Почему среди профессоров преобладают либеральные взгляды

[bravchick]

Любопытная статья в New York Times про то, почему среди профессоров преобладают либеральные взгляды. Основная мысль -- в обществе считается, что университет место для либералов. Поэтому люди консервативных взглядов редко идут в профессора (а также в журналисты, художники и актеры). То есть, не профессора становятся либералами, а либералы профессорами.

Еще более интересны аналогии, которые в статье приводятся в качестве аргументов: точно также мужчины не идут в медсестры, а женщины в физики (а вовсе не из-за дискриминации). Сама по себе мысль не сложная и не новая, но то, что ее пропагандирует New York Times, мне кажется любопытным.

Comments

Re: среди профессоров преобладают ...

[shkrobius.livejournal.com]

If the academia is a place for people with original views, independent thinking, and non-conformist bent, as it pictures itself, it makes perfect sense that it attracts the contrarians rather than conformists. On the other hand, if it is a place of suffocating conformity, then this rationale begins to make sense. To explain why the self-image is at odds with the reality you need to explain this reality first. There are universities where left domination never occurred, either in the humanities or natural sciences, like UChicago. You need to explain these exceptions, too. Furthermore, you need to explain why is the academia changing precisely at the moment when this domination looks most assured: why these universities that are dominated by the left are becoming more conservative. Observe that domination of the conservatives had no effect on the desire of the left to enter the academia. Yet you consider it reasonable that the opposite must be true. I think that this idea is plain wrong. Curiosity and talent do not correlate with political views. If you want to study mathematics you do not rate the universities by the politics of its faculty (at least, very few people do). You want to pursue mathematics and you are happy for any opportunity to do so. There is another aspect of it, which you may not know about. At the national labs, there is no substantial left bias. People do science. It is cutting edge. They are educated like anyone in the academia. The salaries are comparable. The political views, by my observations, are reflecting the average in the particular geographical locations. Yet these are populated from the same pool. And again people land with a job where they can rather than chosing it by plumbing the leftism of their future colleagues. This explanation is simply non-explanation. It looks kinda reasonable by it is of Chapaev's variety.