Welcome to our book review site go-pdf.online!
You may have to Search all our reviewed books and magazines, click the sign up button below to create a free account.
Passing on the Right
Shields and Dunn shed light on the hidden world of conservative professors through 153 interviews. Most conservative professors told them that the university is a far more tolerant place than its right-wing critics imagine. Many, in fact, first turned right in the university itself, while others say they feel more at home in academia than in the Republican Party. Even so, being a conservative in the progressive university can be challenging. Many professors admit to closeting themselves prior to tenure by passing as liberals.
Passing on the Right
Shields and Dunn shed light on the hidden world of conservative professors through 153 interviews. Most conservative professors told them that the university is a far more tolerant place than its right-wing critics imagine. Many, in fact, first turned right in the university itself, while others say they feel more at home in academia than in the Republican Party. Even so, being a conservative in the progressive university can be challenging. Many professors admit to closeting themselves prior to tenure by passing as liberals.
Passing on the Right
Few seem to think conservatives should become professors. While the left fears an invasion of their citadel by conservatives marching to orders from the Koch brothers, the right steers young conservatives away from a professorial vocation by lampooning its leftism. Shields and Dunn quiet these fears by shedding light on the hidden world of conservative professors through 153 interviews. Most conservative professors told them that the university is a far more tolerant place than its right-wing critics imagine. Many, in fact, first turned right in the university itself, while others say they feel more at home in academia than in the Republican Party. Even so, being a conservative in the progre...
Campus Diversity
Campus diversity is a contentious topic, but this book shows far more consensus than conflict in student attitudes toward diversity.
Ideological and Political Bias in Psychology
This book examines the traditional assumptions made by academics and professionals alike that have embedded sociopolitical biases that impede practice. and undermine efforts to achieve an objective scientific status. If allowed to go unchallenged, the credibility of psychology as a discipline is compromised. This contributed volume thoroughly and comprehensively examines this concern in a conceptually and empirically rigorous manner and offers constructive solutions for minimizing undue political influences within the field of psychology. Societies in the 21st century desperately need reliable psychological science, but we don’t have it. This important volume explains one of the main reaso...
Fighting the Last War
This book argues that the political and security threats posed by the domestic radical right in Western countries have been consistently exaggerated since 1945. This has allowed governments to justify censoring and repressing their political opponents, including many who cannot be fairly described as being affiliated with the radical right.
How to Think Better About Social Justice
Those who are pursuing social justice too often fail to incorporate the insights of sociology, and when they do make use of sociology, they often draw heavily from claims that are highly contested, unsupported by the evidence, or outright false. This book shows why learning to think sociologically can help us to think better about social justice, pointing us toward possibilities for social change while also calling attention to our limits; providing us with hope, but also making us cautious. Offering a series of tips for thinking better about social justice, with each chapter giving examples of bad sociological thinking and making the case for drawing from a broader range of sociological the...
A Liberal Education
Enlisting a natural experiment, global surveys, and historical data, this book examines the university's evolution and its contemporary impact. Its authors conduct an unprecedented big-data comparative study of the consequences of higher education on ideology, democratic citizenship, and more. They conclude that university education has a profound effect on social and political attitudes across the world, greater than that registered by social class, gender, or age. A university education enhances political trust and participation, reduces propensities to crime and corruption, and builds support for democracy. It generates more tolerant attitudes toward social deviance, enhances respect for rationalist inquiry and scientific authority, and usually encourages support for Leftist parties and movements. It does not nurture support for taxation, redistribution, or the welfare state, and may stimulate opposition to these policies. These effects are summarized by the co-authors as liberal, understood in its classic, nineteenth-century meaning.
The Myth of Left and Right
"AMERICAN POLITICS IS AT a breaking point. This became obvious when a mob of American citizens, upset with the results of the 2020 presidential election, stormed the Capitol Building in Washington, D.C. to stop Congress from tabulating the election results. In order to work, democracies require citizens who respect the rights of individuals, defer to the outcomes of elections, and abide by the rule of law, but today's toxic political culture has caused many Americans to abandon these vital norms. Ideological tribalism and partisan hatred have become so rampant that frightening numbers of American citizens countenance violence against their political opponents to get their way"--
Free Speech and Intellectual Diversity in Higher Education
The essays in Free Speech and Intellectual Diversity in Higher Education reflect diverse perspectives on one of the most pressing issues in higher education--the controversies over freedom of speech and its relation to intellectual diversity. Does the First Amendment apply on campuses and do its principles clarify or obscure the issues surrounding campus speech? What, after all, is the basis for those principles, and how do they relate to the purposes of the university? Is free speech truly effective without a diversity of perspectives, and to what extent is such diversity found at universities today? Does free speech discourage the inclusion of minorities or previously excluded groups? Are there specific policies that can address the issue of free speech on campuses today in ways that are fair to all parties and to the interests at stake?
