Shelia Jackson Lee Insane Eclipse Comments

[Sun_Worshiper]

[. . .]

To your second point, is it Yale's fault that one of their graduates is ignorant about space? Lots of well educated people are ignorant about lots of things.

[. . . ]

Given the words coming out of her mouth, she's not well-educated, she's just plain dumb. Or stupid. Or cognitively impaired. Whatever term you want to use. It's Yale's fault for admitting her, or, barring that, letting her graduate. Same for UVA Law.

Eh, maybe she was a great student, writes well, argues well, studied hard at the topics that she specializes in. Someone can be very good at one set of things - good enough to graduate from a top school, while being utterly ignorant about some other things. I know quite a few professors like this, as I imagine we all do. She was a political science student at Yale - should the professors in her political science department have failed her over her command of physics or astronomy?

I'm not really wanting to defend this woman. I had never heard of her until yesterday - maybe she is really not bright. But people calling her cognitively impaired or functionally illiterate based on being ignorant about the composition of the moon might want to take a deep breath, as may folks indicting Yale for her having studied there in the 1970s.

I'm not as old as she is, so maybe her elementary schooling was different from mine, but I did learn simple facts about the natural world like "the moon is made of rock," "the moon does not emit light," and "the moon is not a star" in 3rd grade. These are not advanced concepts in astronomy or physics that require Ph.D. level-study to understand. As for the fields of political science and law, they reputedly place a very high value on the ability to communicate effectively. She fails on that criteria also, given past public remarks.

If I had a student who expressed the same ignorance of the world with the same cadence, syntax, and vocabulary, I'd be asking if the student was illiterate or on drugs.

Perhaps this is further evidence that not all H-Y-P graduates, or law school graduates, are as smart as people assume they are. And as alluded to upthread, it's probably also an indicator of just how dumb many U.S. voters are.

The bolded is certainly true. But of course, attending and graduating from a top school is more about being good at studying, writing, presenting, etc., then it is about knowing facts. And a lot of folks forget specific things that they learned in school over 50 or 60 years.

And, more generally, a person can be ignorant about a certain topic, yet still quite capable and even brilliant in other areas (again, I'm not saying that this is the case of this woman, just making a general point). I know someone who is so brilliant in their particular area of study, yet their knowledge of basic concepts in some other areas are mind bogglingly poor. This person is far from functionally illiterate or cognitively impaired, they are just painfully ignorant about something that most of us would consider basic. And they are incredibly well educated on the main topics of importance to their professional life.

[dismalist]

[. . .]

To your second point, is it Yale's fault that one of their graduates is ignorant about space? Lots of well educated people are ignorant about lots of things.

[. . . ]

Given the words coming out of her mouth, she's not well-educated, she's just plain dumb. Or stupid. Or cognitively impaired. Whatever term you want to use. It's Yale's fault for admitting her, or, barring that, letting her graduate. Same for UVA Law.

Eh, maybe she was a great student, writes well, argues well, studied hard at the topics that she specializes in. Someone can be very good at one set of things - good enough to graduate from a top school, while being utterly ignorant about some other things. I know quite a few professors like this, as I imagine we all do. She was a political science student at Yale - should the professors in her political science department have failed her over her command of physics or astronomy?

I'm not really wanting to defend this woman. I had never heard of her until yesterday - maybe she is really not bright. But people calling her cognitively impaired or functionally illiterate based on being ignorant about the composition of the moon might want to take a deep breath, as may folks indicting Yale for her having studied there in the 1970s.

I'm not as old as she is, so maybe her elementary schooling was different from mine, but I did learn simple facts about the natural world like "the moon is made of rock," "the moon does not emit light," and "the moon is not a star" in 3rd grade. These are not advanced concepts in astronomy or physics that require Ph.D. level-study to understand. As for the fields of political science and law, they reputedly place a very high value on the ability to communicate effectively. She fails on that criteria also, given past public remarks.

If I had a student who expressed the same ignorance of the world with the same cadence, syntax, and vocabulary, I'd be asking if the student was illiterate or on drugs.

Perhaps this is further evidence that not all H-Y-P graduates, or law school graduates, are as smart as people assume they are. And as alluded to upthread, it's probably also an indicator of just how dumb many U.S. voters are.

It's not that many voters are dumb, it's that all are rationally ignorant. The probability that any one vote can determine the outcome of an election is effectively zero. So why invest in studying the issues and getting informed? Political parties know this, so they appeal to emotions rather than analysis or arguments about substance. At the moment, appeal to tribe is the way to go! The person to be elected -- presidential candidates aside -- doesn't matter much.

[Wahoo Redux]

I find it very hard to believe that Jackson thought the moon was a gaseous planet which produces heat.  That's crazy, even for the most uneducated person.  Her garbled syntax on top of this is a matter of cognitive difficulties, I am betting. She probably should not be in office.

Generalized comments on academics who seldom venture outside their discipline or the state of education, sure, they make sense, but I don't think they are applicable here.

[dlehman]

So, apparently she claims that she meant the sun, not the moon.  I tend to believe she isn't quite as stupid as the discussion thus far treats her.  Mixing up "sun" and "moon" is akin to the many misspeaks we've heard from Biden and Trump.  Perhaps the real story should be how ignorant our entire political system is - that I could go along with.  But I think this focus on Sheila Jackson Lee's comments are cheap shots. People say things that are wrong and walk back all the time - why is nobody addressing her response to the ridicule?