Current Events > Indiana law requires professors to promote 'intellectual diversity'

(+) Yeah! (+)

hating freedom of speech

Strange. Only one party is banning books.

And it ain't the one you're bitching about.

What's wrong with DEI?

RadDude9000 posted...

Imagine hating freedom of speech and thinking you're the good guys.

Read a history book.

Yeah, the GOP needs to stop banning books. Every group in history that has ever banned books and shut down libraries has been downright evil.

IShall_Run_Amok posted...

knowledge and wisdom has standards

But if they don't also teach that 2+2=5 then how can we be sure that education is balanced and fair?/s

hockeybabe89 posted...

Yeah, the GOP needs to stop banning books. Every group in history that has ever banned books and shut down libraries has been downright evil.

Im convinced that guy is trolling. No one is really that imbecilic. Right?

MirageOfRuins posted...

Im convinced that guy is trolling. No one is really that imbecilic. Right?

Is there really a difference?

Either they're trolling or they actually believe right-wing propaganda deserves to be taught as equal to fact. Neither are great mindsets.

MirageOfRuins posted...

Im convinced that guy is trolling. No one is really that imbecilic. Right?

Dill is a weird case, certainly.

RadDude9000 posted...

Imagine hating freedom of speech and thinking you're the good guys.

Read a history book.

Freedom of speech is saying what I want knowing the government will not come after me for it (exceptions apply of course).

what Freedom of speech is NOT, is pretending that all opinions are of equal value. Should a college professor entertain a conservative student who believes the 2020 election was stolen? Well guess what, now if they dont they could get fucking fired. Want your opinion to be taken seriously in the class room? GET BETTER OPINIONS.

This is quite literally limiting what professors can say in their own classroom. If you think youre the good guy and support this law, you need to read some more books.

This is how it used to be. People used to be able to argue in good faith and that's been lost

RadDude9000 posted...

Imagine hating freedom of speech and thinking you're the good guys.

Read a history book.

You're still here, RealDill?

And how about you read the first amendment, since you chuds still don't grasp what freedom of speech actually means. (Hint: It doesn't mean "I can say whatever I want at any time no matter how wrong and abhorrent with no consequences whatsoever.")

Freedom of speech means I get to take a dump on your chest and you're not allowed to call me mean names for doing it.

ShotOJameson posted...

This is how it used to be. People used to be able to argue in good faith and that's been lost

Like you "arguing in good faith" in that other topic about how racism is the minorities' fault?
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/79c1ba8a.jpg

mybbqrules posted...

Like you "arguing in good faith" in that other topic about how racism is the minorities' fault?
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/79c1ba8a.jpg

I'm willing to hear opposing viewpoints

mybbqrules posted...

Like you "arguing in good faith" in that other topic about how racism is the minorities' fault?
https://gamefaqs.gamespot.com/a/forum/7/79c1ba8a.jpg

Yes.

Please just accept his bullshit at face value, sealioning is a lot of work, please understand, etc etc

Every angle of a topic should be taught without bias so students can learn and decide for themselves how they want to interpret the information.

That's an ideal world though and I'm not sure if it works in our reality as it stands.

ShotOJameson posted...

This is how it used to be. People used to be able to argue in good faith and that's been lost

Is that what you believe school should be? Every idiotic baseless opinion being debated in "good faith"?

Fuck arguing. There are facts. No individual has any obligation to respect all views as equally valid and evidence-based

Fuck this fucking country for normalizing the idea that nothing is objectively true. All because some subhuman shitstain reality show host told millions of people to stop believing their eyes and ears.

ShotOJameson posted...

This is how it used to be. People used to be able to argue in good faith and that's been lost

They still can. That's not what this is doing. I feel that deep down you knew that as well.

ShotOJameson posted...

This is how it used to be. People used to be able to argue in good faith and that's been lost

Conservatives dont argue in good faith. Theyd literally rather make up delusional fantasies than argue in good faith.

ShotOJameson posted...

I'm willing to hear opposing viewpoints

No one is willing to hear yours. Who deluded you into thinking your viewpoint matters?

Every angle of a topic should be taught without bias

Oh, yes, save them from the "bias" of calling the likes of slavery and the holocaust horrible actions.

Vyrulisse posted...

Every angle of a topic should be taught without bias so students can learn and decide for themselves how they want to interpret the information.

That's an ideal world though and I'm not sure if it works in our reality as it stands.

Cool, where do you draw the line? Should biology classes go over the possible anatomy of every cryptid? How do we know if our understanding of animal physiology is true if we don't understand how the mothman operates? Are classes going to be held up when 2 creationists can't decide on exactly how evolution is wrong and that THEIR version is correct?

Heineken14 posted...

How do we know if our understanding of animal physiology is true if we don't understand how the mothman operates?

"Now, we are here to study the circulatory system of horses. Before we can do that, however, we must ask a question. Mothman: does he fuck?"

*nervous whispers*

DrizztLink posted...

"Now, we are here to study the circulatory system of horses. Before we can do that, however, we must ask a question. Mothman: does he fuck?"

*nervous whispers*

Does Mothman have a corkscrew penis like ducks? We're about to find out!

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]

So you just chose some wild out there fringe belief to try to debate me with. Alright then. You could teach that the belief exists but use qualifiers such as how it's debunked or spread by racists. That goes into every angle, you can teach some people about dumbass belief systems and calling them stupid is not biased in my view.

You left out the second part of what I posted too in which I say I don't think it's viable and that what I said would only really work in an ideal world. So in a sense we agree.

Vyrulisse posted...

Every angle of a topic should be taught without bias so students can learn and decide for themselves how they want to interpret the information.

Conservative views should be treated with extreme prejudice, and the point of education is to remove as many faults of the mind as possible which are required to embrace conservatism.

Vyrulisse posted...

So you just chose some wild out there fringe belief to try to debate me with. Alright then. You could teach that the belief exists but use qualifiers such as how it's debunked or spread by racists. That goes into every angle, you can teach some people about dumbass belief systems and calling them stupid is not biased in my view.

You left out the second part of what I posted too in which I say I don't think it's viable and that what I said would only really work in an ideal world. So in a sense we agree.

What angles do you actually mean?

I wonder what conservative beliefs the students are afraid of discussing openly.

Surely it can't be small government

Vyrulisse posted...

So you just chose some wild out there fringe belief to try to debate me with. Alright then. You could teach that the belief exists but use qualifiers such as how it's debunked or spread by racists. That goes into every angle, you can teach some people about dumbass belief systems and calling them stupid is not biased in my view.

You left out the second part of what I posted too in which I say I don't think it's viable and that what I said would only really work in an ideal world. So in a sense we agree.

How is calling a certain belief stupid not biased? Thats inserting what you believe about something into the no bias lecture, and thus should not be allowed according to you.

DrizztLink posted...

What angles do you actually mean?

Mostly I just mean that if you teach a class you should teach the subject thoroughly.
It's not really that wild of an idea I think. Obviously you shouldn't teach dumbass belief systems or go into silly territory like some of the examples already posted suggest, just a thorough and unbiased teaching of the facts of a subject. A dry ass boring class that nobody likes.

CE jumping to extreme examples is taking what I mean way too far but that's par for the course.

Vyrulisse posted...

So you just chose some wild out there fringe belief to try to debate me with. Alright then.

It's what Republican politicians are attempting to teach.

BombermanGold posted...

"The American public and Hoosiers as well are losing faith and trust in higher education," Deery said. "One of the strong reasons for that is, frankly, higher education hasn't done a great job of making every viewpoint feel welcome."

Yeah, frankly, certain viewpoints shouldn't feel welcome, and should be treated as what they are.

Vyrulisse posted...

So you just chose some wild out there fringe belief to try to debate me with.

Why do you get to decide on whether it's wild out there fringe beliefs? Why should they not have the same level of discussion and attention? Again, where do you draw the line?

Is it ok to ignore something completely fucking stupid because only 1 dumbass believes it but then not ok to ignore something completely fucking stupid because 100,000 dumbasses believes it?

Vyrulisse posted...

Mostly I just mean that if you teach a class you should teach the subject thoroughly.
It's not really that wild of an idea I think.

CE jumping to extreme examples is taking what I mean way too far but that's par for the course.

Ah yes, the extreme examples of the lost cause narrative and the idea that slavery actually benefited slaves in some manner.

Except I was quite literally taught about these things in my southern middle school so please shut the fuck up. You dont know what extreme is if you think giving weight to ideas like that is not a very relevant flaw in your stupid idea.

Vyrulisse posted...

Mostly I just mean that if you teach a class you should teach the subject thoroughly.

But that's beside the point of the topic.

It's about "both side'sing" education, not the density of the lesson plans themselves.

So if you start talking about "exploring every angle of a topic without bias" in a topic discussing how MAGAts want to deny slavery happened, it's not exactly likely that people will think you meant "teach the subject thoroughly" instead of thinking you're talking about the actual subject matter.

Imagine having such shit opinions that you need to create laws to force otherwise sane-minded intellectuals to give them credence

DrizztLink posted...

But that's beside the point of the topic.

It's about "both side'sing" education, not the density of the lesson plans themselves.

So if you start talking about "exploring every angle of a topic without bias" in a topic discussing how MAGAts want to deny slavery happened, it's not exactly likely that people will think you meant "teach the subject thoroughly" instead of thinking you're talking about the actual subject matter.

Yeah, this shit aint made in a vacuum. We've seen exactly how these laws play out for decades and more recently in red states where you end up getting shit like Jackie Robinson books banned because they make people feel uncomfortable knowing their grandma and grandpa were super fucking racist.

CE jumping to extreme examples

The "extreme examples" are precisely what the bill is for
BombermanGold posted...

said the new law would help conservative students feel more comfortable expressing their opinions on campus.

"The American public and Hoosiers as well are losing faith and trust in higher education," Deery said. "One of the strong reasons for that is, frankly, higher education hasn't done a great job of making every viewpoint feel welcome."

Not every viewpoint is worthwhile or needs to be welcomed. But the bill is expressly to allow those viewpoints.

[LFAQs-redacted-quote]


It's very obvious that all government courses only extol the virtues of large overreaching governments and small government conservatives are ostracized! Or accounting classes saying that the only good tax is a high tax!

Euripides posted...

Imagine having such shit opinions that you need to create laws to force otherwise sane-minded intellectuals to give them credence

Imagine being stuck in an echo chamber so long you can't even entertain differing opinions

MATH PROFESSOR: "The square root of 64 is 8"

CONSERVATIVE STUDENT: "I feel like it's 7"

MATH PROFESSOR: "That is incorrect"

CONSERVATIVE STUDENT: "WHY ARE YOU OPPRESSING MY VIEWPOINT????"

*Professor is fired the next day*

Revisited posted...

Lol but Fullmetal alchemist makes me want to believe that alchemy can be real some day...

The things Elric does may be possible someday but it won't be called alchemy.

ShotOJameson posted...

Imagine being stuck in an echo chamber so long you can't even entertain differing opinions

That has nothing to do with a classroom. I think deep down, you know that though.

Euripides posted...

MATH PROFESSOR: "The square root of 64 is 8"

CONSERVATIVE STUDENT: "I feel like it's 7"

MATH PROFESSOR: "That is incorrect"

CONSERVATIVE STUDENT: "WHY ARE YOU OPPRESSING MY VIEWPOINT????"

*Professor is fired the next day*

You just made a joke conservatives make about liberals.

There's a lot more in common there than you think

Tyranthraxus posted...

The things Elric does may be possible someday but it won't be called alchemy.

And as a concept, in a lot of ways alchemy was just proto chemistry until we got more advanced.