Just don't take those classes. Every college has insane teachers, some more than others. Take the classes that you want that will give you the highest chance of being successful.

Also, this post looks an awful lot like bait.

I don't know about indoctrination. I think people making such claims have much experience from universities. Now, I graduated over 10 years ago, but for me the point was not to teach how to think, but teach how to learn and analyze. How to apply different methods, and which methods are suitable for different scenarios.

Then again I studied applied math and physics.

A lot of university programs are bullshit.

Anything STEM related is OK.

As for business school, accounting and information systems are typically the most "scientific" imo. Accounting is just math with a specific ruleset. Information systems, depending on the university, can range anywhere from a generic IT program to computer science in business school.

Not sure how your econ degree is, but if its econ related to social and behavioral sciences, yeah you will get a lot of propaganda and social science.

Classics is one most people fail to see the significance of. It is the study of the origins of Western Civilization- of Greece and Rome, and the Latin and Greek languages. Understanding Greco-Roman civilization is integral to understanding the modern West. Too bad universities are cutting Classics departments all across the country. We need more Classicists.

The question is, how much of 'ancient history' can be verified with primary sources, and how much are we supposed to take on faith?

Depends on the period and event. For instance- Cicero's personal letters to Atticus. There is a known manuscript tradition, though thin, and there are historical references in the middle ages to knowledge of their existence at some point in the 9th century, then Petrarch (re)discovered them in the 14th century in a monastery in Verona. Manuscript traditions are traced via "hands" or the distinctive writing style for different times and periods. With several manuscripts one can trace the line of copying to an extent.

I use Cicero's letters as an example because before they were widely studied there was great ignorance about the later years of his life, and the politics surrounding the late Roman Republic. Cicero's philosophical works had been widely read in the Middle Ages, especially book 6 of his De Republica- The Dream of Scipio. They painted a far from complete picture. The letters humanized him, showing his flaws, faults, and contradictions in his own personal philosophy. And it gives great detail into the final years of the Republic before Cicero's execution, as well as a philosophical explanation of how Cicero saw the Republic.

Other periods are far dryer, especially (sticking with Rome here) sources for the Crisis of the Third Century. But you would be surprised how much info the Primary sources do give, especially about Greece and Rome.

There is a known manuscript tradition, though thin, and there are historical references in the middle ages to knowledge of their existence at some point in the 9th century and earlier, then Petrarch (re)discovered them in the 14th century in a monastery in Verona.

Thanks for this reply.

So even if we take this story on face value, Cicero's letter could easily have been forged 1,000 years after his 9alleged) existence, could it not?

And even if we assume the letter is not a forgery, how do we know it is from the 9th century?

Once we understand how easily 'history' can be faked, why would we continue to take 'ancient history' on face value?

Children are being taught in school today that a boogeyman in a cave gone dun 9/11. think about that for a moment.

Cicero's letter could easily have been forged 1,000 years after his (alleged) existence, could it not?

Not based on the Latin of the day. Cicero's letters became the standard. Even learned Latin had declined sharply into a more vulgar form just a couple of centuries after the collapse of the West. When Petrarch rediscovered them they set the standard for Latin education for 4 centuries, and today are still considered the height of Latin prose writing.

And even if we assume the letter is not a forgery, how do we know it is from the 9th century?

The dating of most manuscripts is done based on their handwriting. Distinct regions at specific times had different styles of approved "handwriting" that the manuscripts, secular or spiritual, were written in. Primary sources from their own time as well as from the end of the Manuscript era and the invention of the printing press help to track this tradition as well.

Once we understand how easily 'history' can be faked, why would we continue to take 'ancient history' on face value?

Because there is a point where you can trust certain Primary sources, based on tracing manuscript traditions and locations, reference from other Primary works, and archaeology that confirms what Primary sources say.

Children are being taught in school today that a boogeyman in a cave gone dun 9/11. think about that for a moment.

Now here we agree. It's a terrifying thought. I try to introduce people to the 32 second collapse reel of building 7 if they are open minded enough but still caught within the official narrative.

Universities are making a ton of $ off of international student enrollment. In fact, I would say international student enrollment makes more $ for schools than domestic students, because they have to pay higher tuition as they are out-of-state.

The culture of universities has shifted to appease these students because they want their $

That's honestly a big part of it. I currently work for a university and we're actually hurting bad now because international student enrollment is dipping due to H1B visa changes

Not sure why you're downvoted, what you described has pretty much been my observation.

Male taxpayers are funding education so that students can learn how evil they are... back in my day (I'm an Aussie), my most radical lefty lecturer criticised US imperialism, nuclear weapons, and destruction of the environment (of course she was a feminist.) Fair enough. But it didn't all get blamed on the white patriarchy! Ah, the simple days that were the 90s!

Yes. They nearly got to me.

My students have the luxury of being taught by someone who has tripped before.

Went to college...tripped with professors...

My last class I took....the professor was an SJW and the entire class was very conservative.

It was an interesting semester...

Got an A by being fake though! So yes.

It was about social justice in education. The title was very similar to that.

No point in arguing with her as I am 1 class away from my master's

That's the reason you should have argued. Another wasted education,

I mean I argued collegially

My dog can speak on command too

Well it is a corrupt world. Im getting my degree to rise above.

If I'm being honest, I just registered for my first undergraduate classes for a secondary education degree in humanities. I just finished a community college in the very liberal and otherwise ignorant south burbs of Chicago. Being a cis white male i dodged & ducked & dive my way through hateful glares from nearly everyone I met with only a few really cool exceptions. Every teacher and administration I've spoken with acts burnt out and is only in it for the money. Education in the west is bloated and corrupt and while I can't completely change it, I can try so that others might still have the chance to one day. Your degree is an altitude of corruption. Your reasoning is as poor as your apparent education. You should be ashamed but thats hate speech isn't it?

Well I have brought a lot of good to my community. I pick and choose my battles.

Ok

What do you do for a living? My work is a constant battle.

I'm a massage therapist. I do a lot of physical therapy work as well with people. I have a family & this is my first part time semester in years. (I registered pretty late). It's daunting in the classroom because they've slowly built this institutionalized hate machine over the past two decades. But it's got to be burned out at the root and that's in the classroom. I'm nervous about starting this semester because of casual racism towards whites etc, but if I don't man up it'll be worse for my son

I do not want you to think I do not fight anything. I work in education.

It is way more corrupt than people even know.

The corruption is disgusting- I live in cook county where school boards regularly rob schools blind and the administration is in on it. Something has to change. The system needs a good purge Good luck in your school.

I can actually see a compelling argument in her favor about capitalism.

I can too tbh. The thing is based on the post it sounds like the prof was more blaming men rather than trying to make her students aware of our animalistic tendencies due to hormones and psychology that are beyond our control which is all one can/should do. Placing blame on the other hand works right in the favor of the elite's divide and conquer strategy and does nothing to actually overcome the problem.

http://www.wakingtimes.com/2014/01/28/untold-history-modern-u-s-education-founding-fathers/

Yes, and it's called Cultural Marxism. Look at the percentages of "teachers" in colleges who are "liberal" compared to "conservative".

I remember viewing /r/funny, sometime ago, and I shit you not... someone posted a picture of a "designated crying station" at their university. I laughed so hard, then I checked the comments, and people were actually defending them and saying they were actually a good thing.

My laughter then turned to disbelief, that is how far gone society actually is. smh...

Still beats hacking each other to pieces with rusty swords over a piece of dirt.

Wat?

What i mean is, I'd rather live in a world of cry hard pussies than a world of blood thirsty kings.

Eh, pretty sure we can find a middle ground, don't cha' think? There was a time when men were men, and women were women. Let's go back to those times, long before soy, endocrine blockers, and hormones in the food and drink.

Username checks out.

Thank god we have /u/Putin_loves_cats to lead us back to a time when domestic violence was good discipline, rape was boys being boys, and we all had holes in our bed sheets.

Be careful what you wish for. Blood thirsty kings ruled during eras of peace too.

Well, if it's a binary choice, one of those two will produce hard men that colonize space, the other will produce a sub-race that can be ruled over by overlords efficiently.

This is my farmland, to grow food for my people. I also have too many people, so I will whack you with this rusty sword and take your farmland, and attractive females.

Grond is King of farmland.

Why is it so scary to learn lefties gravitate towards universities? Karl Marx was an intellectual and Marxism is grounded in academia. Should be no surprise it spreads throughout academic institutions. Right wing philosophies for example tend to spread through churches and military circles. There's no particular reason certain political philosophies thrive in certain areas of society, but the trends are too obvious to be ignored.

Didn't Marxists in Europe and Asia, once they'd acquired adequate political clout, carry out mass executions of writers, philosophers, musicians, composers, poets, thinkers...? In Cambodia, they executed anyone who wore glasses because they were way too smarts, didn't they? Yeah, they did. And wasn't Karl Marx that loser who never contributed anything to humanity besides his retarded book outlining the details on how to take from others?

You're conflating a lot of different philosophies and regimes with Marxism. Marx is responsible for what himself, not for those who use his philosophy to dominate others. Also I'm not sure what your point is.

In Asia, maybe. In the USSR, many writers chose to go against the USSR's political views, and were thus considered rebels and undesirables. Primarily due to propaganda, the number of persecuted artists was inflated to 'all of them', instead of just the ones who, for whatever idiotic reason, chose to defy the government AND stay in the country they were actively ridiculing. A good parallel would be if Edward Snowden had stayed in the US after his leaks. Also, not entirely certain why you ridicule communism as a system for 'taking from others', when capitalism fits that definition much more closely. For communism to be created, yes, things must be taken, but capitalism encourages continually taking as much as possible for yourself.

earning aint taking son.

And how do you earn? By getting someone else to do the work for you, and paying them significantly less than the finished product is work. That's how capitalism works, and it's how companies work. Basically, if you're not an innovative business leader, or you were born at a point when no one cared about any service you could think of to provide, you'll be stuck working for the higher-ups.

Why are you saying it like its bad to work for others. Capitalism is good for innovation. Innovative people can get rewarded. You were not prevented from becoming an "innovative business leader". You just didnt. If you had, you would be wondering why people are trying to take your hard earned money.

About the significantly less than product is worth, the profit margins make it that way. There is a certain amount that they have to make in order to make enough. You have a choice to not buy those products.

Capitalism encourages innovation and healthy free markets.

Capitalism =/= Greed

And how does it encourage that innovation? With cash prizes. Capitalism encourages hiring workers to work for you, selling the product they make, then paying them significantly less than the product is worth. For an extreme example, look at the child labor factories in places like Asia. They make consumer goods worth $1000, but they get paid below US minimum wage, while whoever runs the company that employs them gets rich. For a less extreme example, consider yourself. How much do you make in a year? Now how much does your boss make in a year? Does he really do that much more work than you?

If you don't have a boss, then this won't apply to you, and I doubt I'll be able to sway you, because the people who receive the benefits from a system are always the main proponents of it.

Nobody is forcing those workers to work, especially in America. Places like China have many problems that lead to poor work conditions, but the sole reason isn't just capitalism.

Yes, my boss makes more money than me, and deservedly so; he has more responsibilities and makes more important decisions that will directly affect the company than I do on a daily basis. Does this mean I blame capitalism for my shortcomings? HELL no. This is America, I can be in his/her position if I worked for it.

Capitalism encourages innovation because it forces companies to adapt and "one up" one another. This also leads to a healthy competitive market, which leads to lower prices for consumers, ie you and I. And why do they want to one up each other? Of course many do it for the passion in their work, but you better believe a LARGE majority of innovators and inventors are chasing a dollar symbol. And that is because money grants us freedom, and really, that is all we want at the end of the day.

And don't get me wrong, capitalism can also promote corruption, in that, it can be easy to take advantage of it if you have the right political power. But again, that is a systematic problem, not a capitalism problem.

Nobody is forcing those workers to work

Lmao. This is just ridiculous. just like no one is forcing them to buy food right?

This is America, I can be in his/her position if I worked for it.

Not really true. We like to imagine that we live in a meritocracy, but we really don't. Everyone is not afforded equal opportunity. A person born into a family with $10 million has a hell of an advantage over a person born into a family with $10.

Sure, opportunity might be equal between those of equal socio-economic backgrounds, but that's basically they same in every economic system.

We absolutely live in a meritocracy, all countries are a meritocracy. Which is also why capitalism works, it rewards those that are highly skilled.

I didn't graduate that long ago - maybe 3 years - most people at universities are socially liberal and tend to be left/democratic. But I think this is the nature of the beast. Of course faculty is going to support the side that supports funding for higher education and NSF/NIH/NEA/NEH funding for research. It is also a place that has people from all over the world with all sorts of beliefs, so there is a tendency to be more tolerant/openminded. Just as a side point, I'd also like to say that anecdotally, I know two people who were raised to believe homosexuality was a terrible sin. Then they went to college and met actual gay people and how have no problem with it.

Universities have also become much more left leaning I'd say in the past decade. The right in the US has become very anti-science/anti-intellectual, which has driven most academics. I was in the sciences where politics hardly ever comes up. Even there (as far as people I know) you are going to meet a lot more Ds/lefties due to that. This trend has been going on at least 10 years: http://www.people-press.org/2009/07/09/section-4-scientists-politics-and-religion/

In that study, only 6% of scientists identified as republican. But this trend has nothing to do with "indoctrination". It has to do with how the republican party addresses climate change, evolution, and especially NSF/NIH etc.

Still kicking Karl while he’s dead.

He was right. What of it?

He was right.

He was not right, what he actually was, was a rich charlatan who put his name on an ideology and philosophy created by TPTB.

Yawn.

negatory captain

😂 by force, the failure of all others who were also "right"

Putin_loves_cats knows the score.

Damn straight, I do!

Well educated people tend to be liberal. I guess that's just because they are plotting to undermine america, and not because people with high IQs and educational attainment see the benefits of liberal ideology over conservative.

lmao...

Cultural Marxism is just a buzzword you use to describe anything you don’t like, Marxism is specifically economic in nature. A designated crying space seems smart so that people only cry in one place. Would you rather that when people cry, they cry in the middle of lectures?

Lol equating Marxism with liberalism. Go to college, you might learn something.

The short answer is yes. All 'education' is.

It's carefully designed to progressively shape your perception so that, aside from totally misunderstanding the nature of 'reality', you conform to the system and even fight to defend it. Modern education, and even parenting by people raised in the same system, is basically your induction into the Matrix.

This is true. Hard for us to accept, because we want to believe we are 'smart' for getting our diplomas and degrees. But the facts are undeniable, and this is not even a 'secret' per se; it is just that most people will not look.

It's something that becomes apparent as you get older, after leaving education systems, and realize that you've learned more valuable, important information out of the education system than within it.

That is, if you're someone who does research things and continue learning. I think one of the biggest, baddest aspects of modern education is how it teaches people to respect authority and 'official' sources in an informational method of consume-regurgitate. People think universities and colleges are telling them the truth... Science is the worst for this, too. I see people wearing shirts saying 'science is real', as if that was ever debated. It's like, yeah, sure science is real, but is what you're looking at real science or is it data manipulated to fit the 'scientific consensus' that the agenda has deemed 'right' for us to believe? Example: When you talk about vaccines and how bad they are people start quoting 'facts' and 'statistics' put out by the FDA. Because the FDA haven't been found repeatedly approving known toxins for use in food and medicines while banning plenty of real medicines and foods...

It's a terrible situation. People really need to wake up to it all.

realize that you've learned more valuable, important information out of the education system than within it.

Agreed 100%.

Science is the worst for this, too. I see people wearing shirts saying 'science is real', as if that was ever debated. It's like, yeah, sure science is real, but is what you're looking at real science or is it data manipulated to fit the 'scientific consensus' that the agenda has deemed 'right' for us to believe?

Ask the average 'science' believer to explain the difference between 'science' and the scientific method.

Ask them if they know what an 'appeal to authority' is.

Then ask them how much 'science' they ave done for themselves.

Then watch their minds go into meltdown.

People look up a scientific article, see the headline, or read the analysis and believe it’s true.

Only if it fits with their preexisting worldview.

People google and then cherry-pick the 'science' which seems to support their belief.

When has the FDA approved known toxins for use in food or medicine?

You have got to be kidding?

Ah, you are one of those people. I was hoping we could keep this discussion based in reality, but you blew that right out. Soy does not cause cancer. MSG does not cause cancer. If either of them caused cancer, Japan would not exist.

Don't worry about them... worry about the Neo-Keynsianism they are filling your head with. Econ majors go work for banks, and bankers have to "drink the koolaid" on the whole "fiat money", "priming the pump", "leakage", "multiplier effect" line of bullshit.

If you pay attention to Keynes, himself, you'll see how much of a hocus/pocus ponzi scheme international banking really is.

Economics in One Lesson - Hazlitt AGD - Rothbard That's your new syllabus.

I went into a lecture 10min early once and the class before me was a gender studies class.

Had graphs and charts on the slide about the feminist issues and other stupid shit.

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it stupid shit

You’re right I don’t understand slides talking about how females deserve more than men.

Please help with this

I agree with you, it’s brainwashing.

I remember in high school in geology class we were learning about the Big Bang. Some girl in class asked our teacher if he was going to teach us any other theories or just that one, he said he only had the materials and allowance to teach the Big Bang theory. This chick told the teacher it was illegal to misinform a class by telling them there is only one believable theory to the beginning of the world. I have no idea if that was true or not but the teacher looked red in the face and sputtered for 5 min about how other theories exist but not one of them can actually be proven as truth.

Makes me hope there are students like that in universities today. It was weird tho, made me feel lied to

It's the extreme liberals. Education is dominated by liberals; in some ways this can be a good thing, in other ways, it's a very bad thing, because you get the 'bad eggs', the radical feminazis, who try to push their agenda on students as if it were fact. Honestly, I don't care if my teacher is conservative or liberal, just as long as they teach me FACTS, not opinion.

YES.

lets not pretend that higher education is the only thing broken. public education as a whole is. indoctrination starts in preschool/kindergarten and relentlessly goes on all the time until the very end

Everything is.

Every teacher has a Pet Theory on the way the world works. Some are better at presenting their evidence.

As to the question: is higher education indoctrinating us?

Yes. This is how it has always been.

What do you do for a living? My work is a constant battle.

You have got to be kidding?