> non-economics social sciences skew more than 14-1 liberal to conservative
isn't it so for every science? I mean it is only natural that the conservative views are displaced by education and scientific knowledge. That is almost by definition.
isn't it so for every science? I mean it is only natural that the conservative views are displaced by education and scientific knowledge. That is almost by definition.
This article is a good example of how liberal viewpoints can also conflict with science:
http://nymag.com/scienceofus/2015/12/when-liberals-attack-so...
I generally agree with older conservative agendas (smaller government, efficiency, equality of opportunity) but would never ever call myself a conservative today. Doing so risks lumping yourself in with an ideology which denies reality.
That being said, I'd also hesitate to label myself a liberal due to some of the less rational aspects of liberalism today (knee-jerk anti-capitalism, safe spaces, GMOs).
: belief in the value of established and traditional practices in politics and society
: dislike of change or new ideas in a particular area
where is education - is learning of new by the ones being educated, and science is a discovery of new knowledge. Thus conservatism and education/science by definition can't occupy the same volume. Conservatism is compatible with only that education and knowledge which accidentally happen to confirm the established and traditional practices and beliefs which are already in place. ( in other words - they sometimes may agree on value, yet always differ on derivative, thus it is 2 completely different mental models)