Republicans Hate College Now, Apparently

[LuisDantas]

I am curious of this myself. I find lawyers are subject to bad apples like anything else, but not to the degree of calling it a parasite.

It is the activity itself, and above all the mistake of placing it in a position of prestige, that hurts society.

Law is a necessary activity, because there will always be disputes to settle. But it can't be allowed to become a means to earn a living.

 

[Quetzal]

It is the activity itself, and above all the mistake of placing it in a position of prestige, that hurts society.

Law is a necessary activity, because there will always be disputes to settle. But it can't be allowed to become a means to earn a living.

Why not? The law is complex and there are so many elements of it. Do you expect people to work in this extremely demanding field for free? This is one of the more bizarre positions I have heard from ya!

 

[Revoltingest]

Not at all. I have a personal and well-earned reputation in real life for discouraging law studies with, shall we say, some passion.



Because their whole point is to earn money out of the knowledge and application of law.

That is an almost archetypical example of parasitical activity. It consumes resources and true wealth that must therefore be taken from the rest of society. And what does it offer in exchange? Nothing at all besides barely-disguised promises of privilege, revenge and exception. While challenging their own colleagues, no less.

Appealling as that scenario clearly is for many people - perhaps because it taps into expectations of some form of tendency of existence to reward us "eventually" - it is the very definition of a drain.

In my opinion that comes from a misunderstanding of the true role of law. Law is a tool for settling disputes. No more and no less. It is not supposed or even particularly expected to be "fair", let alone to change society in a positive way.

Were people a bit more rational and sane, law would not be allowed to attain much in the way of prestige, and recourse to it would be correctly perceived as an exalted bet. People would strive to reach common understandings in order to avoid the inherent risks of resorting to law disputes. And we all would be considerably better of for it, including in the moral sense.

I don't see the law as all negative. But the system is a license to steal for lawyers,
who wield enormous power, & aren't held accountable for legally sanctioned fraud,
extortion, incompetence, & carnage they cause. So while some lawyers are fine
people, it attracts & encourages the criminal element. And with the foxes running
the henhouse, this won't change.

 

[LuisDantas]

Why not? The law is complex and there are so many elements of it. Do you expect people to work in this extremely demanding field for free? This is one of the more bizarre positions I have heard from ya!

I expect people to realize that legal conflicts can't be allowed to be taken too seriously, lest the bill be paid by society as a whole.

Sure, that means that sometimes we will be unfairly penalized by the legal system if the disputes end up arriving at that sphere.

Which is already at least arguably true, don't you think?

So we are all ultimately better off by minimizing the impact of that inherently flawed activity in our lives. The best possible law activity aims to make decisions quick and their impact supportable, as opposed to "fair and just".

One reason why I feel so strongly on the matter is the scriptural nature of the activity. Much of its point is to attempt to reign in reality by way of words on paper and the force of authority. There is just no upside to such an approach.

 

[LuisDantas]

I don't see the law as all negative.

Neither do I, although I suppose that may not come across very clearly amid all my revolt...

Law is necessary. But it must be kept in its (small and unprestiged) place.

But the system is a license to steal for lawyers, who wield enormous power, & aren't held accountable for legally sanctioned fraud,
extortion, incompetence, & carnage they cause.

Quite so.

Even worse: in so doing, it attracts people who expect to be well-paid and well-sought for that. And quite often they actually are, alas!

So while some lawyers are fine people, it attracts & encourages the criminal element. And with the foxes running
the henhouse, this won't change.

I don't think it can change until and unless we remove the prestige from the activity.

 

[Revoltingest]

Neither do I, although I suppose that may not come across very clearly amid all my revolt...

Law is necessary. But it must be kept in its (small and unprestiged) place.




Quite so.

Even worse: in so doing, it attracts people who expect to be well-paid and well-sought for that. And quite often they actually are, alas!




I don't think it can change until and unless we remove the prestige from the activity.

We need to elect more non-lawyers.
Especially people who've been thru the legal system.

 

[LuisDantas]

We need to elect more non-lawyers.
Especially people who've been thru the legal system.

Rarely, if ever, have I agreed with you quite so much!

 

[Nous]

Not at all. I have a personal and well-earned reputation in real life for discouraging law studies with, shall we say, some passion.

How is your anti-lawyer passion different from bigotry toward any other group?

Because their whole point is to earn money out of the knowledge and application of law.

What profession is not intended to provide a living for the professional?

How many hours per month do you provide in professional services pro bono?

 

[Nous]

We need to elect more non-lawyers.

Yeah, like Trump, eh?

 

[Quetzal]

Sure, that means that sometimes we will be unfairly penalized by the legal system if the disputes end up arriving at that sphere.

I find that it is very easy to take this position if we do not put ourselves in those shoes. I prefer a more empathetic approach.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

This has never been my experience. In my experience the liberals just shout you down and make fun of you. The minute you mention you are against gay marriage you are labelled a homophobe and any friends you had quickly disappear. Could be a cultural divide between the US and UK.

Could be. In my experience, "friends" vanish the moment you mention you aren't a Christian anymore, they cast you aside, shun, and will even say you are demonically possessed. Don't have god in your life? There must surely be something wrong with you and there is no way you can be a moral person or having meaning and purpose in life.

To my mind, college is an opportunity to become more tolerant and appreciative of alternative opinions; to learn research methods, analysis and critical thinking skills. A professor stifling a point of view solely on political grounds, rather than on the merits of the argument, strikes me as a political apparatchik more than a sophist.

I have had a professor like that, and he is incredibly and extremely unpopular with students. It was to the point he almost pissed me off enough to walk out of his class once. I couldn't stand this guy, and we both fall under the general Marxist spectrum. Another Marxist professor though, he was very open to other views and positions, does not let students cut each other off and interrupt each other, he is sensitive and thoughtful, and the complaints he gets revolve around how stiff he can be with grading, especially if you've taken his editing course and/or research methods course because he will expect more of you if you have and have him again later on.

Why would a teacher not encourage dissenting opinions? Isn't part of his job to help students hone their analytic, argumentation and debate skills?

I had a philosophy teacher who was absolutely amazing. One week we'd be reading far-right Libertarian ideas, and the next we'd be reading about Marxism. And even if she didn't like a point, for the sake of debate and challenging her students, she would take that position and drill her students hard from that perspective. If you had her, be ready to think and respond quick or don't talk at all because you'll get in the way and get trampled. This professor, because she was so well rounded, read, and educated in her area, it's pretty much impossibly to pin down her political views if you don't know her outside of class.

 

[LuisDantas]

How is your anti-lawyer passion different from bigotry toward any other group?

Is it bigotry to point out that an activity hurts society?

What profession is not intended to provide a living for the professional?

None. I disapprove of law careers. The activity should not be made into a bread-earner.

How many hours per month do you provide in professional services pro bono?

I don't know how I could count that.

 

[LuisDantas]

Yeah, like Trump, eh?

Better than Trump, obviously.

Do you agree that he rode into a feeling of rejection of "the establishment"?

 

[LuisDantas]

I find that it is very easy to take this position if we do not put ourselves in those shoes. I prefer a more empathetic approach.

Towards who?

 

[Nous]

So while some lawyers are fine people, it attracts & encourages the criminal element.

There is no evidence that lawyers are as a group any more criminal than engineers, is there?

I don't see the law as all negative. But the system is a license to steal for lawyers,
who wield enormous power, & aren't held accountable for legally sanctioned fraud,
extortion, incompetence, & carnage they cause.

You only say that because you lose your cases.

 

[LuisDantas]

There is no evidence that lawyers are as a group any more criminal than engineers, is there?

I can't quote a source, but I would be very surprised if there were no such evidence. It certainly feels like it should be true, if for no other reason because the activity is such perfect bait for the unethical.

 

[Nous]

Better than Trump, obviously.

Do you agree that he rode into a feeling of rejection of "the establishment"?

The only reason that anyone is talking about Trump today is because of the effed-up electoral method of electing the President in the US. It it weren't for that, Clinton would be President.

 

[Nous]

I can't quote a source, but I would be very surprised if there were no such evidence. It certainly feels like it should be true, if for no other reason because the activity is such perfect bait for the unethical.

I ask again: How is your anti-lawyer passion any different than the racist's biogtry?

 

[Quetzal]

Towards who?

The hypothetical individual in your previous post who was unfairly penalized.

 

[Revoltingest]

There is no evidence that lawyers are as a group any more criminal than engineers, is there?

Well, there is this survey....
Honesty/Ethics in Professions
But it stands to reason, if the 'justice' system allows & even incentivizes fraud,
extortion, theft, & dishonesty, then it will attract those who seek that line of work.

You only say that because you lose your cases.

This shows your preference for convenient presumption over asking questions.
I win about 95% of the time. But winning is very very expensive.