| I'm not religious, to be clear; I was just using religion as an example. I also went to a highly ranked university, for whatever it's worth. > Hypothesize -> experiment -> measure -> conclude With the replication crisis, it's become clear that these systems have serious problems determining truth once you're dealing with something less concrete than engineering. I put a lot of stock in what physicists say about physics; I don't believe there's as much rigor in political science (as scientific as the DPRK is democratic) or women's studies. I expect that as you move from physics through the social sciences, you get less and less attached to reality. "Publish or perish" and the increasing political repression on university campuses both cause perverse incentives that lead to me discounting the truth-value of most things I see coming out of universities. >Tithes Monetarily speaking, universities are a plague on the world- especially America. Imagine a world where you had to give 30,000+ dollars to the church in order to get a decent job. You might nominally learn something at the institution you go to, but learning is the ~3rd most important reason why anyone goes to university- they go for the piece of paper certifying they have an IQ above 90, so they can get a job; they go to party and meet new people, and because they were told they should go by society; and lastly, some want to learn things.
You know that universities aren't actually selling knowledge because a) it's very rare for someone to sneak into Harvard to attend a lecture, and b) universities put their lectures up online for free! >I certainly wouldn't trust them to write federal legal policy Neither would I; in fact, they shouldn't, it adds more perverse incentives that corrupt the field. I don't want scientists directing government policy for the same reason- it adds an incentive for the power-hungry to be even more careerist. I assume you've heard the quip that the modern researcher spends half their time playing politics and filling out grant forms? >so pastors probably have a net positive effect in this area. >It wouldn't even surprise me if seminary school were to directly teach many topics academically or use academic methods and authority, but it's still done in the context of tithing and one truth (god exists) that is beyond critical examination, the yes is presupposed. Sure, if you're an atheist religion's not for you. Similarly, if you're republican university's increasingly not for you; if the truth were to disagree too much with the political agenda, so much the worse for the truth- in a manner quite reminiscent of a church, actually! >The megachurch person is to you, as you are to me. Again, I'm not religious. And given your trust of modern academia, I'd say the same to you ;) |