Counterintuitive Spring 2023

The fact that 72 percent of professors teaching at American universities are liberals and only 15 percent are conservatives is outrageous. With American professors being three times more liberal than normal, it is evident that more professors will persuade liberalism and others will intentionally indoctrinate students. This affects our generation in many ways. Some examples are, teachers fail to adequately challenge liberal undergraduates, which results in leaving many of them unprepared for the real world, and it leaves conservative students afraid to express their beliefs in the classroom because of the professor failing them for not conforming.

With liberal teachers teaching a class it fails to adequately challenge liberal undergraduates. As Doren explains it, “Being a liberal was easy, my professors rewarded me for agreeing with their political views, and I felt morally superior on the Political Left. Since I rarely listened to anyone who differed with me politically, I assumed all intelligent people were liberals too.” By thinking like this, it doesn’t challenge their knowledge. It also leaves them unprepared for the real world because not everyone is a liberal and if we don’t listen to other people’s ideas then we wouldn’t be able to properly work in groups. In any job setting one has to be able to work with other workers and if someone can’t do that then they aren’t prepared for the real world.

When professors indoctrinate conservative students with liberalisms, conservatives fear going against the professor’s word. They fear liberal professors will fail them for having a different belief and not conforming to liberalism. If more teachers are liberals, there will be more liberal talk throughout the school and in the classrooms leaving students unable to preach their beliefs. If a professor believes in certain things and a student doesn’t, it could cause problems in the classroom ultimately leaving the student to fail, to fear being failed or to be inadequately challenged.

Doherty, Daniel. “Avoding Leftist Indoctrination At American Colleges and Universities.” Townhall.com. N.p., 19 Nov. 2011. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Kurtz, Howard. “College Faculties A Most Liberal Lot, Study Finds.” Washington Post. N.p., 29 Mar. 2005. Web. 5 Nov. 2015.

How Mormons Accidentally Anger the Jews

Unless we examine them more thoroughly, posthumous baptisms seem to be completely absurd.  While nearly all Christians believe that baptism is the only key to salvation, the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is so dedicated to keeping everybody out of hell that they will even, despite criticism from other sects, graciously perform post-mortem baptisms for anyone—even people who were not Mormons during their lifetime (it is worth noting that these baptisms are performed via proxy; the Church is too respectful to baptize a cadaver).  To better understand why Mormons perform baptisms for the dead, let us look at another very common practice in the Church: missionary service.  Since its founding, the LDS Church has strongly encouraged all of its young men to go out into the world on a mission to serve others.  Similarly, the Southern Baptist sect of Christianity strongly believes in mission service. 

On the website for the Southern Baptist faith, the importance of mission service is explained thus: “as a convention of churches, our missional vision is to present the Gospel of Jesus Christ to every person in the world and to make disciples of all the nations.” If we are to assume that the Mormons—at least in this particular aspect of spirituality—hold similar beliefs to the Southern Baptists, then we can conclude that a very large part of the purpose of any mission is simply to convert people to one’s own religion, making mission service essentially a worldwide imitation of the Jehovah’s Witnesses’ practice of going from door to door, knocking and hoping to convert people to what they believe to be the correct one religion.  If Southern Baptists hold religious traditions that attempt to convert people, it is possible to assume that all religions do this, including Mormons.  While the specifics of the tradition may vary from travelling to Uganda to baptizing dead people, it can be said that every religion is ultimately interested in gaining more followers.

Assuming that the ultimate goal of any religion is to lead every individual down the path to redemption—or, as some individuals might assert, ram their beliefs down everyone’s throat—, we can conclude that every religious practice, such as posthumous baptism, is at least partially done for the sake of converting non-believers.  This does not mean that the Church has no respect for a baptized individual’s soul’s right to choose to convert, but it does make sense of the idea that a person can be baptized more than once.  Posthumous baptisms are certainly a result of the LDS Church’s admirably intense desire for every person to meet Heavenly Father in the Celestial Kingdom, but it is also true that more baptisms equate to more chances to convert, which—the Church hopes—ultimately lead to more Mormons (even if they’re dead).

While the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints has exhibited an enormous display of religious tolerance and inclusion by trying to save as many people as possible, the Jews have not taken kindly to the Mormons’ practice.  Despite the good intentions behind the Mormon’s practice of baptizing Holocaust victims, many members of the Jewish community misunderstand the implication of post-mortem baptisms, and therefore feel spiritually raped by the Mormon Church.  Jews, unlike Mormons, do not believe that an individual can be baptized after death.  The practice seems so foreign and perverted that it is completely unfathomable.  Although the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints means no harm towards to Jewish community, the message of good will behind the baptism of Holocaust victims is not received as it is intended to be. 

According to Rabbi Moshe Waldocks, many Jews feel that the actions of the Mormon Church are nothing more than a desperate grab for converts, saying that “It smacks of a certain sense of proselytism: If you [Mormons] can’t get them while they’re alive, you’ll get them while they’re dead.”  This statement makes it evident that it is not necessarily the desire for converts that the Jews take issue with, but rather the perceived lack of respect for a dead person’s dignity.  While the Mormons clearly believe that it is never too late to be saved, the Jews apparently are firm believers that the living ought to let the dead lie.  It is this fundamental discrepancy in doctrine that results in a misunderstanding on the part of the Jews, which is reflected in an anger and some indubitably disrespectful shenanigans—one half-Jewish individual became angry enough to create a terribly disrespectful website titled alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com.  According to the website,

Sadly, many Mormons throughout history have died without having known the joys of homosexuality.  With your help, these poor souls can be saved.  Simply enter the name of a dead Mormon in the form below and click Convert!  Presto, they’re gay for eternity.  There is no undo.

This website, its contempt for the Mormons and the homosexual community notwithstanding, is an unmistakable sign that Jewish individuals simply have failed to perceive the good intentions of the Mormon Church, and instead feel abused by the Mormons for inadvertently violating the Jewish belief that the dead must stay dead, and are not to be converted by one Church or another.

To summarize, the belief in posthumous baptism stems from the desire for universal salvation by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, as well as from the Church’s desire to add more names to its congregation—a common desire amongst all world religions.  However, a post-mortem baptism does not guarantee a conversion—this reflects the Mormons’ respect for the dead person’s soul’s right to choose its religion, and also explains the practice of posthumously baptizing certain individuals such as Anne Frank multiple times after death, in order to essentially make more Mormons.  Jews, fundamentally holding a belief that conflicts with an idea held by the Mormons, have interpreted the practice of baptisms for Holocaust victims not as a gesture of good will, but rather a disrespectful grab for more converts.  This misunderstanding has led to an outrage in the Jewish community, resulting in the creation of a vitriolic website aimed at converted Mormons to homosexuality.  Ultimately, the conflict between the Mormons’ desire to save everyone from hell and the Jews’ feelings of abuse at the hands of power-hungry Mormons raise a question that has been asked since time immemorial: can’t we all just get along?

Works Cited

Oppenheimer, Mark. “A Twist on Posthumous Baptisms Leaves Jews Miffed at Mormon Rite.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 2 Mar. 2012. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

“Mission and Vision.” Http://www.sbc.net/aboutus/missionvision.asp. Southern Baptist Convention, 15 June 2010. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

“Why Do Mormons Perform Baptisms for the Dead?” Mormon.org. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.
All Dead Mormons Are Now Gay. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Goyette, Braden. “Why Mormons Baptize the Dead: A Guide.” NY Daily News. 1 Mar. 2012. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Unnatural Habitats Cause Abnormal Behaviors in Wild Animals

A typical day in a zoo consists of little to no time at each exhibit, examining an animal in a small space.Many people believe having animals in captivity is a good idea and a chance for an educational experience. The majority of the public is for zoos and aquariums being open; however, there are a decent amount of people who think the opposite about animals in captivity. During a zoo visit one may see a wild chimp eating his waste or pacing back and forth and believe that it’s his normal behavior without thinking twice about it. In fact, according to the website Zoo Chimps’ Mental Health affected by Captivity “self-mutilation, repetitive rocking, and consumption of feces, are symptoms of compromised mental health in humans, and are not seen in wild chimpanzees.” Often what is seen to be “normal” behavior is overlooked by the public but seriously concerns many researchers.

Zoos and Aquariums are false advertisements to the public. Most exhibits within a zoo or aquarium lack the sufficient space a wild animal such as a tiger or killer whale needs to live. When a person is viewing the exhibit, most of the time the wild animal is presenting unnatural behavior. For example, according to the Canadian Federation of Humane Societies’ website, Marine Mammals in Captivity, “Like killer whales, belugas travel hundreds of miles in the wild. Constrained in an aquarium the swim in circular patterns, unable to live and swim naturally.” For lack of money, the insufficient space is likely never to be expanded once the animal is in his exhibit. Even if the zoos or aquariums make an exhibit larger, the space will never be match an animal’s natural environment. Most, if not all captive animals die while in captivity.

Lack of stimulation and foraging behavior are common problems for many zoo animals. These behaviors can cause reintroduction to the wild to be difficult and lead to unhealthy animals. According to Ida Korneliussen in Can Wild animals have mental illness?, the author states “Animals can engage in compulsive actions if they don’t get what they seek and need . . . This is because they cannot escape the cage to look for food.” Animals in captivity that face unusual environments are not able to function as they would out in the wild where they can explore for food and partners. Because the animal’s acclimation to a zoo environment, the captive animals’ lack of natural behavior causes a problem if the animals are ever introduced back out into the wild; the animals’ behavior will differ and the animals would be used to zoo behavior versus wild behaviors.

Once wild animals are captured and arrive at the zoos, they’re trapped in a cage for the rest of their life, just as humans are when they’re sentenced to prison for life. An animal’s exhibit is harmful to the animal’s well being. For example, a killer whale, also known as an Orca is extremely large in size when compared to most captive wild animals. In Marine Mammals in Captivity, the article states that killer whales “live in pods of two to fifty whales and swim up to 100 miles in a day and dive to depths of 500 feet [and that orcas] prefer deep water and usually spend 10 to 20 per cent of their time at the surface.” Animals that live in large tanks of water do not have any room to function normally; the water killer whales reside in is extremely harsh and filled with chemicals that damage marine mammals’ skin. Not only does the water they swim in damage the orca’s skin but there is no way for the marine animal to travel to parts of the ocean to find a mate. Large marine animals in captivity such as orcas swim in a secluded unnatural space where the size is nowhere close to the ocean size. The continuous lack of natural environment in captivity will continue to drive animals to express unusual behaviors inside their exhibits and could also lead to death of the animal.

Works Cited

NEW SOURCE* Korneliussen, Ida. “Can WIld Animals Have Mental Illness?” ScienceNordic. N.p., 24 June 2015. Web. 2 Nov. 2015. <http://sciencenordic.com/can-wild-animals-have-mental-illnesses&gt;.

“CFHS | Marine Mammals in Captivity.” RSS. Canadian Federation of Human Societies, n.d. Web. 02 Nov. 2015. <http://cfhs.ca/wild/marine_mammals_in_captivity&gt;.

Control Yourself – Social Trust is Essential to Delay Gratification

Acquiring self control skills will lead to greater success in the classroom, and in life. Self control is one of the most important traits that a person can possess in order to be successful. Self regulation is defined as a cognitive skill that enables mindful, intentional and thoughtful behavior. It involves the ability to control impulses, such as not drinking alcohol the night before class. It also involves the capacity to do something because it is needed.   Imagine if a student is confronted with the choice of going to a party or studying for a chemistry exam. The student knows that sacrificing time to study and do well on the exam will go far in improving the chances for good grades, while partying may be fun in the short term but will do nothing to achieve the goal to get into medical school. Flash forward to medical school, where every day including weekends is a never ending repeat of sleep, study, eat and more study. During this time, the student watches friends sleep late, go out, have fun. The student is aware, however, that the delaying gratification will result in a successful, respected career. Anything less would be a huge disappointment and the student is focused on the goal.   Doctors are masters at self control and delayed gratification. They could not become physicians without possessing these traits. I argue that a person’s ability to exhibit self control and delayed gratification is not a predetermined trait, but a result of experiences and environmental impact.   Self control can be learned as long as there is trust in the outcome.

A very famous study (Marshmallow Study) by Stanford Professor Walter Mischel found that when preschool children were able to delay gratification by waiting to eat a treat, they grew up to be more successful adults than those children who did not have that level of self control. In this study, done in the 1960’s, Mischel gave the children a treat (a marshmallow, a cookie, a pretzel) and told the children that if they could wait 15 minutes to eat it, they would get an extra treat. After following the children to adulthood, researchers discovered that those children who demonstrated self control were healthier, had more success, and better grades than those children who immediately ate the treat. Psychologists and social scientists realized that emotional intelligence and self control were more important to life success than IQ intelligence.

However, a recent study by Celeste Kidd of the University of Rochester challenges the assumption that self control is a predetermined trait. In her study, she found that trust and confidence in the results of waiting to receive the reward plays a significant role in a person’s ability to delay gratification. The children tested were able to make rational decisions on the probability of reward based on trust. Celeste Kidd was able to manipulate the degree of delayed gratification by introducing reliable and unreliable variables to their experiment.   For example, the first group of children were given a box of crayons, and then stickers, and promised bigger boxes, but these boxes never came. This was the unreliable experience. The second group of children were promised the boxes and then received them. This was the reliable experience. Both groups of children were then offered the marshmallow test. The results of the study were conclusive and strong. Children who had trust in the outcome that they would receive their second treat waited four times longer – 12 minutes versus 3 minutes – than those children who were in unreliable situations. Clearly, children inherit different temperaments and show different behaviors from birth. This study demonstrates, however, that children can make rational decisions based on the environment, and that even the child with natural self restraint will eat the treat immediately if it appears unlikely that they will receive another one later. The children in the reliable environment learned that waiting for the treat works, and they had the ability to wait.

In the article 40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One Quality Are More Likely To Succeed, author James Clear cites Celeste Kidd’s research as proof that environment and trust affect a person’s ability to self control. If there is a goal to be reached, then self discipline and delayed gratification are required, and self control can be learned. The secret is to start small and deliver on it. For example, I know that going to the gym and exercising is good for my health and mental wellbeing, but it is so much easier to stay snuggled in my bed, or go out to eat with friends. So I used some of the tips I learned during my research to teach myself to delay gratification.

1. Start Small. Make it so easy you can’t say no. I promised to exercise one time every week. Soon I was exercising three times a week.
2. Improve Something by 1%. Every day. I do one more rep, or stay 5 minutes longer, or eat one less chicken nugget meal.
3. Consistency. I mark off every day on my wall calendar with a big X and see how far I’ve come. It helps me bounce back from a bad day.
4. The 2 Minute Rule. Don’t procrastinate. Spend 2 minutes on that paper, or homework, or reading that book, or eating that piece of fruit. It’s easier to finish once you get started.

The result is that I have avoided the dreaded “Freshman 15” and I feel healthier. Most importantly, I learned I had the ability to self control, which reinforces my position that self control can be learned and applied. Obviously, I had trust that the outcome would be a healthier, happier me.

To further strengthen my argument, a causal relationship has been found between trust and delaying gratification. A 2013 joint study by researchers from the University of Colorado and Boston University, led by Laura Michaelson, provides the first demonstration of a causal role of social trust in delaying gratification. The researchers manipulated trust while avoiding manipulating of rewards establishing the causal relationship.  The study found that participants dealing with untrustworthy characters were 33% less likely to wait a week for a reward than those participants dealing with trustworthy characters. Clearly, there is an assumption of a future reward in order to do something undesired or unwanted to get that future reward. If the trust in the outcome is non-existent, such as in the homeless community as a whole, then impulsive behavior is more likely. After all, why wait for a reward that you never received in the past? This study emphasizes the role of social trust in the ability to self control, and that delaying gratification does not occur in a social vacuum. It suggests that certain populations such as criminals, youth and homeless might struggle because of their lack of trust that reward will be delivered, and that implementing social trust may address some of the struggles.

Works Cited

“The Marshmallow Study Revisited.” : Rochester News. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

Gannon, By Megan. “Twist on ‘Marshmallow Test’ Shows Environment Affects Self-Control.” LiveScience. TechMedia Network, 11 Oct. 2012. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.

“40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One Quality Are More Likely to Succeed.” 40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One Quality Are More Likely to Succeed. N.p., n.d. Web. 16 Nov. 2015.