I swear to god libtards are slowly taking over my school...

I swear to god libtards are slowly taking over my school, English teacher is goddamned radical feminist and now i have to deal with this shit as well.

>be me
>be in school
>doing a IT test
>evaluating whether or not a statement is biased
> "Donald trump will offer a non biased opinion on immigration "
>i write down true
>few days later
>get test back
>find that teacher marked my test as false
>wtf.jpg
>turns out the faggot is Canadian
>also a libtard

what do?

i can also post the test and answer sheet if you need proof

Other urls found in this thread:

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

The statement doesn't conform to a truth table. It is neither true nor false until proven one way or the other. As he is still offering opinions, there cannot be a sufficient sample size to extrapolate from as the statement is worded.

Let's see it.

Report that bitch.

Report the brainwashed bitch.

posting test

You gotta report him, the question is subjective.

I'm a libtard and even I know that's a heinous fucking question. Teachers shouldn't be spouting their opinions in the class room.

...

Donald Trump bases his opinions on either Fox News, rumors, commercials, or he makes shit up himself. Of course he's biased.

Who gives a shit? Cry about it on Sup Forums, faggot.

Do not give the feminist lunatics any space in your school. Do not be a cuck. Report him at once. That's a question which doesn't have a definite answer and therefore it should not have been in the test.

/thread

>what do?

make america great again rather then discussing this on a rational lvl go buy a gun and shoot up some ppls in your school obv.

deal with the fact that you are wrong. Whatever your opinion is on Trump he is the most biased man in the world on the subject.

...

agreed, pics or it didn't happen.

I'd really like to see that pic

Wait a sec.
>>evaluating whether or not a statement is biased
>> "Donald trump will offer a non biased opinion on immigration "
Looks like an attention trick. The statement itself cannot be biased or not, it simply states an opinion with the word "biased" in it. Though it is subjective anyway as an opinion can be biased or not anyway. No fucking way you can tell the answer without knowing who stated that anyway.

It doesn't even matter if your teacher is trying to spout her political stance on you, she's a shit metodologist anyway and cannot come up with a sensible test plan. I say report her.

Bait or not, I'm replying because I'm bored.
The Don does offer a biased opinion on immigration.
But it's not his opinion that matters, it's a matter of will or won't or if it's moral or immoral.

Blocking immigration to Muslims is not immoral, especially not immoral when you're a leader. If leaders had to contemplate on what is the morality of any decision, then no decision will be made, no decision is not just the wrong choice, it's the worst choice.

Your English teacher clearly is trying to subtlety subvert your classroom to being liberal, and on top of this, it's an English subject, not civics.

Course of action? Report it to your school's administration office.

...

...

...

Few things,

1) Teachers shouldn't bring politics into their curriculum unless it's a politics course.

2) No matter your political views, that's definitely false. Even if you agree with him, you can quite clearly tell that his stances on immigration are similar to those of the Republican Party. No shit it's biased.

3) Don't mix in your personal beliefs with facts that go against those beliefs. That's where conflicts arise.

OP, I think this may be a simple vocabulary trick.

"Non-biased" implies up to, and including, "factual", but because it modifies "opinion" rather than a more precise term, the statement is logically false.

It would be no different than saying "Donald Trump will offer a fact-based opinion on immigration". That simply is not possible. "Opinions" are not fact-based in the strictest sense, only "conclusions", "evaluations", and similarly technical terms would make your answer correct.

Part of the trickiness lies in the colloquial tendency to merge these words together under the umbrella of "opinion".

teach is lousy at polemics figures
figures on immigration are deliberatly concealed,that owes to us officials FORBIDDEN to ask citizen status at our borders,census questionnaires had no qs on the citizen status if respondees, IDS not required to vote,our post office merely delivers ballots in early voting to adressees, the post office has become the seal of approval for fraud voting.
tell your perfessercucker he takes it from water buffalo he is an ignoramus belongs driving a bus or clerking at a 711

so basically my IT teacher is a tricky bastard

>what do?

maybe just stop being such a sexist racist person and they won't bother you

More or less, that appears to be the case. As a rhetorician, this is a common method to teach students to think about logical equivalencies rather than the content of the sentence proper. I find errors like these all the time in papers, including those having been peer-reviewed.

It may be that your teacher is biased in some regard, but in terms of actual logic, (s)he is correct. However, I personally would not use such a topical example to teach students these types of logical nuance.

why the fuck cant people like you teach my English classes, my English teacher lectures us about fucking wage gaps, despite their non existence

Did someone forget to take their meds today?

But, he does a goddamn religion test for acceptance. So, you are not only wrong, but a goddamn failure as a human being.

Lmao, my school has safe spaces.

Your legit retarded.... how the fuck can it be non biased if it's your fucking OPINION....

Wew, American education wtf

goddamn do you write beautifully. i could read analysis like yours all day.

The answer is in the sentence you fucking dipshit. "Opinion" implies bias you dumb fuck.

>>doing a IT test
wtf does IT stand for in this context? I'm used to it referring to Information Technology, but it seems like this is some kind of English class.

But you said "doing a IT test"
>"a IT test"
You mean an. And you wonder why you got the question wrong.

basically instead of doing anything to do with computers, we're currently doing a bunch of theory work dealing with data collection. Trying to discredit my intelligence by cherry picking your arguments via a grammatical error is a clear fallacy.

Well, when was the last time you saw a majority students (other than pre-law majors) engaged in understanding subtle logical nuances and rhetorical strategies?

Foundations of logic and rhetoric can appear dry to students who are unwilling to learn the fundamentals. Who would want to take a boring class in rhetoric when other English classes offer the same credit for less work and greater hours to spend doing something more fun?

I appreciate your comment. Precision and concision in language are crucial in meaningfully understanding and illustrating the functions of logical arguments and rhetorical strategies. Even I avoid dense and dry prose when possible, in both reading and writing.

That's sadly true, thanks for not being a faggot and posting something useful.

my state is a liberal state, i said i supported trump and i got shunned forever at school

Isn't funny how Conservatives were the ones who started the whole "Political Correctness" thing back in the 1980's and now they are all acting like it is a big Liberal problem? The friggin Religious Right was all insulted by Video Games and TV shows. Now they are complaining about the problem THEY FUCKING CAUSED! Make up your uneducated minds you stinking religious fucks!

haha like you had friends to begin with? nobody likes you faggot

>political correctness started with Jack Thompson
Nigger, maybe you should read something before spewing your uninformed opinion like some sort of mouth diarrhea.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_correctness
>In the early-to-mid 20th century, the phrase "politically correct" was associated with the dogmatic application of Stalinist doctrine, debated between Communist Party members and American Socialists. This usage referred to the Communist party line, which provided "correct" positions on many political matters. According to American educator Herbert Kohl, writing about debates in New York in the late 1940s and early 1950s,

>The term "politically correct" was used disparagingly, to refer to someone whose loyalty to the CP line overrode compassion, and led to bad politics. It was used by Socialists against Communists, and was meant to separate out Socialists who believed in egalitarian moral ideas from dogmatic Communists who would advocate and defend party positions regardless of their moral substance.

— "Uncommon Differences", The Lion and the Unicorn Journal[4]
>In March 1968, the French philosopher Michel Foucault is quoted as saying: "a political thought can be politically correct ('politiquement correcte') only if it is scientifically painstaking", referring to leftist intellectuals attempting to make Marxism scientifically rigorous rather than relying on orthodoxy.[31]