It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

10% of college grads believe Judge Judy sits on the Supreme Court

page: 3
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Nope. But I generally recognize the names when they're mentioned.




posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 08:13 AM
link   
a reply to: seagull

Supreme Court




Seated left to right: Justice Clarence Thomas, Justice Antonin Scalia, Chief Justice John G. Roberts, Justice Anthony M. Kennedy, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.

Standing left to right: Justice Sonia Sotomayor, Justice Stephen G. Breyer, Justice Samuel A. Alito, Jr., Justice Elena Kagan.


Looking at that list, I recognize Scalia and Ginsburg. Anyone else, if I had seen their name alone and without reference to the SCOTUS, I wouldn't be able to tell you that they were justices.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 08:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

You're hardly alone in that.

Fifty years ago, people would have been hard pressed to name 'em... There really is nothing new in this, nor, in my not so humble opinion, anything to be sorry about.

Supremes should be somewhat anonymous.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 08:16 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert

What I find even more damning about out country is that almost 80% of adults in this country believe angels are real.

I wonder if that figure holds true for ats membership?



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 09:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

We are not talking about a group of people who merely fail to name a Supreme Court judge, but instead name a television personality. This would be like naming Bill Nye the Science Guy as the last recipient of the Nobel science prize. FYI, it wasn't.

The correct answer, is "I don't know.". That is fine. To respond with not only an incorrect answer, but an entirely ridiculous one, is far worse than admitting to a small amount of ignorance. Also, the fact that I, a British citizen could have named more Supreme Court justices from the States, than ten percent of people going to the university in question, says something terrible about social and political awareness of that ten percent of people surveyed. I would reiterate that going to university should not be the place where one receives an education, but the place where one completes it. Ten percent of the surveyed students have not yet begun to understand even their own nation, and therefore I question the method by which they arrived at university in the first place.

Again, I would like to know what subjects were being read by the individuals who responded in such ill informed fashion.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 09:22 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

What if you didn't know who Judge Judy was?



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: introvert
What I find even more damning about out country is that almost 80% of adults in this country believe angels are real.

What does that tell us?


It tells us that 20% of people just might be wrong and you are part of it. :p



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 09:35 AM
link   
I have no idea who Judge Judy was, I hate TV. If it wasn't for my girlfriend, I wouldn't even have one in the house.

If I was confronted with that same question and offered only 2 choices and not the "I don't know", maybe I would of taken a wild guess and said that yes, she sits on the supreme court.

10% is hardly a big number and is not a factor of stupidity. Maybe other people don't really know who she is and took the wrong guess. As I got more mature, I mostly stopped blamming stupidity for the lack of knowledge.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 10:43 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

What do you mean by "what if you didn't know who Judge Judy was?"?

Do you mean, what would happen if I, personally didn't know who Judge Judy was, or do you mean what if a person in general did not know who they were? And are you asking me what I think it would mean for that person, that they did not have a clue who Judge Judy was?

If you meant the last one of those options, I would say that it depends. If they DID know the actual Supreme Court members, any of them by name, then it would mean that the individual in question had their damned head on straight, and wants as little to do with popular culture as possible, which is an entirely reasonable position to take.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 10:48 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I'm asking what if the person being asked didn't know who Judge Judy is. To me, not being able to name a SCOTUS judge, or misassigning another judge as a SCOTUS judge isn't exactly a damning measure of American civics knowledge. I would say how people who complain that pc culture is taking away their freedom of speech is a MUCH better example of terrible American civics knowledge.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 10:51 AM
link   
Here's the thing about a lot of polls conducted on college campuses - college kids will go out of their way to give bogus ridiculous answers just to mess with the pollsters. When I was in college pollsters would set up in the food courts or in town near the favored drinking establishments. No one ever took the polls serious, mix in polling in a pub and you'll get answers like these.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 10:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: CantStandIt
Just goes to show ya... 'educated' is not always synonomous with 'well-informed'.

Education consist of information that is given to a student that they accepted as fact.

As #xuenchen said, these students likely never saw a Judge Judy show, so they probably chose her name solely on name recognition.

The real tragedy here, is that more attention is given to Hollywood characters of no real consequences, than is given to the characters in this world that do make a huge difference in our lives and futures.

Your can't blame the young ones, we have to carry the banner for that shame.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 10:59 AM
link   
a reply to: introvert

The majority again rules.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

I think that it IS a damning indictment of a persons civics knowledge, when they know nothing of the individuals operating the highest court in the land, given the massive responsibility placed upon members of that court, and the huge power they have, given the scope of the matters with which they deal.

This is not SO bad in regular life, but for anyone who has taken up a university place, to be so unaware of the comings and goings in that realm, should be concerning.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:04 AM
link   
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

The 10% should now be awarded a Blue Ribbon for failure 101.




posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: TrueBrit

I'd be more concerned with them knowing what the SCOTUS does and has jurisdiction over versus who is actually serving on it at any given time.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

Ordinarily speaking, the identity of at least one Supreme Court justice would become known to anyone astute enough to have bothered to find that out, especially if, like a smart person, they had not only sought out a description of the role of the SCOTUS, but case studies and example decisions, outlining how the function of the SCOTUS plays out in real life, and under different Justices, and different political backdrops.

That ten percent though? Nope.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:11 AM
link   
Most people familiar with any SCOTUS judges would be familiar with Scalia or Ginsburg. Well there are 7 other justices on there. I've already stated that I wouldn't be able to name them. I even listed them at the top of this page, and I STILL have to scroll back up to look at them to get their names.



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:12 AM
link   
College really has nothing to do with intelligence any more. Hasn't for quite a while, but looks like it's getting worse. What a waste of time farce.
edit on 1/21/2016 by ItCameFromOuterSpace because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 21 2016 @ 11:17 AM
link   

originally posted by: pl3bscheese
a reply to: seagull

Here's a stupid question. If I ask someone for a couple of bucks back, how much should they give me?

I # you not five different individuals delivering me food in the last couple of months have asked me for clarification how much monies they should give me. Not a single time has the individual known that a couple means two.


That's because language evolves, the precise definition of couple means two but in conversational English it means a small amount, it is much less precise. The person delivering food should further clarify exactly how much you want back, especially since you're likely giving them a bit extra as a tip, which means they have a self interest in shorting you, which means it could cause problems for them if you get ticked off and call their manager.


originally posted by: Krazysh0t
Who in this thread can name all the supreme court judges? I can't.


It took me a couple minutes of thinking about it but
Kennedy, Roberts, Scalia, Soromayer, Kagan, Ginsberg, Thomas, Alito

I missed Breyer, had to look that one up. So, I may not be able to get all 9, but I'm pretty sure I won't fall into the 10% that mistakes a TV personality for a member of the Supreme Court. What I can't do though is identify any of them by their image, I have no idea what any of them look like. It's probably 50/50 if I would recognize Judge Judy without context as well.
edit on 21-1-2016 by Aazadan because: (no reason given)




top topics



 
13
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join