What is "education"? Is it degrees? There are a lot of problems with this. It's hardly a sign that someone "thinks critically".

A lot mediocre students I knew in school stayed on to do more school because they were not able to do something else. A lot of degrees and classes are frankly bullshit and this problem has gotten worse since the 60s - the details matter. Time wasted studying pseudo-intellectual nonsense doesn't imply someone has a better understanding of the world than someone else (often the opposite) - just that they wasted time getting indoctrinated in a particular culture (often subsidized by others if not the taxpayer).

What about the people doing interesting and useful things in society, building stuff, creating wealth - what these people think matters a lot more than someone that got a PHD on olfactory ethics. Not all education is equal.

Even then, the meta analysis matters less than the details of the actual underlying argument. Appeal to authority and experts is a poor substitute for rigorous good faith debate of the actual issues.

There's a reason William F. Buckley said he would rather be governed by the first 2,000 people listed in the phone book than by the faculty members from Harvard.

"I am obliged to confess that I should sooner live in a society governed by the first two thousand names in the Boston telephone directory than in a society governed by the two thousand faculty members of Harvard University. Not, heaven knows, because I hold lightly the brainpower or knowledge or generosity or even the affability of the Harvard faculty: but because I greatly fear intellectual arrogance, and that is a distinguishing characteristic of the university which refuses to accept any common premise."

So it's not that I dispute the data that there's a lefty bias in universities (there obviously is), I dispute what that actually means.

> So it's not that I dispute the data that there's a lefty bias in universities (there obviously is), I dispute what that actually means.

The issue at hand isn't perceived bias in universities, it's voting tendencies of people who have higher education.

PS, this conversation is a waste of both of our times. I won't be continuing it. Because there is no good faith either side. I'm certainly not going to display any and I aver you aren't either, but you can judge for yourself.

> The issue at hand isn't perceived bias in universities, it's voting tendencies of people who have higher education.

Arguably they go hand in hand, take young people and immerse them in a political/ideological monoculture for four formative years and it's not surprising many come out saying the same things and voting the same way all of their professors did, there's a lack of viewpoint diversity. Most people are mimetic, exposure to the best arguments from an intellectually diverse curriculum would be great but that's not what universities (broadly) are today. It's very hard to think for yourself, even harder when immersed in a place where ideological conformity is rigidly enforced.

FWIW I thought your comment was in good faith, we just don't agree.