Poll: Your Political Leaning

[was1984]

I've gotten curious while reading this board of everyone's political leanings. I know a lot of grad students tend very liberal, and I've gathered that from reading this message board. I also wonder if there are any differences between science/engineering and humanties.

With that in mind, I've devised this poll, which is indeed far too limited. I am a libertarian, but I lean slightly right. I'm against the abridgment of just about everything, from gay marriage to gun rights. This poll doesn't really even fully describe my own position.

Lets try to keep this civil.

[GirlattheHelm]

Raging Civil Libertarian here. Which means I believe in: Build your fences high, ignore your neighbors, keep the second amendment, I don't care about your sexuality so go do what the hell you want, allow states to govern unto themselves more, be very self reliant, and stop picking on everyone elses hobbies.

Now I'm going back to my cave.

[medianerd]

Yeah, not sure where to put Social Sciences on your poll.

[Yellow#5]

I'd best describe myself as a pragmatist. I don't care about the ideology as much as I care about the plan.

[weeble]

Interesting... but I agree with medianerd. Where are the social sciences?

[belowthree]

Wow huge gap between sci/eng and humanities.

For those asking: Social Sciences go under humanities as far as I'm concerned...

[Rutabaga]

haha, you would say that since you're in the "hard" sciences!

[feisty]

humanities. pretty far left when i actually articulate my views, but not that politically active.

[barry_86404]

Not a good question or poll especially with the inaugeration less than a month ago. Some of us still are hurting from that day.

[weeble]

Hmm... I'd say it depends which of the social sciences you're in. Personally, I'm voting in one of the sciences categories.

[feisty]

Not a good question or poll especially with the inaugeration less than a month ago. Some of us still are hurting from that day.

I agree, Aretha's hat was pretty painful.

[Tonights]

Not a good question or poll especially with the inaugeration less than a month ago. Some of us still are hurting from that day.

Oh no! Don't ask me my political leanings, you might damage my delicate sensibilities! *clutches pearls*

Puh-leeze. If you don't like it, there's no need for you to participate.

This really is a neat poll, it's crazy interesting to see the ideological split between the humanities and the "hard" sciences. I've been involved in radical left movements since I was 12, so I think I belong squarely in the "far left" tickybox!

[was1984]

Yeah, not sure where to put Social Sciences on your poll.

That's your call. I could only put 10 options in the poll.

I tend think social sciences are more akin to history or English than physics or engineering, but it probably depends on what your specific area of interest is. I'm not here to raise the ire of brilliant statisticians who ply their trade in the social sciences .

[was1984]

Oh no! Don't ask me my political leanings, you might damage my delicate sensibilities! *clutches pearls*

Puh-leeze. If you don't like it, there's no need for you to participate.

This really is a neat poll, it's crazy interesting to see the ideological split between the humanities and the "hard" sciences. I've been involved in radical left movements since I was 12, so I think I belong squarely in the "far left" tickybox!

I wonder this too. While this poll isn't remotely scientific, it does seem to cast doubt on the idea I've heard recently that universities are deliberately omitting conservative ideologies from their campus. Here we are before the future faculty even have graduate degrees, and there is a clear liberal bias in the humanities.

Now the question is...what about our world views makes scientists/engineers a reasonable cross section of society (thus far with slight liberal leanings), while humanities have such a strong bias?

[Rutabaga]

I would probably say because most people in the social sciences and humanities spend more time working with social issues and the human condition, perhaps making them more apt to support measures that try care for the disadvantaged in society.

Scientists are just in for the money :wink:

[was1984]

I would probably say because most people in the social sciences and humanities spend more time working with social issues and the human condition, perhaps making them more apt to support measures that try care for the disadvantaged in society.

Scientists are just in for the money :wink:

I don't know. Your position requires a huge leap. That leap is that the government is the best vehicle to carry out those measures.

[Tonights]

I would probably say because most people in the social sciences and humanities spend more time working with social issues and the human condition, perhaps making them more apt to support measures that try care for the disadvantaged in society.

Scientists are just in for the money :wink:

*giggles*

Well, I can't say the reason for hard scientists, but as a social scientist I think you're right on the money there, Rutabaga. I've done a great deal of work with impoverished folks who have no agency of their own. It does tend to make one move towards the side of the political spectrum that's got a better chance of protecting and enfranchising them.

Then again, since I've been so left for so long, you might say my politics subconsciously influenced my decision to become an anthropologist rather than the reverse. We have to take that into account, too.

[Rutabaga]

Then again, since I've been so left for so long, you might say my politics subconsciously influenced my decision to become an anthropologist rather than the reverse. We have to take that into account, too.

Without a doubt. Causality here is a little unclear! Perhaps more of a feedback loop really!

[belowthree]

Scientists are just in for the money :wink:

No one pursuing grad school is so daft as to do it for the money... okay, maybe the bio folks. I have no idea why my peers are a more balanced cross-section, I'm going to blame it on the EE, MAE and structural folks. Conservative bastions, those.

I wonder what would happen if we omitted people just applying for master's degrees. (Since arguably, at least on the engineering/sciences side, some of those *are* just in it for the money.) Or to be less discriminating towards the many master's students who intend to get a PhD later, perhaps another poll split down "planning to pursue a career in academia" vs. "planning to pursue a career in industry"?

[was1984]

No one pursuing grad school is so daft as to do it for the money... okay, maybe the bio folks. I have no idea why my peers are a more balanced cross-section, I'm going to blame it on the EE, MAE and structural folks. Conservative bastions, those.

I wonder what would happen if we omitted people just applying for master's degrees. (Since arguably, at least on the engineering/sciences side, some of those *are* just in it for the money.) Or to be less discriminating towards the many master's students who intend to get a PhD later, perhaps another poll split down "planning to pursue a career in academia" vs. "planning to pursue a career in industry"?

I think we are going to have to enlist Zogby for that one.

*tangent alert* Even an M.S. is arguably not worth the cost, as in the time you get your M.S. you will miss out on somewhere between $100,000-$175,000 and your peers with a B.S. will be at the same salary level as an M.S. new grad. It makes financial sense to get an M.S. part time while working, but I've tried it and it is horrible. Most of us pursue graduate degrees so we can work on something that is actually interesting.

[barry_86404]

Why shouldn't we make people responsible for themselves and fyi hard science is one of the toughest degrees and thus maybe in a whole they are correct and realize wait we are america and everyone can accomplish anything for themselves so why not let them. Unless of course you want socialism, the smaller the government the better we are but to bad I have read so many articles pointing out that we as america is really a closet socialist country.

[Tinyboss]

Far-left hard scientists, yeah!!

[nandelle]

moderate-right leaning math-person here.

Though my undergrad is in business, so that may explain it right there

[void]

Now the question is...what about our world views makes scientists/engineers a reasonable cross section of society (thus far with slight liberal leanings), while humanities have such a strong bias?

I reject your language in this post. Why does a centrist view get to be "reasonable" while the liberal view has a "strong bias." Also, correct me if I am wrong, but are not all political leanings biased in their own way?

[synthla]

Ideally, there would be an option for apolitical. I have my own views vis-a-vis different strains of political theory, but I think our (the American) political system is fairly much broken and thus find little to be gained from paying close attention to it, other than aggravation and disappointment.