"A disgrace"? Could someone please explain Mr. McCain to me?

.....I suppose that many of you have seen or heard John McCain's recent remarks re Social Security (see video)—which he offered as some "straight talk." I am puzzled by this alleged straight talk.
.....We need to separate two issues. One issue is whether there is something broken about Social Security. McCain thinks so, and I suspect he is right about that.
.....A second issue concerns what McCain says toward the end of his above remarks. He describes the Social Security system itself, which involves money put into the system by people now working and money taken out by people now retired. Now, as I understand it, Social Security has always involved precisely that "system."
.....In the video, in no uncertain terms, McCain judges that system to be "a disgrace."
.....Now, I really don't see what is disgraceful about it (the above "system," I mean). Prima facie, it seems sensible, fair. Evidently, ordinary Americans, too, whether Republicans or Democrats, have long liked it; they have not found it to be "a disgrace."
.....What on earth is McCain talking about?
.....Perhaps Mr. McCain does not realize that the system he describes is what Social Security has always been? Does he suppose that, until recently, beneficiaries of the system were withdrawing the money they themselves put into accounts throughout their working years? If so, he's a spectacular ignoramus, one who is too foolish to be the President.
.....Or perhaps Mr. McCain meant to opine, not about the system he describes (in which current workers pay for current benefits), but the particular circumstance—owing to the Baby Boom, etc.—that not enough is being put into the system now to cover what is taken out (or will be taken out). If so, we must conclude that he is either vulnerable to remarkable bouts of confusion while speaking, or he is the world's most inarticulate fellow, saying clearly what he clearly does not mean to say.
.....Am I missing something? Help me out here! (I will attempt to find the larger context of McCain's remarks, but I doubt that that will help.)

P.S.: My friend Steve sent the video below. Yes, happiness is a warm puppy—or a guy singing a bunch of warm puppies to sleep!

Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit

• BULLSHIT PRODUCT.

.....Have you noticed advertisements by a new company called "Philosophy"? Philosophy sells cosmetics. Their motto is "believe in miracles."
.....I know a lot of philosophers. The philosophers I know are about as likely to believe in miracles as they are to believe in the Tooth Fairy.

.....One of Philosophy's products is "Hope in a Jar." On the jar, we're told that, "where there is hope, there can be faith. Where there is faith miracles can occur."
.....Well, by definition, where there is faith, there is belief without evidence. And a miracle is an event that defies natural laws. Why would belief w/o evidence bring about an event that defies natural laws? What total bullshit.

• BULLSHIT TV SHOW.

.....While we're on the topic of BULLSHIT, have you ever seen Penn & Teller's Showtime TV show called "Bullshit"?
.....It's pretty entertaining. Here's one of their better segments—on bottled water. The best part comes in the second half, when customers at a fancy-schmancy restaurant pay big money for bottled water that, in reality, comes straight from a hose in the back alley. "You'll laugh so hard your sides will ache, your heart will go pitter pat."



.....I don't mind P&T's cursing and name-calling: that's just their style, their humor. But they can be sloppy (no, boys, they didn't burn witches in Salem, they hanged 'em.). They can be unfair—they've been accused of cherry-picking evidence (e.g., regarding the efficacy of recycling). Sometimes, they're just dead wrong (as when they rejected claims of the dangers of second-hand smoke, based on outdated info). I give 'em an A in entertainment and a C in logic.

• BULLSHIT PHILOSOPHER.

.....A few years ago, philosopher Harry Frankfurt made quite a splash with his published essay On Bullshit (2005; written in '86). According to Wikipedia,

...Harry Frankfurt of Princeton University characterizes bullshit as a form of falsehood distinct from lying. The liar, Frankfurt holds, knows and cares about the truth, but deliberately sets out to mislead instead of telling the truth. The "bullshitter", on the other hand, does not care about the truth and is only seeking to impress:

"It is impossible for someone to lie unless he thinks he knows the truth. Producing bullshit requires no such conviction. A person who lies is thereby responding to the truth, and he is to that extent respectful of it. When an honest man speaks, he says only what he believes to be true; and for the liar, it is correspondingly indispensable that he considers his statements to be false. For the bullshitter, however, all these bets are off: he is neither on the side of the true nor on the side of the false. His eye is not on the facts at all, as the eyes of the honest man and of the liar are, except insofar as they may be pertinent to his interest in getting away with what he says. He does not care whether the things he says describe reality correctly. He just picks them out, or makes them up, to suit his purpose.”

Frankfurt connects this analysis of bullshit with Ludwig Wittgenstein's disdain of "non-sense" talk, and with the popular concept of a "bull session" in which speakers may try out unusual views without commitment. He fixes the blame for the prevalence of "bullshit" in modern society upon anti-realism and upon the growing frequency of situations in which people are expected to speak or have opinions without appropriate knowledge of the subject matter.

Here's an interview of Frankfurt re "bullshit"



.....The interviewer presses Frankfurt for an example of BS. With some reluctance, the professor cites the notion that John Kerry's heroic actions during the Vietnam War (the interview occurred a few years ago) qualify him to be President. "Bullshit," he says. And surely he is correct. (Note that F expresses no skepticism about K's heroism.)
.....Very recently (June 29), Wes Clark got into hot water when, in reference to Pres. candidate John McCain, he said, "Well, I don't think riding in a fighter plane and getting shot down is a qualification to be president."
.....Well, again, surely he is correct. Importantly correct. Nevertheless, Clark's comment caused a shitstorm. One must not speak the truth about this matter, evidently. Clark should have known better than to defy right-wing PC—a particularly funky species of bullshit.

• BULLSHIT PRESIDENT.

.....Harry Truman was known to have a colorful vocabulary. According to a familiar story,

Always an earthy talker, Truman once offended a friend of his wife's by referring repeatedly to "the good manure" that must have been used to nurture the fine blossoms at a Washington horticulture show. "Bess, couldn't you get the President to say 'fertilizer'?" the woman complained. Replied Mrs. Truman: "Heavens, no. It took me 25 years to get him to say 'manure.'"

The Army's new "secret weapon"; critical thinking video; responding to a need

• From the Guardian: US weapons research is raising a stink: The US Army's XM1063 projectile is designed to be 'non-lethal' - but is it peaceful or hovering on the brink of illegality? [Note: above original photos of relevant howitzer sent to us by our pals over at 13 Stoploss]:

.....Is the XM1063 a stink bomb, a banana skin, or a bad trip? ... XM1063 is the code name for the US army's new secret weapon which will "suppress" people without harming them, as well as stopping vehicles in an area 100m square. But is it a violation of chemical weapons treaties, or a welcome move towards less destructive warfare using non-lethal weapons? ¶ ...The first part of the weapon is an artillery round...fired from a 155mm howitzer.... It scatters 152 small non-explosive submunitions over a 1-hectare area; as each parachutes down, it sprays a chemical agent....

• CRITICAL THINKING VIDEO. A reliable reader (Bohrstein) has drawn my/our attention to a video (Here Be Dragons), which is an introduction to critical thinking by Brian Dunning of Skeptoid. I've seen most of it, and it appears to be quite good and entertaining as well.

• From the San Jose Mercury: College to expand program on solar-panel installation:

.....Skyline College in San Bruno is renewing a successful solar-installation program for the fall and plans to expand its curriculum in response to the growing alternative-energy market.
.....The program trains students to become certified solar installers and is funded by a grant of about $450,000 from the California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, organizers said.
....."It's creating a pipeline for potential employees for the solar industry," said project leader Sandra Wallenstein….

Thursday evening Chunkery

• COOL PICS. There’s an odd-but-cool article in the Times about a Modjeska Canyon resident and her elegant garden: Modjeska Canyon garden's water-wise ways take bloom. Check it out, if you dare.

"To live in chaparral and have a creek in this canyon is amazing," she says. "It is a privilege and a responsibility to live here and not waste it. We are so lucky that it didn't burn down. I would have been just as upset to lose the garden as the house. I guess we would have had to rebuild." Sarkissian is quiet for a moment as she looks at the creek and reflects on her time here. "But you just don't have that many 13-year periods of your life."

The article includes an unusually lovely slide show. Garden, flowers, blue shirt.

• THE GREAT STINK. Matt Cocker (!?) at the OC Weekly (THE GREAT P-U) explains that the endless Irvine “Great Park” events these days are being undone by a big 'n' stinky compost pile. As my old Opa would say, "It did shtink."

• VENGEANCE IS THEIRS. R. Scott Moxley, also at the OC Weekly, writes about the Susan Atkins (of Manson Family infamy) parole issue: DA Tony Rackauckas Joins the Battle Over Susan Atkins' Dying Wish.

Atkins, who has an impeccable prison record, is sinking fast (brain tumor, amputated leg, etc.), but Rackauckas (a charter member of Mike Schroeder’s “Team Rat Bastard”) has joined the LA Times in opposing release.

Moxley quotes the Times as recently opining: “Atkins gravely wounded our collective peace, and society has a right, even the obligation, to exact vengeance.”

Exact vengeance? Well, either the Times editorial writer needs to work on his tone, or he’s just a moron.


• CRAPULENCE AND PHOTOGRAPHY. I was out in the world again today and so I took my camera. Two of these shots are near my house: on Live Oak Canyon Rd (above) and at the entrance of Lambrose Canyon (at the beginning of this post, above). Another (below) is from that crazy overpass from the 5 south to the toll road north (toward the Santa Ana mountains). (Click on photos.)

I was feeling sick (never mind), and so I just took 'em from the car, through the windshield.


• THE DARK END OF THE STREET. Couldn't sleep last night. Started watching an old episode of Millennium (Lance Henriksen), which included a moving sequence using James Carr's "Dark End of the Street" (1967). Do you know it? It's wonderful. (So's Millennium, BTW.)

The smoky north

Along with Louis B. Jones, the Reb directs the prestigious Writers Workshop at Squaw Valley. Thus, soon, she and her crew will be heading north, as per usual. (Click on photo to enlarge.)

It'll be a bit smoky up there, of course. Here's a satellite image of Cal wildfires in this morning's OC Reg. I've indicated the approximate location of Squaw Valley (Olympic Valley).

MEANWHILE, THE TOASTY SOUTH. See Marla Jo's article in the Reg: 3 O.C. community colleges make top 100: Annual list ranks schools based on number of associate degrees they confer. Evidently, a trade publication ranks Coastline, Orange Coast and Santa Ana colleges in the top 100, in this odd regard. (Many traditional students forgo acquiring Associate degrees, since they are unnecessary for transfer to a four-year institution.)

AND THE SULTRY SOUTHEAST. There’s a marvelous story in this morning’s Inside Higher Ed (In Culture Wars, Do Facts Matter?) about a phony quote, falsely attributed to an academic by the usual right-wing suspects: “No. We don’t hire Republicans because they are stupid and we are not. Why should we knowingly hire stupid professors?”

Here's the actual, somewhat more "nuanced," quote, from a philosophy professor: “We try to hire the best, smartest people available. If, as John Stuart Mill said, stupid people are generally conservative, then there are lots of conservatives we will never hire. Mill’s analysis may go some way towards explaining the power of the Republican party in our society and the relative scarcity of Republicans in academia. Players in the NBA tend to be taller than average. There is a good reason for this. Members of academia tend to be a bit smarter than average. There is a good reason for this too.”

Just how big an IF is that IF? Yet another empirical question, one about which most of us would rather not discuss openly or directly.

What Mill actually said was: "Although it is not true that all conservatives are stupid people, it is true that most stupid people are conservative." Now, if you add the premise that "there are many stupid people," then you can expect there to be lots of conservatives, i.e., Republicans. But one may not infer that conservatives (Repubs) will be scarce among (the smart) academics, since, for all that Mill has said, it is possible that most smart people are conservative. I mean, it is at least possible that, oddly, if you're stupid, you're conservative, and if you're smart, you're conservative (and maybe if you're average, you're non-conservative). Whew.

Erwin Chemerinsky's law school "team lineup"

Marla Jo Fisher over at the OC Reg just posted this:

Who is on UCI's law school team lineup?

Marla informs us that the "legal blogosphere around the country has been buzzing in recent weeks with speculation and news about Irvine's new faculty, which has been described as unusual in the number of prominent women, and also in its ethnic composition."

Indeed it has. You’ll recall that Erwin Chemerinsky, the new dean, was hired, then fired, then rehired. Evidently, local right-wingers were upset about Professor C's politics. Some intelligent conservatives (even local ones) came to his defense.

Among Chemerinsky’s hires are

• Rachel Moran, “a UC Berkeley law professor who will become the president next year of the Association of American Law Schools.”

“She has been the director of the Institute for the Study of Social Change at UC Berkeley's law school, Boalt Hall.”

• “A veteran Los Angeles Times legal affairs reporter, Henry Weinstein, who took a buyout recently, will also join the staff to teach fledgling lawyers how to investigate facts.” (New hire Catherine Fisk is pictured at right.)

The Reg article gives the full list of hires. Also hired was someone whose career I’ve followed for years: UCI Psychology Professor Elizabeth Loftus, a renowned expert on memory.

Loftus is somewhat of a hero in the “skeptical” movement (which, essentially, debunks pseudoscience and promotes logic and science). Wikipedia briefly describes the ”Jane Doe” case and Loftus’ famous investigation concerning it, which has helped discredit therapies involving repressed and recovered “memories”:

"Jane Doe" was the subject of a case study published in 1997 by Dr. David Corwin on issues of repressed and recovered memory. Neither the study nor later follow-up studies and articles referred to her by her real name. As a psychiatrist retained in a divorce case, Corwin had videotaped an interview with Jane Doe—then six years old—in which she claimed to have suffered physical and sexual abuse at the hands of her biological mother. Eleven years later, Corwin showed Jane Doe the original tape after obtaining approval from her and her guardian. Corwin then videotaped a follow-up interview in which Jane Doe appeared to spontaneously recall another abusive event she had suffered despite having had no conscious memory of abuse in the years since the initial interview. Corwin published a transcript of the tape and an explanatory article. With Doe's permission, Corwin also played portions of both videotapes to numerous professional audiences.

Loftus hired a private investigator in California and together with co-researcher Melvin Guyer undertook a subsequent investigation into the case, reviewed extensive court records and interviewed Jane's mother and foster mother. In 2002, based on the information obtained, Loftus and Guyer published an article entitled "Who Abused Jane Doe? The Hazards of the Single Case History" in the Skeptical Inquirer. The article was highly critical of the scientific validity of Corwin's 1997 article, and questioned the factual accuracy of his account.

SEE also:

• On so-called “repressed memories”
• ”The Myth of repressed memory”

Orange Coast College on sh*t list; money "falling from the trees"

• MORE ON IVC “HOMETOWN HERO” MIKE (Pal o' Fuentes) CARONA.

The LA Times has a seriously juicy story about Irvine Valley College “Hometown Hero” Mike Carona, the former Sheriff: Carona doled out Orange County reserve badges to 'friends' who donated $1,000, court document says.

The Times includes a link to a pdf file of some eye-opening court documents. (Check 'em out: pdf.)

While being interviewed by federal investigators last September, a month before Carona was indicted, [former Assistant Sheriff Don] Haidl leveled a variety of assertions:

• Carona and another former assistant sheriff, George Jaramillo, thought money was going to be "falling from the trees" once they assumed office.
• Carona wanted Haidl to handle all the business deals that were to benefit Haidl, Carona and Jaramillo, as well as deal with the "rich" people who came in contact with the Sheriff's Department.
• The three men talked about putting money they made in a trust or lobbying company until they could legally take it out after leaving public office.
• When Carona was involved in discussions about illegal topics, he would say, "That's a conversation for the boat" or "a conversation we should have at 40,000 feet," referring to his concern about the government monitoring his conversations.
• Carona often used the phrase "Give me the win," a reference to making sure he received full media credit when something positive happened in the department.

For the OC Reg’s version of this story, go to Carona was a paranoid egomaniac, former friend tells FBI

• MORE ON COMMENCEMENT SPEAKER RUEBEN MARTINEZ.

The Reb came across this CBS Evening News segment (The Stay-In-School Hero Of Santa Ana) about Irvine Valley College’s recent commencement speaker, Rueben Martinez. (It aired June 25.) Martinez is a winner of the MacArthur “genius” prize.

• ORANGE COAST COLLEGE ON SHIT LIST.

According to this morning’s Inside Higher Ed,

The Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges [ACCJC/WASC] has announced a series of actions involving numerous two-year institutions in California. At its latest meeting, last month, the accrediting group placed Los Angeles Southwest College on probation and continued probation for Lassen College, while it removed from probation and restored the accreditation of the College of Marin and Los Angeles County College of Nursing and Allied Health, and removed College of the Redwoods from probation and placed it on warning. The commission also placed seven other colleges on warning — Cerritos, Copper Mountain, Mission, Ohlone, Orange Coast, Palo Verde and San Joaquin Delta Colleges — and continued Mira Costa College on warning. And it removed from warning status five other institutions: Cuesta, Hartnell, Porterville, San Joaquin Valley, and Western Career Colleges.

More specifically, OCC was "Placed on Warning on the Basis of a Progress Report and Visit."

• "OPERATION WHITEWASH" DIDN'T WORK?

Back on April 29, the Coast Report (Faculty Hands Over Complaints:
Teachers give notebook of grievances to state accreditation team) reported that

.....Four faculty members made a special effort this month to ensure their discontent with Orange Coast College top administrators was on the record.

.....The group sought out the ACCJC team during its follow up visit to OCC earlier this month and presented them a notebook filled with documents and emails detailing alleged transgressions of the school’s administration.


.....The delivery of the notebook is a response to some faculty members’ unhappiness about how the school’s accreditation process is being handled after a 2000 evaluation, including suspected censorship of faculty surveys for the accreditation report, the administration’s alleged use of retaliation against faculty for speaking out and how the campus is generally being run.


.....The issues have been building for some faculty members for years but seem to have ratcheted up during the past 18 months.




.....“This started when current administration decided they didn’t want to communicate with faculty about things that are normally considered shared governance,” biology instructor Ann Harmer said.


.....Sources said the issues have been going on since before the accreditation report happened and more than just the four faculty members who gave the notebook to the ACCJC have concerns.
..... The notebook was given to the accreditation committee when it returned to OCC April 15 for a follow up report, which according to technology instructor Ernest Maurer is unusual.


.....The team came to check up on three main issues they had with the school—the completion of student learning outcomes, the broadening of academic student services and administrative planning and budgeting, and the strengthening of its program review, according to a letter to OCC President Bob Dees from the president of the ACCJC. Faculty members said they feared the association’s concerns weren’t addressed by campus administrators.

“(Issues) they brought up we feel were really shoved under the rug by the administration,” Harmer said.


.....Several faculty members said they tried to arrange a meeting with the accreditation committee on April 15, but were stonewalled by the administration, who claimed to be unaware of where the committee would be meeting.
..... When they did find out where the team was, according to math instructor Maurer, the accreditation team leader told them he wasn’t aware anyone wanted to speak with him, but he accepted the notebook.


.....This isn’t the first time faculty members have contacted the accreditation committee. Last spring a letter was sent listing the problems that faculty saw on campus, Harmer said.


.....Vice President of Instruction Melinda Nish said faculty members are always able to give information to the accreditation committee and it is not unusual for information to be passed on.


.....OCC has an accreditation committee on campus made up of faculty, staff and administrators divided up into groups based on the mission statements and goals of the campus, who among their other duties, compile a report that is submitted to the state accreditation team, according to Harmer.


.....Several faculty members have expressed concerns that original faculty comments destined for the ACCJC team never made it into the final report or were censored.


.....“I don’t know if it’s faked, or is cleaned up,” Harmer said. “It (the final report) makes the administration look more favorable.”


.....Astronomy instructor Nick Contopoulos said the final report given to the team doesn’t accurately reflect the sentiments of the entire campus.


.....“I feel they were not represented. Period. They were representative of those who don’t cause trouble. We’re causing trouble,” Contopoulos said. “We’re not trying to cause trouble. We just know the history of the place and how it was at the highest level. I know what it used to be like and how it is now.”


.....Nish, co-chair of the campus’ accreditation committee, said faculty members were encouraged to give input.


.....“Our progress report was drafted and done by a faculty member,” Nish said. “That faculty member, Karen Felts, didn’t edit out or censor out any information.”


.....Some faculty members said the report misrepresents the present climate of the campus and Maurer said they don’t have confidence that faculty viewpoints were accurately represented.


.....One of faculty’s concerns is the administration’s use of retaliation against those speaking out against the administration. Specifically, they say administrators are using the right of assignment as punishment to take faculty off classes they want to teach.


.....“They can specifically tell you what you’re going to teach, if you get overload, or summer school,” Maurer said. “They use right of assignment as a punitive measure.”


.....Maurer said that faculty members are willing to risk retaliation because the issues are affecting the students.


.....“It is always about the students,” Maurer said. “You hear it from the faculty, but not from the administration. They continue to go after people that speak up. They get transferred. Classes get disbanded.”


.....An issue that several faculty members have brought up is the differences between the current president and vice presidents and those of the past.


.....“Faculty loved when administration poked their heads in,” Maurer said. “Now we only see them at an arms length.”


.....Harmer echoed the sentiment, saying the president and vice presidents would be out walking around campus in past administrations.


.....“That doesn’t happen now,” Harmer said. “Our position is that it’s your job. Your job as vice president of instruction is to communicate with instructors. Your job as president is to go out and communicate with the public. It’s not getting done.”


.....Nish said there are many opportunities for communication for faculty and administration.


.....“I don’t really perceive there is a problem,” Nish said, “but, there is a lot of information out there on campus and it can be overwhelming.”


.....Nish said she is always walking around campus, attending faculty senate meetings, or having forums or informal chats.


.....Some faculty members said all the administration needs to do is step out of their offices and sit down and talk.


.....“It wouldn’t take a lot to solve the issues and that’s the sad part,” Maurer said. “It would take open communication, realizing and admitting they’ve made mistakes. They can’t continue to cover some stuff up.”

.....Contopoulos echoed the sentiment, but added that it isn’t going to be an easy process.


.....“It’s not going to be easy for both sides,” Contopoulos said. “We need to find a solution for the students. You want to mend the fences. You can’t pretend like nothing’s happened. You have to face up to the hard things. You need big people to get up and stay ‘enough.’ I’m going to say enough.” [All emphases added.]

• SOCCCD's ACCREDITATION CRISIS:


.....Years ago, Chancellor Raghu P. Mathur (then IVC President) foisted his good pal Ray Chandos onto the college as Accreditation Chair. Chandos' whitewash was so obvious that it attracted the attention of the local news media. It didn't work then either. (See IVC Accreditation Whitewash.) I am not suggesting, of course, that OCC's Karen Felts engaged in a similar sort of whitewash. Don't know. Whitewashery can be subtle and need not be perpetrated by the Accred Chair.
.....Meanwhile, Chandos' program dwindled to almost nothing, but that wasn't a problem. Mathur protected him. Mathur believes in having friends and doing them favors. Know what I mean?
.....As readers of DtB know, the two colleges of the SOCCCD are in an accreditation crisis, for we have been informed by the ACCJC that we must finally fix problems identified by them by the end of this year. There will be no extensions. (See graphic above from ACCJC letter to Saddleback College.)
.....The problems largely concern trustee micromanagement (and micromanagement through the trustees' agent, the Chancellor), a "plague" of despair, a failure to define roles and responsibilities of groups, etc. Like OCC, Saddleback College is viewed as deficient with regard to establishing "student learning outcomes."
.....These difficulties are long-standing. During the last "round" with the ACCJC, the Chancellor and trustees insisted on inserting defensive language into the accreditation reports, contrary to appropriate processes. It is widely thought that that action helped ensure a poor outcome.
.....I am told that Saddleback College has already written a draft of its new report. It is very brief, and it was written without faculty participation. I have been told by those who have read it that it is very unimpressive. This does not bode well for Saddleback College.
.....(Imagine the year 2010. You phone Saddleback College information. You then hear, "Irvine Valley College, Mission Viejo Center.")
.....Irvine Valley College, it seems, has taken the opposite tack. It has worked very hard to produce new regulations and understandings during a lengthy series of meetings that include faculty reps (everyone is represented). I am told that it has sought to create an atmosphere in which participants can speak freely, and they have done so. As near as I can tell, no "censorship" is involved in the process, and all parties have been able to express their concerns, which are to be included in the final report. (IVC's Accred "focus group" met today from 8:00-11:00.)