/sci/ - Science & Math

>>8579401

when you live in the academia bubble where nothing is ever really challenged, and people in power are pretty much immutable and immovable, they are in a sense eroded from the bottom up, by the students.

teachers are able to influence students. liberal teachers play to what they know children will fall for. things like more freedom, moral relativism (there's no right or wrong, things like that), and "encouragement" to do things that benefit them now, and not worry about the future because "it will all work out".

this stuff is very powerful, and is able to motivate a lot of people who have nothing to lose because they haven't yet earned enough worth defending.

they're willing to give things away for free because
A) they don't have much
B) they haven't worked to secure tangible things for themselves, in many cases, only intangibles, like reputation and status (within an ephemeral peer group)

the time is viewed as expendable, and not something that will affect their future (even though it could), so they have a higher tendency to engage in risky (read: degenerate) behavior.

the media calls anyone in academia a "scientist", and they know that most people will think of Edison or Einstein when they hear someone is a scientist, but aren't the people referred to more similar to a rowdy high schooler than a legendary person of science?

also mathematicians are pretty conservative by and large, and arguably mathematicians are in the highest standard deviation of "scientists".