It is interesting in the context of this discussion to consider the
technologic impact of moveable type v the computer on society. The former
expedited the Age of Reason, whereas the latter has had the opposite effect
IMHO, drowning out reason in favor of INFORMATION, which is now
conflated/confused with knowledge....that is a huge problem that will lead
to the use of CRISPER (genetic engineering) and Artificial Intelligence,
culminating in a silicon-based 'life form' dominating us enslaved
carbon-based folk. I am not being ironic, this could transpire if we don't
keep a close watch on Raymond Kurzweil's 'Singularity', his dream of a
world in which 'we will multiply our effective intelligence a billion fold
by merging with the intelligence we have created'. The problem is that the
'intelligence' of computers is only as good as that of the programmers, and
if 'faster, cheaper, better' is the basis for success, the programmer will
out-compete human intelligence hands down....witness the competition
between Watson, the IBM supercomputer and the best and brightest of the
Jeopardy contestants. The computer ate the humans' lunch. Yet the computer
flubbed a couple of questions big time, coming up with nonsense answers
because they were nuanced such that, for example, you had to know that both
Canada and the US occupy North America. A computer may be able to tell a
joke, but I don't know if it can 'get' a joke, for example. My point is
that we have gotten to this phase of human history through the mechanism of
Evolution, which maintains our successful biologic strategies in our DNA
(the failures are extinct, so their approaches are only archived in our
knowledge base as biologists), pulling out some gene or set of genes that
were useful at one point in our experience on the ever-changing planet and
repurposes it for the current condition as a 'novelty', i.e. we don't throw
the baby out with the bathwater. So for example, 'surgically' removing
symbolic icons of our social/political history may be expedient, but it
then condemns us to repeat those same errors (George Santayana- "Those who
cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it"). We need to be aware
of our past successes and failures in order to be able to make sound
decisions. Witness the Marshal Plan, aiding post-WWII Germany instead of
grinding it into the ground as the victors of history have done, because
our historians and social thinkers realized that the Treaty of Versailles
that led to the Second World War was the cause of Hitler Germany. A
computer program would not have factored in the error in judgement made by
the victors of WWI. We need to re-embrace learning based on knowledge, not
information, as Daniel Christian is doing for Big History, teaching it from
the Big Bang forward so students understand the 'arc' of social systems in
order to make informed decisions. I have tried to do so in biology/medicine
as well, starting from unicellular life moving forward to see the 'logic'
of the Life Sciences when witnessed from their origins, as best we can tell
for the moment. Which addresses the issue of 'sound bite' versus ' essay'
answers, the former being the prevailing approach, the latter being
eschewed for the sake of expediency, pleasure, the constraints of the
computer, 'cookies' preventing exposure to minority ways of
thinking......All of the above and more must be addressed so that we can.
Fast Food, Fast Drugs and Fast Information are dehumanizing us...read Jaron
Lanier's "You are not a Gadget", that is if you have the time and interest.
😂

On Wed, Jun 13, 2018 at 5:39 AM, Henriques, Gregg - henriqgx <
[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> Excellent discussion.
>
>
>
> Following up on John’s comments, I think one of the key aspects of the TOK
> Society could be to think about the root cause. For me, we have lost a
> shared narrative, a shared vision and values that justifies our
> justification systems, to use Waldemar’s concepts from his talk.
>
>
>
> Thus one of our “projects” might be looking for examples that could serve
> as beacons that could move us toward a shared vision we would be proud of.
> I was thinking about that as I read this article from the Atlantic.
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.theatlantic.com_politics_archive_2018_06_a-2D&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=SS94xeY937Sv6r9JQwy5lXnXMbhbIcmOgklJAZQNYBs&e=
> radically-woke-and-deeply-conservative-commencement-address/562490/
>
>
>
> Best,
> Gregg
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion [mailto:TOK-SOCIETY-L@
> listserv.jmu.edu] *On Behalf Of *Joseph Michalski
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 13, 2018 8:28 AM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
>
> *Subject:* Re: Are We All Nutcases?
>
>
>
> Thanks John and Chance. First, I fully agree with John's argument about
> the symptoms and the notion of "going for the intellectual jugular." That's
> often the nature of the discourse in science & the power dynamics involved,
> especially when you offer some rather unconventional views or challenge the
> standard orthodoxy (as John has done in his work).
>
>
>
> Chance, I think your Simpsons clip captures perfectly the essence of the
> underlying dynamic we're discussing. And note how he walks away with an
> entirely different narrative, despite the overwhelming evidence pointing to
> his own imminent physical demise. I didn't share that in my response to my
> brothers, I offered at least five credible, evidence-based responses to
> their critique of higher education. They responded to NONE of these
> arguments, but simply ignored them. Instead, the focus was on one sentence
> where I mentioned that Peterson's political argument about universities
> appealed to his base (a la Trump), and, indeed, that he had become rather
> popular amongst the alt-right accordingly. The one brother seized on that
> comment to argue, "You see?  There's your typical left-wing bias. You talk
> about his appeal to the alt-right and therefore associate his arguments
> with white nationalism (I said nothing about white nationalism and wasn't
> even thinking about that!) to discredit his ideas. Peterson's not wrong.
> He's spot on."
>
>
>
> I'm left speechless. Literally, what can one say? This comes from my two
> brothers, who are multi-millionaire realtors and ardent Trump supporters. I
> get that. My point is to try to "reason" with the "other". I figure that
> they know me, they know I'll listen to all sides, and that I'll think
> seriously about the arguments. Yet nothing I argued had any credibility or
> traction, whether based on: 1) scientific evidence I presented about
> confirmation bias and groupthink; 2) national polling data on people's
> attitudes and the links to their political orientations and
> authoritarianism; 3) actual data on the numbers of incidents in contrast to
> the mundane, day-to-day operations of universities; 4) possible reasons as
> to why some people argue such extreme and hostile positions about academia
> based on their own limited experiences, as per Peterson's personal
> experiences (the problem of rampant over-generalization); or 5) the
> selective use of specific cases that only buttress one's argument and the
> complete ignorance or discounting of any examples that undermine or
> contradict one's positions (the problems of selection bias/confirmation
> bias).
>
>
>
> I'm reminded of an argument I had with a radical ideologue many years ago
> about why the U.S. intervened in Iraq under George H Bush and the
> justifications used on both sides of the political debate at the time.
> After about 45 minutes, I stopped and said something like: "You know, we've
> been going back and forth on this for a long time. Along the way, I've
> acknowledged points where I thought you made some convincing arguments and
> points where I felt you had better information that I needed to consider.
> Yet not once have you said anything about the merits of my own positions or
> the evidence I've used to make my arguments." His response? "I'm not
> interested in the terms of your arguments." Literally. I realized at that
> moment that I would always be at a disadvantage in intellectual discourse
> by trying to be open-minded and respectful as compared with those who
> simply believe what they believe, no matter what. And that's kinda what got
> be interested in studying human conflict, reconnecting with Gregg years
> later around his work, the justification hypothesis, etc.
>
>
>
> All that said, I find the whole thing a bit deflating. I'm someone who
> doesn't "know" the "truth," with any kind of capital "T". I look, listen,
> and learn. And then I try to fashion arguments, develop theories, propose
> ways to test those ideas, and then actually do the research. I then find
> out that I can be wrong. But all of this thinking and research takes time -
> and lots of "words." Like my emails! And the only light-hearted response
> I'll get - before being attacked for being part of the left-wing liberal
> re-education camps supported by American (or Canadian) tax dollars - is
> that "Joe, you write too many words." And I'm reminded of Mozart's
> interaction with the King and his complaint about Mozart's latest
> masterpiece. There's no critique of the *substance* of the music; there
> are simply "too many notes". And you've probably read too many notes or
> letters of mind already, but I welcome constructive suggestions for how we
> can move forward with people who like to reduce complex issues and
> well-reasoned arguments to a matter of "too many notes"!
>
>
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DdCud8H7z7vU&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=6dHyleneydnKa8t2Cz_EfcE4W2UDotdXSAAID1Go9Ys&e=
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DdCud8H7z7vU&d=DwMF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=fklNA-BMxfZL6YIlBXpP5zf-E6VB5KQ1emRU-qGlHo8&s=a5UfRIYsAob9N6Nxn2fWNx28NTXFvsOeiW5C6a9vZIo&e=>
>
>
>
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DdCud8H7z7vU&d=DwMF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=fklNA-BMxfZL6YIlBXpP5zf-E6VB5KQ1emRU-qGlHo8&s=a5UfRIYsAob9N6Nxn2fWNx28NTXFvsOeiW5C6a9vZIo&e=>
>
> Amadeus - "There are simply too many notes."
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DdCud8H7z7vU&d=DwMF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=fklNA-BMxfZL6YIlBXpP5zf-E6VB5KQ1emRU-qGlHo8&s=a5UfRIYsAob9N6Nxn2fWNx28NTXFvsOeiW5C6a9vZIo&e=>
>
> www.youtube.com
>
> "Just cut a few and it'll be perfect." "Which few did you have in mind?" A
> scene from my favorite movie of all time.
>
>
> My best to one and all, -Joe
>
>
>
> Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
>
> Acting Academic Dean/Associate Academic Dean
>
> King’s University College at Western University
>
> 266 Epworth Avenue
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3D266-2BEpworth-2BAvenue-2B-250D-250A-2BLondon-2C-2BOntario-2C-2BCanada-2B-2BN6A-2B2M3-26entry-3Dgmail-26source-3Dg&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=OWiSuvhUjjafL0V10vw-4wKcFCy61KPwWtKSyDPpzqk&e=>
>
> London, Ontario, Canada
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3D266-2BEpworth-2BAvenue-2B-250D-250A-2BLondon-2C-2BOntario-2C-2BCanada-2B-2BN6A-2B2M3-26entry-3Dgmail-26source-3Dg&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=OWiSuvhUjjafL0V10vw-4wKcFCy61KPwWtKSyDPpzqk&e=>
>  N6A 2M3
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3D266-2BEpworth-2BAvenue-2B-250D-250A-2BLondon-2C-2BOntario-2C-2BCanada-2B-2BN6A-2B2M3-26entry-3Dgmail-26source-3Dg&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=OWiSuvhUjjafL0V10vw-4wKcFCy61KPwWtKSyDPpzqk&e=>
>
> Tel: (519) 433-3491, ext. 4439
>
> Fax: (519) 433-0353
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
> ______________________
>
> *ei*π + 1 = 0
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> *From:* tree of knowledge system discussion <[log in to unmask]
> edu> on behalf of Chance McDermott <[log in to unmask]>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, June 12, 2018 3:29 PM
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Subject:* Re: Are We All Nutcases?
>
>
>
> Joe, that was an awesome piece to read!
>
>
>
> Below is a visualization of how I experience what you wrote about, only
> replace the physical diseases with individual and group justifications, and
> Mr. Burns himself is the world situation.
>
>
>
> "Are you saying I'm *indestructible*?"
>
>
>
> "No, no! And even a slight breeze could..."
>
>
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DgmBj8r1-2DfDo&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=oRfolxYFiKVIclXuDlaP82BgLvxOmjgZOFPJL9Ilxoo&e=
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_watch-3Fv-3DgmBj8r1-2DfDo&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=G_N7oydzTqNuHPDZSiCHq7l9xHk0iMFD7Zu6e9zGvgE&s=8USe0boP2q06WWzuotDlvPsLkzXwzRlhcaXpi2bRLPM&e=>
>
>
>
> I echo John's insightful post regarding the commodification of the
> University system.
>
>
>
> -Chance
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 8:04 AM, JOHN TORDAY <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Joe and TOKers, As a working scientist over the course of the last
> half century I can attest to the wheels falling off in the wake of the
> Bayh-Dole Act, which not only leveled the playing field between Academic
> Research and Industry, but leveled the pursuit of knowledge in biomedical
> research. Allowing for the patenting of discoveries in institutions of
> higher learning monetized the thought process in our nation's academic
> laboratories, undermining the mission of discovery. That was just one of
> many efforts to hold institutions to a 'bottom-line' standard fostered by
> the Republican Party, literally slicing and dicing free thought. So I am no
> social scientist, but I am asking openly whether this is the cause of what
> is going on on college and University campuses? Because if we can identify
> the root causes, we may be able to put the evil genie back in the bottle,
> or at least address the problem and provide opposition, as Joe is asking
> for, and re-embrace thinking over action, mutual respect over destructive
> behavior.
>
>
>
> The mere fact that the 'wars' that are going on on campuses are about
> symptoms, not causes, is very troubling. We no longer seem interested in
> analysis as the first step, going right for the intellectual 'jugular'
> instead.
>
>
>
> I have been participating in the TOK because of my own insights to the
> evolution of physiology and consciousness, which derive from a novel way of
> approaching the question of evolution (see attached). I must admit that
> deviating from the 'belief' in Darwinism has been challenging, but it is,
> IMHO, emblematic of what Joe is addressing.
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jun 12, 2018 at 5:10 AM, Joseph Michalski <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear Colleagues:
>
>
>
> I'm the youngest of six children, from a rather conservative family in
> Virginia. Full disclosure: all 5 of my older siblings and my almost
> 90-year-old mother voted for Trump. I'll come back to this.
>
>
>
> In thinking about Gregg's paper on groupthink and the example of the
> dynamics of his own university, I can't help but think about similar
> dynamics on the right. The psychologists on this list know better than I,
> but the fundamental processes that are operating almost certainly apply
> equally that produce extreme choices as a result of the group members
> interacting with each other in their own echo chamber. The sound
> reverberates and only grows louder (metaphorically, if not literally). It
> shouldn't matter in the least what the underlying ideology or even general
> idea might be that's being disputed. I'm thinking of the scene from the old
> movie West Side Story when we see the Jets meeting to decide what they
> think the rules should be for the proposed rumble - and how quickly the
> issue escalates to an evermore violent proposal.
>
>
>
> Interestingly, two of my older brothers (educated at UVA and JMU) are far
> to the right on the political spectrum and highly critical of higher
> education. They gleefully sent me the following Jordan Peterson video to
> support their argument that universities these days are essentially
> "liberal reeducation camps":
>
>
>
> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.prageru.com_videos_dangerous-2Dpeople-2Dare-2Dteaching-2Dyour-2Dkids&d=DwIFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=41P-EUsK-dWohuJLhjlik176RHY5Hr6teg9yZDZuyM4&s=ID3LxNCyuj6WLQlxpNoVL8q1Z-xn0jYjlW20pidBHA8&e=
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.prageru.com_videos_dangerous-2Dpeople-2Dare-2Dteaching-2Dyour-2Dkids&d=DwMF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=fn6v73F4DPo9zMbccmGMrPzJqANE605L3n__V4l5orM&s=KY4SVt0LTtrCqNDi3K1IblxXlMhwX9edD64gjFrRNl0&e=>
>
>
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.prageru.com_videos_dangerous-2Dpeople-2Dare-2Dteaching-2Dyour-2Dkids&d=DwMF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=fn6v73F4DPo9zMbccmGMrPzJqANE605L3n__V4l5orM&s=KY4SVt0LTtrCqNDi3K1IblxXlMhwX9edD64gjFrRNl0&e=>
>
> Dangerous People Are Teaching Your Kids
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.prageru.com_videos_dangerous-2Dpeople-2Dare-2Dteaching-2Dyour-2Dkids&d=DwMF-w&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=fn6v73F4DPo9zMbccmGMrPzJqANE605L3n__V4l5orM&s=KY4SVt0LTtrCqNDi3K1IblxXlMhwX9edD64gjFrRNl0&e=>
>
> www.prageru.com
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.prageru.com&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e2CVMjon_2Tp6DNDL5UZU835I9LFs5hsF8JOgsX6CvU&s=jBbWkfV6pJk-SHKjarMP1sCx8KeKgyNHtaAVDW_6WIY&e=>
>
> Dangerous people are filling the heads of young people with dangerous
> nonsense. Who are these people? They are what Jordan Peterson calls “the
> post-modernists:” neo-Marxist professors who dominate our colleges and
> universities. And here’s the worst part: we are financing these nihilists
> with tax dollars, alumni gifts and tuition payments. Time to wise up.
>
>
> In response, I tried a conciliatory approach. I acknowledged that there
> are indeed post-modernists and radical Marxists in the university - and
> some of them are certainly activists & certainly fit Peterson's
> characterization. I mentioned something about normal distributions and how
> within any organization or institution (universities, businesses, sports
> clubs, politics, etc.), you're bound to find extremists in terms of certain
> characteristics, traits, or beliefs at the tail ends of the distributions.
> But most of the area under the curve falls in between.
>
>
>
> I then pointed out that what tends to make the news are the most extreme
> examples of behavior, such as the 2017 Berkeley protest or the Middlebury
> response to Charles Murray. What's NOT newsworthy, however, are the
> countless thousands of speeches, public lectures, sponsored debates, etc.
> that occur regularly across universities that go off without incident (yes,
> more leftist, but certainly many right-wing sponsored events too). But the
> critique is that the *dominant narrative* is one of left-wing extremism
> and that we are all complicit as members of the academy of undermining
> Western civilization, etc., etc.
>
>
>
> So, to combat that thinking, I then drew an analogy with my own work on
> terrorism. I pointed out that by any reasonable definition, there have been
> various terrorist attacks in the U.S. since 9/11. This is something, like
> homicide, for which we have pretty good data. To be sure, there's some
> debate about what constitutes "terrorism," but let's just focus on
> politically-motivated, indiscriminate mass killings of civilians or
> non-combatants. Does that happen in the U.S.? Absolutely. Is it horrific
> every time it happens? Of course. But, most people do not seem to know that
> the last 10 years have seen the *lowest* number of terrorist incidents in
> the U.S. for a 10-year period than in any other decade previously dating
> back to 1970 (that's the earliest year for which we have reasonably
> reliable, comprehensive data). Even fewer know that there were fewer deaths
> to U.S. citizens on American soil due to terrorism between 2006-2015 than
> there were deaths due to lightning strikes over that same period. And yet a
> 2016 national poll by Pew found that fears about terrorism were two of the
> top four fears that Americans cited.
>
>
>
> My point was simply that there are indeed extreme examples of intolerance
> and violence - and these certainly should be reported. On the other hand,
> we need to be careful to understand that these are the extremes and *not* the
> norms. Yet for staunch believers, like my brothers, they only look for
> confirmatory evidence and absolutely refuse to entertain any notion that
> they might be misinformed about what's really happening on college
> campuses. They know, because they've seen the news reports on Fox and, even
> more powerfully, from watching Prager U videos like the one I've included.
> Can you spell "groupthink"?
>
>
>
> Anyway, my point to this group is that I'm a pretty open-minded,
> understanding, and forgiving individual who happens to love science. I
> listen to my brothers and try to understand their perspective, but then,
> as with any issue like higher education, I share some different
> perspectives and evidence intended to show them that the issues are more
> nuanced and there's a lot of basically routine, institutionalized and,
> quite frankly, corporatist stuff that we do on an everyday basis. Heck,
> I've spent at least 100 times more time in committee meetings dealing with
> enrollment issues, state (provincial) funding, tuition fees, budgets,
> capital fundraising campaigns, and student disciplinary issues (e.g.,
> plagiarism) than I have responding to unruly, disruptive, radical protest
> movements on campus. But that's all they see. And when I try to point all
> this out, they merely characterize me as a left-wing liberal defending our
> radical universities. So, if I cannot make any inroads with my brothers (I
> always try to acknowledge where I agree with them), my question is how can
> we possibly create long-term change, engage in constructive dialogue, and
> salvage the notion of a "liberal education" in the best sense of that term
> - where both liberals and conservatives could agree on the core values? I
> mean, sheesh, I never thought of myself as a "dangerous person" or my
> colleagues as "dangerous people" teaching our kids. But a great many
> people, including my brothers, think that's *exactly* the way things are
> in universities, i.e., we're all a bunch of nutcases espousing "dangerous
> nonsense."
>
>
>
> Yours kindly, -Joe
>
>
>
>
>
> Dr. Joseph H. Michalski
>
> Acting Academic Dean/Associate Academic Dean
>
> King’s University College at Western University
>
> 266 Epworth Avenue
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3D266-2BEpworth-2BAvenue-2B-250D-250A-2BLondon-2C-2BOntario-2C-2BCanada-2B-2BN6A-2B2M3-26entry-3Dgmail-26source-3Dg&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e2CVMjon_2Tp6DNDL5UZU835I9LFs5hsF8JOgsX6CvU&s=ebPZfP1hkgO0Bj__pUdZI_doRHa2CZWDgP5amSgSSBQ&e=>
>
> London, Ontario, Canada
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3D266-2BEpworth-2BAvenue-2B-250D-250A-2BLondon-2C-2BOntario-2C-2BCanada-2B-2BN6A-2B2M3-26entry-3Dgmail-26source-3Dg&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e2CVMjon_2Tp6DNDL5UZU835I9LFs5hsF8JOgsX6CvU&s=ebPZfP1hkgO0Bj__pUdZI_doRHa2CZWDgP5amSgSSBQ&e=>
>  N6A 2M3
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__maps.google.com_-3Fq-3D266-2BEpworth-2BAvenue-2B-250D-250A-2BLondon-2C-2BOntario-2C-2BCanada-2B-2BN6A-2B2M3-26entry-3Dgmail-26source-3Dg&d=DwMFaQ&c=eLbWYnpnzycBCgmb7vCI4uqNEB9RSjOdn_5nBEmmeq0&r=HPo1IXYDhKClogP-UOpybo6Cfxxz-jIYBgjO2gOz4-A&m=e2CVMjon_2Tp6DNDL5UZU835I9LFs5hsF8JOgsX6CvU&s=ebPZfP1hkgO0Bj__pUdZI_doRHa2CZWDgP5amSgSSBQ&e=>
>
> Tel: (519) 433-3491, ext. 4439
>
> Fax: (519) 433-0353
>
> Email: [log in to unmask]
>
> ______________________
>
> *ei*π + 1 = 0
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=
> 1
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=
> 1
>
>
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=
> 1
>
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=
> 1
> ############################
>
> To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list: write to:
> mailto:[log in to unmask] or click the
> following link: http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=
> 1
>

############################

To unsubscribe from the TOK-SOCIETY-L list:
write to: mailto:[log in to unmask]
or click the following link:
http://listserv.jmu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=TOK-SOCIETY-L&A=1