Skip to comments.Blind to their Liberal Biases
Posted on 12/30/2011 5:48:43 AM PST by Kaslin
I think it's very difficult for any of us to be objective about any subject, especially something we care deeply about, but my objective observation is that liberals tend to be less aware of and less willing to admit their biases.
We see this often, which I'll get to, but first, let me relate how this phenomenon most recently came to my attention.
In a conversation with a saleswoman for online college courses, I expressed my disappointment that the professor of a religion course I was considering for purchase is an avowed atheist. I said that if I were going to spend time studying the subject, I'd prefer the professor share my Christian worldview.
Don't misunderstand. I think it can be profitable to learn what nonbelieving "scholars" teach about the Bible, but the point I want to discuss here is the woman's response.
She maintained that it is preferable, for this largely secular course on the Bible, to have a professor who can approach the subject from an objective, critical and historical perspective, as if a believing professor would be incapable of that approach. But is that true?
Her error is assuming that nonbelief equates to objectivity. In fact, every human being -- and thus every professor -- has a worldview, and that worldview will inevitably influence his perception of the material. Every professor will have made critical intellectual decisions on a multitude of issues in the material, all of which will be influenced by his worldview.
For example, if you don't believe in miracles, you'd be more inclined to discount those verses of Scripture describing miraculous events, from the Virgin Birth to Jesus' converting water into wine to the bedrock Christian belief: the bodily resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Nonbelievers might be more receptive to "higher criticism" and the "documentary hypothesis" and thus less skeptical of the theory that Moses didn't write the first five books of the Old Testament. They might be quicker to focus on apparent contradictions in Scripture that critical examination often reveals are not contradictions at all.
A believer in the divine inspiration and inerrancy of Scripture will certainly bring his biases into biblical exegesis, but so will a nonbeliever. We cannot escape our biases.
But the woman insisted the secular professor is only interested in presenting the material from a critical and historical perspective. A noble aspiration, I concede, should the professor actually possess it, but nevertheless unattainable. Historians and critical readers have biases, too. They can't help it.
It's just wrong to assume that a nonbelieving worldview is more objective than a believing one. We are all blessed (or burdened) with our presuppositions, and they accompany us wherever we go.
It occurred to me that the woman's argument is analogous to the political liberals' legendary denial of bias. Indeed, many liberals don't even view themselves as liberals. Rather, they are reality- and fact-based creatures. Only conservatives allow their biases to taint their objectivity. Liberals will admit that some conservatives are rational, but to be both rational and conservative, they must be evil. They know the policies they support are wrong, objectively, but they choose to do so anyway -- or something like that.
Evidence abounds: Scholarly studies show that mainstream journalists are overwhelmingly liberal, yet many deny it, and many honestly don't even see the biases they bring to their selection and reporting of the "news." ABC's Christiane Amanpour, for example, denies her liberal biases, saying she "remains in the realm of fact." The Bush haters who deceived themselves about Bush's alleged WMD lies claimed they were reality-based when in "reality" their hatred made them stark-raving mad on the subject. A liberal college professor touting open academic inquiry banned "conservative" materials from class because she refused "to tolerate the intolerable." Members of the man-made global warming cult dogmatically proclaim a consensus despite strong dissent. Environmentalists extrapolate this mindset in their approach to scores of issues, traveling utterly quixotic paths and pursuing devastatingly expensive larks while dismissing skeptics as flat-earthers. Obama constantly refers to his ideas as self-evidently reasonable and Republicans' as driven solely by partisanship, because how could they possibly oppose his reality-based proposals?
As a conservative, I believe that many liberals proceed from good intentions, though I think their consistently horrendous results entitle us to some skepticism after a while even as to their intentions -- or at least to their ability to see past their oppressive biases. I don't believe, for example, that they are racists because their policies harm minorities, though they often do. I don't believe they automatically lack compassion just because their policies spread misery.
Yet many liberals do believe that conservatives are evil, uncompassionate racists because our policies don't fit their self-serving, narrow, shallow parameters of "good intentions." Many leftists are so possessed by a need to be morally superior that they can't abide the possibility that conservatives also have noble intentions. So it is that many who believe they are objective, fair and reality-based are far less so than the objects of their scorn.
Loved the link! :-)
Yes! Indeed! Children are **taught** to be liberal!
Simply by attending a socialist K-12 school they risk learning that government can give them socialist-entitlement schooling. Well! Gee! Why not use the voting booth to get **lots** of socialist goodies? It only took one to three generations of government socialist-entitlement schooling to give the nation 4 terms of Franklin D. Roosevelt!
While our earliest socialist schools taught a lukewarm and generic Protestant worldview, today it is utterly godless. How can a child not think and reason godless and cooperate in the classroom?
You are absolutely correct! Children are taught to be liberal! It is only when reality smacks them in the nose that they might wake up to the idea of conservatism. For anyone on the government payroll ( they vote, too) they are protected from reality.
Why? Why? Why? would any foolish conservative send their children to one of our nation's socialist K-12 schools? Honestly, **no** education whatsoever( even illiteracy and innumeracy) would be better than the socialist and godless worldview taught in these pits of ignorance. Geeze! Illiteracy and innumeracy can be fixed. Illiterate and innumerate graduates of our socialist K-12 schools do it all the time, but moral and spiritual dry rot often has permanent temporal and even eternal consequences.
Personally....I see our nation's socialist schools as being such a threat to our nation that I will NOT have a government teacher for a friend. They are too evil, too stupid, too controlling, too much of Useful Idiot, or too much of a timid toady collecting a paycheck to be a friend. I am **done** with government teachers as friends.
Right! For when we find a contradiction we should rejoice, because there's something deeper therein.
He who has ears to hear, let him hear.
25 years ago, we had Ronald Reagan, Johnny Cash, and Bob Hope.
If you can't appreciate the pure beauty of the violin after hearing this, something's wrong with your ears.
Or you can get raw with these strings.
How about this gamechanger from America's Got Talent (which they SHOULD have won).
Either way, the violin is sweet yet LETHAL.
You are a person of good will. It is evident.
Good will! May you have a prosperous and healthy new year.
May the same be for you and yours. May the same be for this world (God's planet), and God's souls.
Would you all say that basically most liberals are not believing Christians? I have found in just my little world of 50+ years, 40 of it being a believer, that most liberal’s are not believer’s, most in fact are atheists including my older brother that was a left wing liberal and to his death did not believe in God.
Awesome violin links!
Liberalism was introduced to the world with this statement: “you will be as gods, knowing good and evil”.
And then they go on to deny there is such a thing as evil, “if it feels good do it”.
OK; A more concise nailing of the subject I have never seen. Are you standing on others shoulders or are you the genesis of that statement?
If that statement is wholly yours then you deserve inclusion with other quotable quotes.
But...As far as I know I am the originator.
Cheers! Will raise my cup tomorrow a little early, for very seldom am awake at midnight. Cheers!
I belong to an email discussion group that has 3 far left liberals. Try as I might, they would not believe facts if it went against their ideology. Data directly from census reports, the IRS and video clips of speeches, or interviews was not proof. None of it mattered. I gave up trying to teach. Now I do not respond. The other conservatives have done the same. Its interesting how the libs argue when there are no conservative to gang up on.
I have long recommended that Shunning works. And at the very least when dealing with unrepentant liberals it eases your stress quotient.
Nope. Blacks are the most Christian ethic group and the most Liberal. Hispanics are the 2nd most on both.
Yes, I love those videos.
When I think about my own transformation from young liberal into mature conservative, I consider that incidents such as those are like seeds planted in those young liberal minds. They may reject the premise at the time, but they do not forget the incident. And one day, they wake up and find that their minds have puzzled out the significance of what they experienced, and they understand--in this case, exactly how wealth redistribution (which they supported) and grade redistribution (which they rejected) are almost exactly analogous to each other. Anyway, that's pretty much what happened to me, and how I became exDemMom.
Eep! I'm guilty of being on the government payroll, too! But I'm military...
Why? Why? Why? would any foolish conservative send their children to one of our nation's socialist K-12 schools? Honestly, **no** education whatsoever( even illiteracy and innumeracy) would be better than the socialist and godless worldview taught in these pits of ignorance.
A few months ago, I saw a film made in the Congo, a third world country where most people are illiterate. Yet these illiterate people asked surprisingly sophisticated questions--and seemed to understand the answers perfectly well. Education shouldn't be indoctrination--ideally, education should enhance people's native intelligence.
Well...Being in the military is definitely being face to face with reality.