Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   What is a Liberal, and What is a Conservative?
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 151 of 254 (138814)
09-01-2004 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by crashfrog
08-31-2004 10:46 PM


quote:
No. If the test had a conservative bias, again, conservatives would score in the middle as "moderates" and liberals would be very left.
Actually, I think prophex has a point. If the test were liberally biased then conservatives would test as moderates to somewhat liberal. Let me explain with one sample question:
Do you think women should strive to serve their husbands, stay home, and raise at least five children?
Now, both conservatives and liberals would answer no to this question. However, if the survey had a liberal bias then those who answered "NO" would be classified as liberals and those that answered "YES" would be labelled as conservatives when they should actually be labelled as idiots. A liberal bias would want more conservatives to test as liberals in an effort to sway their vote towards liberal candidates. If people are given the false impression that their ideology is more liberal than it actually is it would be advantageous to the liberal movement.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by crashfrog, posted 08-31-2004 10:46 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 1:35 PM Loudmouth has replied

  
ThingsChange
Member (Idle past 5926 days)
Posts: 315
From: Houston, Tejas (Mexican Colony)
Joined: 02-04-2004


Message 152 of 254 (138819)
09-01-2004 1:15 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by contracycle
09-01-2004 12:37 PM


contracycle writes:
The rich are necessarily the enemies of the people.
"Enemies"!! C'mon. That is a false assumption. In many cases it is a symbiotic relationship. In general, balance is sought by the free market as supply of workers meets demands of owners. The owner takes a bigger economic risk than a worker. For that risk, the reward is greated, if the marketplace is suitable.
To relate to the forum: Many similarities of Evolutionary principles occur in economies. Globalization is like the ability of an organism to spread from a local population to a wider area. Survival of the best adapted, etc. also apply. The money supply (and fluctuating value) also adapts to population, among other factors.
It's interesting that some Evolutionists argue like Creationists on some topics of this forum (especially the political topics).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by contracycle, posted 09-01-2004 12:37 PM contracycle has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 155 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 1:40 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 157 by RAZD, posted 09-01-2004 1:46 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 160 by paisano, posted 09-01-2004 2:13 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 169 by nator, posted 09-01-2004 7:34 PM ThingsChange has not replied
 Message 204 by contracycle, posted 09-02-2004 5:44 AM ThingsChange has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 153 of 254 (138823)
09-01-2004 1:35 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Loudmouth
09-01-2004 12:57 PM


If the test were liberally biased then conservatives would test as moderates to somewhat liberal. Let me explain with one sample question:
No, if conservatives score as moderates then the test has a conservative bias. This is so self-evident to me that maybe I'm having a hard time explaining it.
Bias isn't found in the questions, though it can be a result of how the questions are phrased; the bias is in the scoring. If conservatives score as moderates then it means that conservative "fringe" positions are considered moderate by the test; that's what bias means.
Liberal bias would present liberal fringe positions as moderate, because moderate has the implication of "normal." That would be the percieved advantage of the bias; normalizing fringe or radical positions.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 12:57 PM Loudmouth has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 1:54 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 164 by joshua221, posted 09-01-2004 2:37 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 154 of 254 (138825)
09-01-2004 1:38 PM
Reply to: Message 144 by Darwin Storm
09-01-2004 12:04 PM


riiight.
However, all employment is volentary on both sides.
This assumes that the option to starve is a valid option.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 144 by Darwin Storm, posted 09-01-2004 12:04 PM Darwin Storm has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 171 by Darwin Storm, posted 09-01-2004 8:07 PM RAZD has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 155 of 254 (138827)
09-01-2004 1:40 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by ThingsChange
09-01-2004 1:15 PM


"Enemies"!! C'mon. That is a false assumption.
I agree that it's an overstatement, but it's certainly the case that the rich cause negative consequences for the poor simply by existing in the same markets.
The astronomically stronger buying power of the rich, or even the well-off, cause the price of resources to rise, often beyond the ability of the poor to afford them. For instance, rental housing.
Many similarities of Evolutionary principles occur in economies.
I agree. But that's not a good thing. The poor deserve better than to simply starve to death because they "couldn't compete." Don't you believe that, as humans, we have a unique gift or ability to come up with a better method than "natural" economic selection?
It's a reality, yes, but don't you think we can do better? Don't you think we have a responsibility to try?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by ThingsChange, posted 09-01-2004 1:15 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 156 of 254 (138829)
09-01-2004 1:42 PM
Reply to: Message 146 by Darwin Storm
09-01-2004 12:11 PM


Darwin Storm writes:
means nothing if people don't have computers
Providing access mean providing all the necessary means to get on-line, thuys would necessarily include the computers or other means. False assumption on your part.
Second: education is not just learning courses in school, it also involves growing your intellect and finding new things to think about. The internet would provide this even without a course structure.
Tell me you have not learned a single thing while being on line.
Enjoy.

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 146 by Darwin Storm, posted 09-01-2004 12:11 PM Darwin Storm has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 172 by Darwin Storm, posted 09-01-2004 8:11 PM RAZD has replied

  
RAZD
Member (Idle past 1405 days)
Posts: 20714
From: the other end of the sidewalk
Joined: 03-14-2004


Message 157 of 254 (138831)
09-01-2004 1:46 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by ThingsChange
09-01-2004 1:15 PM


Try parasites, especially in the sense of the exessively greedy CEO's that take salaries many many times higher than workers (do they really even work twice as hard?)

we are limited in our ability to understand
by our ability to understand
RebelAAmerican.Zen[Deist
{{{Buddha walks off laughing with joy}}}

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by ThingsChange, posted 09-01-2004 1:15 PM ThingsChange has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 170 by nator, posted 09-01-2004 7:46 PM RAZD has replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 158 of 254 (138834)
09-01-2004 1:54 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by crashfrog
09-01-2004 1:35 PM


quote:
Bias isn't found in the questions, though it can be a result of how the questions are phrased; the bias is in the scoring.
Not true. Bias can be found in the question by creating a situtation where the only choices are to side with the liberals or agree to an immoral position, an immoral position to both conservatives and liberals. For instance "Do you beat your wife on a regular basis?" If no, then you are a liberal. If yes, then you are conservative. However, if the "no" or "yes" scored as zero then I guess the scoring would be unbiased.
The bias is in assuming that conservatives are wife beaters, and therefore this is a fair question. This is definitely an extreme situation, but I think it illustrates my point. Those who made up this survey/test wanted people to "objectively" rank their actual ideology. If conservatives consistantly rank as moderates or slightly liberal this would be a boon for liberal parties hence the possible use of bias. I am not saying that the survey does use bias, only that the outcome of a biased test could be the opposite of what you are portraying.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 1:35 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 2:09 PM Loudmouth has replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 159 of 254 (138836)
09-01-2004 2:09 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by Loudmouth
09-01-2004 1:54 PM


Not sure where the confusion is, here
Bias can be found in the question by creating a situtation where the only choices are to side with the liberals or agree to an immoral position, an immoral position to both conservatives and liberals.
Right, which would skew the scoring of liberals towards the middle. If people wind up being "forced" to agree with liberal positions, then more people put "agreement", and liberal positions appear more moderate.
For instance "Do you beat your wife on a regular basis?" If no, then you are a liberal. If yes, then you are conservative.
Right. More people would pick "no", siding with the liberals, so the liberal position would swing towards the middle, making liberal positions appear moderate.
Liberal bias means liberal positions appear moderate.
If conservatives consistantly rank as moderates or slightly liberal this would be a boon for liberal parties hence the possible use of bias.
No...
To repeat, if conservative positions are portrayed in such a way that more people agree with them - for whatever reason, including coercion - then it puts more people on the conservative side, which swings the scoring of conservatives to the middle of the graph. Conservative bias means conservative positions appear moderate.
This message has been edited by crashfrog, 09-01-2004 01:10 PM

This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 1:54 PM Loudmouth has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 2:16 PM crashfrog has replied

  
paisano
Member (Idle past 6422 days)
Posts: 459
From: USA
Joined: 05-07-2004


Message 160 of 254 (138838)
09-01-2004 2:13 PM
Reply to: Message 152 by ThingsChange
09-01-2004 1:15 PM


It's interesting that some Evolutionists argue like Creationists on some topics of this forum (especially the political topics).
Most human beings nurse some form of irrationality, regardless of how rational the field they work in is. Many academics tend to nurse "libertarian leftism" as their pet irrationality.
In the real world, I'd argue that "libertarian leftism" is an oxymoron. Redistribution of wealth and politicized economic planning is necessarily coercive to at least some degree. The closest thing might be social democracy, but the capital-generating classes still get coerced in these systems, leading in the long term to economic disincentives and decline. It's happening in Old Europe as we speak.
I'd even wonder if the below-replacement birth rates in these countries are influenced by the systemic economic disincentives built into their political economies. Sounds like this might be worth studying.
I know to many here "capital" is a dirty word. But there has to be some means of allocating resources and production in an economy. I'd like to hear what alternatives some of our "libertarian leftists" advocate (that haven't largely failed in practice).
BTW I scored +3.53 on the Economic scale and -0.5 on the Social scale. Sounds about right, I'm an unapologetic free market advocate with mild libertarian views.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 152 by ThingsChange, posted 09-01-2004 1:15 PM ThingsChange has not replied

  
Loudmouth
Inactive Member


Message 161 of 254 (138839)
09-01-2004 2:16 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by crashfrog
09-01-2004 2:09 PM


Re: Not sure where the confusion is, here
quote:
Right, which would skew the scoring of liberals towards the middle. If people wind up being "forced" to agree with liberal positions, then more people put "agreement", and liberal positions appear more moderate.
And it would skew the conservatives towards the same moderate position since they are answering the same as a liberal. Those who would actually fall on the conservative side of such biased questions would be classified as conservative when in fact they do not share a common ideology with actual conservatives. I will agree that it moderates liberal extremism but it also mislabels conservative extremism.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 2:09 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 2:24 PM Loudmouth has replied
 Message 165 by joshua221, posted 09-01-2004 2:40 PM Loudmouth has not replied

  
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1466 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 162 of 254 (138840)
09-01-2004 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by Loudmouth
09-01-2004 2:16 PM


Re: Not sure where the confusion is, here
Lemmee see if I can illustrate this with a simple example: a "scale" that tells you if you're "tall" or "short", those terms referring to the difference between your height and the mean height.
In order to set up the scoring I need a sample of people's heights. So, I grab some random people and measure their height.
But I have bias. Let's say I'm fairly tall and tired of being considered weird for it. So I use a measuring tape that I cut the first foot off of. That makes my measurement of everyone's height one foot taller than they are - more people who are not really tall are made to appear "tall", according to the "true" average. That throws off my scoring scale.
Then, on the webpage, I give instructions on how you can measure your own height using a tape.
If you're of average height (that is, the "true" average), you wind up being labeled as "short" because the scoring system is calibrated with zero being one foot higher than you are. If you're a foot taller than the true average, you score as "average" on my score because the scoring is biased one foot higher than average.
My score is biased in favor of the tall because it makes the tall appear average.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 2:16 PM Loudmouth has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by joshua221, posted 09-01-2004 2:52 PM crashfrog has replied
 Message 168 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 3:46 PM crashfrog has replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 163 of 254 (138842)
09-01-2004 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 127 by crashfrog
08-31-2004 10:46 PM


quote:
Then liberals would score in the middle of the graph. That's what it would mean for the poll to have a liberal bias; it would interpret strong liberal positions as moderate, instead.
Crash, I answered this in the context, more of a statement that I wished you would reply to, No if the test was liberally biased liberals would be placed where they were, WAY left... Reinstating opinions seems to be getting us nowhere, I have shown evidence by first showing the biased questions (In the original Post about this) and then proving that liberals who answered them were pegged lefty. I see what you are saying but a liberally biased test would force people to look at the issue in a way so that there is no way around it! I.E. Do you believe having an abortion is wrong EVEN if the mother's own life is threatened? (not an actual question on the test) That is a biased question forcing me, who would say abortion is destroying a "future baby" to say: in that case choice is nessecary.
I want you to see what I am trying to say I have given support for my statement.
You apparently have not, rather replying with your opinion OVER and OVER and OVER...
quote:
"Bias" in this case is the presentation of political skew as moderation or normality; that's why a liberally-biased test puts liberals in the middle.
No, "Biased Questions" force the test-taker to make a decision in a perspective that if not answered a certain way seem inhumane, that is what a lot of the questions do in the Political Compass Test!
Maybe I have a misconstrued view of the actual meaning of a Bias, but what I have stated is what the test made me reply!
Nevermind I do not think I do...
This message has been edited by prophex, 09-01-2004 01:39 PM

"Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you."
Ephesians 5:14

This message is a reply to:
 Message 127 by crashfrog, posted 08-31-2004 10:46 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 190 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 11:51 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 164 of 254 (138843)
09-01-2004 2:37 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by crashfrog
09-01-2004 1:35 PM


quote:
This is so self-evident to me that maybe I'm having a hard time explaining it.
No you are doing a superb job of explaining it, but you are having trouble providing evidence, I have!

"Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you."
Ephesians 5:14

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 1:35 PM crashfrog has not replied

  
joshua221 
Inactive Member


Message 165 of 254 (138844)
09-01-2004 2:40 PM
Reply to: Message 161 by Loudmouth
09-01-2004 2:16 PM


Re: Not sure where the confusion is, here
quote:
And it would skew the conservatives towards the same moderate position since they are answering the same as a liberal. Those who would actually fall on the conservative side of such biased questions would be classified as conservative when in fact they do not share a common ideology with actual conservatives. I will agree that it moderates liberal extremism but it also mislabels conservative extremism.
I agree, it seems crash is having a tough time with the evidence.
We have both given evidence, he has shown none.

"Wake up, O sleeper, rise from the dead, and Christ will shine on you."
Ephesians 5:14

This message is a reply to:
 Message 161 by Loudmouth, posted 09-01-2004 2:16 PM Loudmouth has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 191 by crashfrog, posted 09-01-2004 11:53 PM joshua221 has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024