Academe Bureaucracy: A SAD STATE OF AFFAIRS

• Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
• Next message: Ed Conrad: "Re: Was it my imagination that this group used to discuss Anthropology?"
• Previous message: Susan S. Chin: "Re: Lamarckist Contradiction"

> cynthia gage wrote (to sci.anthropology and a bunch
> of other news groups):

> What we call academe today is a multi-billion-dollar,
> self-perpetuating, self-selected bureaucracy.
> The difference between the academic bureaucracy and any other
> self-selecting bureaucracy is that academe claims, as its sole product,
> objective, unbiased, balanced truth. It has no other reason for
> existence.
> Is the academic bureaucracy actually the first self-selecting
> bureaucracy in history to produce anything approaching objectivity, or
> is its product simply a predictable result of its biases?

~~~~~~~~~~~~
You've said a mouthful, Cynthia, and -- I have to hand it to you --
you've said it very, very well.

Academe is INDEED a multi-billion-dollar, self-perpetuating,
self-selected bureaucracy -- and the only ``truth' it dispenses
is what it decides to give out.
Even when it is fully aware that a particular ``truth" is total
fiction.
Its ``product" unquestionably is, at all times, a predictable result
of its complete and utter bias.

I offer one glowing example.
Academe's adamant, unyielding stance concerning man's evolutionary
inhuman origin has absolutely no basis in fact.
Even worse, when challenged with facts and evidence --
http://www.access.digex.net/~medved/conrad/conmain.htm
-- it resorts to despicable antics of deceipt, dishonesty, coverup and
foul play.

The Wheels of Vested Interests keep right on rolling along.

Thanks, Cynthia, for your keen insight in sizing up a deplorable
situation and for having the courage to call a spade a spade.

>

• Next message: Ed Conrad: "Re: Was it my imagination that this group used to discuss Anthropology?"
• Previous message: Susan S. Chin: "Re: Lamarckist Contradiction"