|
dont troll pls
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
goatse.cx posted:I don't have to show anything, political education should strive to be impartial and objective. No it shouldn't. Political education should point out that all political information you receive in your entire life will be partial and subjective, designed to skew you to one viewpoint or another, and arm you with the ability to judge and analyse for yourself. Presenting a partisan cartoon and asking students to analyse it helps give them this ability, and judge how well it is developing. Most likely this cartoon was chosen because it's easy to read, clearly presents its thesis and conclusion, does not include overt racism or sexism, does not actively demean the other side of the argument, and allows for a range of depth in interpretation. All these things make it basically perfect for someone trying to judge how well their students can analyse visual information and the messages of propaganda.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:33
|
|
|
dordreff posted:No it shouldn't. Political education should point out that all political information you receive in your entire life will be partial and subjective, designed to skew you to one viewpoint or another, Again with this. What's gotten into you people. Why couldn't political information/dicussion be impartial? For example, immigration. Would it not be impartial if I present unambiguously data and facts, relating to the number of illegal aliens currently residing in the country, the annual amount of illegal aliens that arrive, the amount of taxes currently paid by illegal residents, the democrat and republican proposal, etc, without opinion and biases, to my hypothetical students and let them draw their own conclusions?
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:44
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Again with this. What's gotten into you people. Why couldn't political information/dicussion be impartial? For example, immigration. Would it not be impartial if I present unambiguously data and facts, relating to the number of illegal aliens currently residing in the country, the annual amount of illegal aliens that arrive, the amount of taxes currently paid by illegal residents, the democrat and republican proposal, etc, without opinion and biases, to my hypothetical students and let them draw their own conclusions? Your use of the term 'illegal aliens' has already placed a political slant on what you just said.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:46
|
|
|
carry on then posted:Your use of the term 'illegal aliens' has already placed a political slant on what you just said. That term is factual.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:49
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:I find it unlikely that another political cartoonist has stumbled upon the exact same visual metaphor, but that's neither here nor there. I don't have to show anything, political education should strive to be impartial and objective. The bennet cartoon is not, it portrays Obama trying to do (a good thing), and the republican underhandedly sabotaging him. That's distinctively pro-democrat slant. I just did a numbered list of why it doesn't have to be "the exact same visual metaphor", things like "symbolism" and "donkeys and elephants" and "people doing things" are not so restrictive that only a man like Bennet can descend from the heavans and grant such a bounty of beauty unto us mere mortals. There are a couple of non-Bennetts that do this quite easily, though they are all from the Left spectrum since the Right spectrum is more interested in depicting the problem as filthy monster And, since you disagree with the "pro-Democrat" slant (and no one is arguing that it's anything but) it becomes your job to provide an example you yourself would have used, to demonstrate that the teacher did not have to use such a slanted cartoon and was, indeed, engaging in purely partican politics because, if you can't, then yes indeed the teacher had to use that cartoon. In fact I challenge you to find me any cartoon from "the other side" that she could have used instead, I'll even unfetter you from the weighty shackles of "shows people doing things" and just ask for a generic cartoon from the Right on the immigration issue approps for class time.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Again with this. What's gotten into you people. Why couldn't political information/dicussion be impartial? For example, immigration. Would it not be impartial if I present unambiguously data and facts, relating to the number of illegal aliens currently residing in the country, the annual amount of illegal aliens that arrive, the amount of taxes currently paid by illegal residents, the democrat and republican proposal, etc, without opinion and biases, to my hypothetical students and let them draw their own conclusions? Your choice of what information to present and what to discard is not impartial. Your choice of how to present this information (eg using the term "illegal aliens" which devalues and removes humanity from the people to whom it refers) is not impartial. This is not a bad thing; you are human and have human beliefs, and these influence your actions and statements.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:51
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Again with this. What's gotten into you people. Why couldn't political information/dicussion be impartial? For example, immigration. Would it not be impartial if I present unambiguously data and facts, relating to the number of illegal aliens currently residing in the country, the annual amount of illegal aliens that arrive, the amount of taxes currently paid by illegal residents, the democrat and republican proposal, etc, without opinion and biases, to my hypothetical students and let them draw their own conclusions? If your face doesn't clench in hideous anger when you say "illegal alien," it means you're a filthy lib.
|
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:That term is factual.  ... That works a little too well.  And yes, Hispanics count as having Native American ancestry, since ... they have Native American ancestry. fade5 fucked around with this message at 00:02 on Feb 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 13, 2015 23:56
|
|
|
dordreff posted:Your choice of what information to present and what to discard is not impartial. Your choice of how to present this information (eg using the term "illegal aliens" which devalues and removes humanity from the people to whom it refers) is not impartial. This is not a bad thing; you are human and have human beliefs, and these influence your actions and statements. Can the hierarchy of importance of various facts not be rationally, objectively derived? And why would the words 'illegal immigrants', 'illegal aliens' be dehumanizing? Non-humans are incapable of violating the law, nor do we ever apply the term 'alien' or 'immigrants' to animals and plants. Even liberals tacitly acknowledge the illegal nature their coming here when they ask for amnesty, by dictionary definition a pardon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:01
|
|
|
The United States - a nation whose greatest strength is the free movement of individuals and goods with little regard for 50 sets of imaginary lines. Just don't cross those other lines without permission!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
How exactly do you propose "impartial" political education in the United States when the two major political parties are center-right and far right? Would you give equal consideration to either point of view? How would you present a Republican stance on immigration without making Republicans look bad, let alone if you had to use a Ramirez cartoon?goatse.cx posted:Again with this. What's gotten into you people. Why couldn't political information/dicussion be impartial? For example, immigration. Would it not be impartial if I present unambiguously data and facts, relating to the number of illegal aliens currently residing in the country, the annual amount of illegal aliens that arrive, the amount of taxes currently paid by illegal residents, the democrat and republican proposal, etc, without opinion and biases, to my hypothetical students and let them draw their own conclusions? Your choice of terms and data to represent is anything but objective.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:02
|
|
|
fade5 posted:It also applies to every single person of non-Native American/First Nations ancestry living in North America. loving Pilgrim anchor babies bringing their foreign diseases and beliefs to our land. Native Americans did not have immigration laws back then, but someone might correct me on that.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:06
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Can the hierarchy of importance of various facts not be rationally, objectively derived? Why don't you try it? What are the five most important facts about immigration, and in which order? goatse.cx posted:And why would the words 'illegal immigrants', 'illegal aliens' be dehumanizing? Non-humans are incapable of violating the law, nor do we ever apply the term 'alien' or 'immigrants' to animals and plants. Even liberals tacitly acknowledge the illegal nature their coming here when they ask for amnesty, by dictionary definition a pardon. "Alien" literally means "something that isn't human," in the popular conscious if not the dictionary. "Illegal" and "undocumented" are equally apt descriptors with completely different connotations. Factually correct terms can be hella loaded, bruv.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:That term is factual. I could argue that the term isn't factual, but let's say it is. Is it your position that so long as the statement is factual, it is unbiased? Bias can be found in the language you use to present factual information, and even in the factual information you choose to present. Bruce Tinsley, one of the nations most well known political cartoonists, spoke out against the reelection of Judge [what's his name]. Bruce Tinsley spoke out against the reelection of the judge who once convicted him of driving under the influence of alcohol. Both sentences are true. Both sentences obviously present different biases.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Yeah, its like laws are socially constructed and subject to revision instead of being inerrant and eternal.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:10
|
|
|
Kajeesus posted:Why don't you try it? What are the five most important facts about immigration, and in which order? Alien means foreigner. It is derived from the Latin word alienus, which means foreigner. We are not talking about the greys here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Can the hierarchy of importance of various facts not be rationally, objectively derived? Not by you, no. Your ideas of what makes facts important is skewed by your opinions on the subject they represent, just as mine are. Why is it more important to list how much tax people pay than it is to list what work they do once they have entered your country? Why is it more important to know how many are already in your country than to know what proportion of the population they are? Why is it more important to know how many people arrive than to know why they leave their homes? 'Alien' carries the extra meanings of 'unfamiliar, disturbing or distasteful' and 'from another world'. These are bad connotations to apply to human beings. "Illegal" implies wrong-doing, which when applied as a title to a group of people, as in the terms "illegal alien" and "illegal immigrant" suggests that their very existance is a crime. Words have meanings. Use them with caution.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:12
|
|
|
 Hello, I'm BAD PRESIDENT
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:14
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:I might if I was really a teacher teaching policy. As I stands I don't have the extracurricular time to do the research. Well, I'll just posit that what ever you would have produced would definitely still contain biases. goatse.cx posted:Alien means foreigner. It is derived from the Latin word alienus, which means foreigner. We are not talking about the greys here. Even if we pretend dog whistles aren't a thing, "foreigner" is also a loaded term.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:18
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:
Those words describe this picture. A self-negating cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
Seems to me teaching how to interpret the expression of a viewpoint, in a class about either art or politics, would be worth the risk of exposing children to a viewpoint. Maybe even more than one of them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:19
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Speaking of threats to the interests and safety of innocent Iraqis, Isis will probably never outdo the americans in terms of both raw body count and social damage I'd have gone for the KSA myself.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:24
|
|
Cat Army 
|
The Iron Rose posted:Personally I don't really see whether or not it matters if they're fascist or not. They're operating in a manner hostile to USG interests and to the interests of innocent civilians in Iraq and Syria, and for those reasons alone I support their degradation and destruction, ideally through containment and limited engagement combined with support for local USG-friendly forces.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
Not My Leg posted:I could argue that the term isn't factual, but let's say it is. Is it your position that so long as the statement is factual, it is unbiased? Bias can be found in the language you use to present factual information, and even in the factual information you choose to present. I see what you guys are saying, you can skew things by being selective what to present and how to present it, but I don't think it's inevitable, there can be a logic to this
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 00:44
|
|
|
Why is this thread even bothering to argue with a massive gaping arsehole?
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 01:00
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:In the example you've given, the second fact is very much relevant and it would be imo irresponsible to neglect mentioning it I agree that the second fact is very much relevant; I was responding to the implication that factual = unbiased. Here are a couple unbiased opinions. Joe Liccar is a lovely artist.  Ross Gosse is terrible at labels.  E: Also, I haven't seen Pinocchio in a long time, but isn't Jiminy Cricket supposed to be smart? E2: I looked on wikipedia. Jiminy Cricket is the comical and wise character appointed to be Pinocchio's conscience. Seems like a good cricket to listen to. Not My Leg fucked around with this message at 01:23 on Feb 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 01:18
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:I see what you guys are saying, you can skew things by being selective what to present and how to present it, but I don't think it's inevitable, there can be a logic to this I disagree. As you have agreed, being selective in terms of what information to provide / how you present it can skew the perspective of the recipient. In order to do that logically and avoid potential personal bias the information must be compared to a set standard. That logical standard is, presumably, based upon determining whether a piece of information is "very much relevant." (Or, I should say, any 'logic' to be used as a standard is itself a product of human creation and therefore biased). Anything based upon the determination of a single individual itself cannot possibly be anything other than biased. By which I mean, outside of literal divine intervention there cannot be an objective standard to decide what is "very much relevant" and therefore no information can be included/excluded without some level of personal determination (i.e. bias, whether conscious or subconscious). TheDarkFlame posted:Why is this thread even bothering to argue with a massive gaping arsehole? Alcohol/Boredom? Edit: That is Jiminy Cricket right? Mutated Obama is listening to Jiminy Cricket who plays the role of "good conscience." Right? Capt. Sticl fucked around with this message at 01:25 on Feb 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 01:19
|
|
|
This makes me laugh, I'm on the Canadian prairie and my doors have been open all day, and I've worn my sandals outside almost a dozen times this season because it's been so ridiculously warm. Last month we had 13 days where the low was above the average high. It doesn't even feel like winter is going to happen at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 01:29
|
|
2
|
Picnic Princess posted:This makes me laugh, I'm on the Canadian prairie and my doors have been open all day, and I've worn my sandals outside almost a dozen times this season because it's been so ridiculously warm. Last month we had 13 days where the low was above the average high. It doesn't even feel like winter is going to happen at all. Yes, but that's clearly in Boston, where it's currently well below freezing with snow on the way. Incidentally, Boston is currently trying to come up with plans for dealing with rising sea levels. Edit: For example, one idea is to try and become Venice. The Marathon bombers killed four people and wounded nearly 200, but they didn't destroy Boston. Rising sea levels, on the other hand... Xenoveritas fucked around with this message at 01:46 on Feb 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 01:40
|
|
|
goatse.cx posted:Again with this. What's gotten into you people. Why couldn't political information/dicussion be impartial? For example, immigration. Would it not be impartial if I present unambiguously data and facts, relating to the number of illegal aliens currently residing in the country, the annual amount of illegal aliens that arrive, the amount of taxes currently paid by illegal residents, the democrat and republican proposal, etc, without opinion and biases, to my hypothetical students and let them draw their own conclusions? Discussions of political information are irrelevant to the original issue; the original issue was the usage of Bennet's cartoon as an object study in political cartoons.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
I want my child to literally never be exposed to a single thing that challenges the worldview I impose on them
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:05
|
|
|
Wales Grey posted:Discussions of political information are irrelevant to the original issue; the original issue was the usage of Bennet's cartoon as an object study in political cartoons. Thank you! Simply studying something partisan is not by itself evidence of partisanship. If a class looks at the 1994 "Contract with America," is that partisan? It's 100% a campaign document, intended to get Republicans elected. But it also had an influence on the 1994 election. Bennet's cartoon is liberal, but it's the perfect use of symbolism to convey a point. It's a good example of what a political cartoon can be not because of it's message but because of its delivery. Studying it from that standpoint of delivery, which the questions clearly show is what was happening, does not make it a partisan class.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:15
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:40
|
|
|
  "So I'm wondering if God has a..."
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
 1 2 3I have no idea what the McCoy is supposed to mean. ↓↓↓ Ah, thanks. ↓↓↓ Apple Pie Hubbub fucked around with this message at 02:57 on Feb 14, 2015 |
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Apple Pie Hubbub posted:I have no idea what the McCoy is supposed to mean. Jay Nixon is the governor of Missouri.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
I'll probably think of something more specific to say later but for now...wow.
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 06:50 |
|
|
Met posted:
Oh, suddenly we're selective in our biblical literalism!
|
|
#
?
Feb 14, 2015 02:48
|
|
