricacies.
 
joko104 said:
Well God bless governing by civil service. :roll:
Click to expand...

Civil service does governance, and it does it generally very well.

The premise of democracy is that the ordinary salt of the earth person ultimately is the wisest about him/herself. Obviously you disagree.
Click to expand...

I do disagree. The common man may be more wise about himself, but he is not wise about his collective.
 
Smart people, obviously. We didn't get to where we are now by having idiots in positions of power.
 
Hare said:
A recent quip by a fellow poster here inspired me to create this poll. Bear with me, while it may seem patently absurd to some, it is strictly for my own amusement and serves only as a sociopolitical barometer of sorts. Would you rather our governing body be comprised of the faculty of various Ivy league and highly accredited academic institutions (i.e. Harvard, MIT, Stanford etc.) or the first 535 individuals selected at random from your local phonebook?
Click to expand...

Exclusively, neither. I'd rather have smart people (and that does not mean exclusively academics) with ability and desire to make government function.
 
I think the average Joe deserves more credit. and could learn how to govern effectively.
The University Professors might tend to be more ideologues.
It has been my experience that most PhDs make poor managers.
They can be very good in their own area of expertise, but hubris leads them to
believe that makes them good in all areas of Human knowledge.
 
Your Star said:
Smart people, obviously. We didn't get to where we are now by having idiots in positions of power.
Click to expand...

The problem is that "intellectual" doesn't mean "smart". Some of the smartest people I have known are socially inept, and completely out of touch with the real world. They can do math and science **** like crazy, but they would make for lousy leaders and representatives.
 
This thread makes me lol. Joe Spaghetti-Stain is the same doofus who every four or eight years switches from defense of the status quo to opposition to it when nothing really ever changes. He's the brain-dead moron who gets a hard on from Romney or Obama's empty platitudes and glittering generalities.

I understand the point that the intellectual elite aren't equipped to run the country solo, but the main point should be those who can collect, organize and analyze the data should be the ones providing the data to the average cheeze-whiz drinkin' Joe to make a (hopefully) somewhat informed decision.
 
lizzie said:
I'd prefer to have a mix, as a strictly academic body would lack in practicality and sense, but a strictly Joe Sixpack body would lack some understanding of intricacies.
Click to expand...

I don't really understand why people think that. What exactly is lacking sense about scholarly pursuits? Academics have to pay their mortgages just like everyone else. They had to pay for their education, often by saving up for it, or by managing substantial amounts of debt without being overwhelmed. What's impractical about that? What will a plumber learn about business that a lawyer who works for himself or starts a small firm will not? Both must attract clients, manage the finances of their business, and sell their talents. What about their experiences are so different that one has "practicality and sense" and the other does not?

As for Joe Sixpack, considering how much of our population doesn't know the first thing about actual governance, law, or have even read the constitution, I would not want any of them to wield any political power. Lawmaking is a complex profession, and requires extensive training before a person is qualified to fill that job. It's a job, like any other, and you don't hire someone without the requisite knowledge to do the job.
 
Paschendale said:
I don't really understand why people think that. What exactly is lacking sense about scholarly pursuits?
Click to expand...

It's a world of ideas and theoretical concepts, without the application of such. Don't get me wrong- I love intellectual pursuit and the discussion of ideas, otherwise I would not be here, but we also need some people who are living on the other end of the spectrum, to bring some balance.
 
lizzie said:
It's a world of ideas and theoretical concepts, without the application of such. Don't get me wrong- I love intellectual pursuit and the discussion of ideas, otherwise I would not be here, but we also need some people who are living on the other end of the spectrum, to bring some balance.
Click to expand...

Seems to me that, at least nowadays, most of our graduate programs require some sort of real-world experience or application of skills to get a diploma? I might be wrong...
 
longview said:
I think the average Joe deserves more credit. and could learn how to govern effectively.
The University Professors might tend to be more ideologues.
It has been my experience that most PhDs make poor managers.
They can be very good in their own area of expertise, but hubris leads them to
believe that makes them good in all areas of Human knowledge.
Click to expand...

I'm no academic snob, but the great majority of average Joes and Josephines who attend some level of government meeting, are only angry. They often don't have a clear or practical idea to offer in response to the issue that spurred them to voice their opinion. Once they get up to speed on it, they usually peel off, back to their lives, leaving a small core of really concerned citizens and their representatives, to figure it out. I've seen it on many occasions.

I'm not saying all PhD's are whiz's at this stuff either, but they are useful in that some have expertise that can be tapped for information leading to solutions.

In the end, it takes people interested and able to work at it to make government work.
 
RadicalModerate said:
Seems to me that, at least nowadays, most of our graduate programs require some sort of real-world experience or application of skills to get a diploma? I might be wrong...
Click to expand...

I'm not referring to grads. Those are not what we consider in the academic arena.
 
lizzie said:
I'm not referring to grads. Those are not what we consider in the academic arena.
Click to expand...

???

"Academia is the community of students and scholars engaged in higher education and research."

What are "we" considering academic, then? Internet researchers?
 
lizzie said:
It's a world of ideas and theoretical concepts, without the application of such. Don't get me wrong- I love intellectual pursuit and the discussion of ideas, otherwise I would not be here, but we also need some people who are living on the other end of the spectrum, to bring some balance.
Click to expand...

What's theoretical about a biologist who works in a lab in a hospital? What's theoretical about a lawyer who defends indigent defendants in court, or one who fights to uphold contract law? What's theoretical about a computer engineer who designs the products that run this very forum? What's theoretical about a behavioral psychologist who models human behavior enough to produce successful marketing campaigns?

I'm not sure exactly what you think people do with their advanced degrees after they get them. Most don't stay in academia and become professors. They put their skills to good use, in extremely non-theoretical ways.

I think you are buying into a false image in this assertion.
 
RadicalModerate said:
???

"Academia is the community of students and scholars engaged in higher education and research."

What are "we" considering academic, then? Internet researchers?
Click to expand...

No, I agree with your definition, but I don't agree with your assessment that a college grad = a member of academia. Most of those who graduate from college, progress on to jobs which are not research or academic-related. Engineers, doctors, nurses, architects, etc. The academics are the ones who are teaching and researching.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom