Political views of academics

[TJ in Oregon]

In the engineering world, academia certainly leans to the left, decisively but not overwhelmingly (somewhere between 60-40 and 70-30 I'd guess). Most of the conservative engineers tend to go into industry, and since there are far, far more engineers in industry than academia, those with any engineering degree are overall a Republican demographic.

The most liberal field is probably gender studies, which I suspect votes about 100-0.

[TJ in Oregon]

In the engineering world, academia certainly leans to the left, decisively but not overwhelmingly (somewhere between 60-40 and 70-30 I'd guess). Most of the conservative engineers tend to go into industry, and since there are far, far more engineers in industry than academia, those with any engineering degree are overall a Republican demographic.

The most liberal field is probably gender studies, which I suspect votes about 100-0.

I think that might be the main reason why academia leans to the left. Left-wingers tend to stay in after graduating while more conservatives and Republicans go into an industry, whether it is in their field of study or not.

This is true.  Personality-wise, liberals on average are more likely to see education as an end in and of itself, whereas conservatives tend to see education as a means toward getting a job and securing a livelihood.  For conservatives that are more "intellectual" (I hate this term because of how loaded it's become), many are more likely to gravitate toward think tanks where they'd encounter less ideological opposition. 

This is one of those things that's clearly true but very odd about American politics/society if you stop to think about it. On one hand, you have the stereotype of the academic sitting in his ivory tower thinking about some arcane abstract theory with very limited relationship to the common man outside on the ground vs. the practical but theoretically illiterate private sector: "I'm going into industry because I want to accomplish something in my life", etc.

But on the other hand, the moment we start to talk about philosophy or ethics the roles are suddenly reversed (stereotypically of course) where you have the more conservative private sector man, permitted to keep his opiate of the masses that tells him something about personal behaviors that are immoral even if he falls short and no one gets hurt. Meanwhile the academic in his ivory tower does not accept such idealism in ethics and instead subscribes to a consequentialist ethic that the common man can handle rather than some "unrealistic expectation of human behavior". Here the academic suddenly becomes practical rather than theoretical.

[TJ in Oregon]

In academia it seems to me that fields like Socialogy are virtually 100% left-leaning. Psychology also, though psychiatrists might be slightly more conservative, philosophy is probably left-leaning as well. I think that your most likely to find conservatives in History and Economics departments.

Ask those loons what the job placement percentage is of students they teach.  They won't care because all that matters to them is that 100% of their students vote Democrat.  I'm talking about you. 

It is worth pointing out that professors are liberal even in employable fields; just from a few off-the-cuff statements, I can tell my CS professor is very left-leaning, for instance.

Virtually everything touched by academia exudes liberalism, but CS is typically one of the most liberal engineering fields (if you consider it one). It's certainly more liberal than chemical, mechanical, or civil engineering.

Professors in every field will be mostly liberal since they are creatures of academia. In particular, the are reliant on government grants for research funding, (if it's a public school) their paycheck is up to the budgetary decisions of the state legislature and governor, and they've spent pretty much their entire life since high school surrounded by liberals. On the flip side, one can be a conservative in academia in hard science fields without facing a ton of outright pressure from their peers since the subject isn't terribly political. So the net result ends up being circa 4:1 D:R for the professors in those fields.

[TJ in Oregon]

For the record, my chapter's faculty adviser is a civil engineering professor who seems to be at least centrist, likely center-right to an extent. Churchgoer. Said he's okay with Snyder.

I suspect (though I have no data to defend it) that engineering professors at Catholic schools are probably more conservative. I'd guess it's a mix of people who took it because it was a good job and people who prefer to work at a Catholic school.

When I was doing grad school visits, I visited a Catholic school where one of the professors had recently left a highly ranked program (at which he had long been tenured) to go to the Catholic school. I met with him and asked him why he switched and he told me that he thought there should be top-notch non-secular research institutions and wanted to work for one. That's not to say anything abut his political views (I have no idea) or even what his religious affiliation is beyond the implication that he has one and values it. But that does say something.

[TJ in Oregon]

He's not Catholic, to my knowledge, but he has spent time in "industry" which may be an important contributing factor.

You do find the occasional good Protestant who works at a Catholic school because he prefers the nominally religious environment to a completely secular one and at least has some vague hope that the school has a beneficent goal in there somewhere. It was a common joke about the Theology department at one notable Catholic school (I can't remember which) that they only have one real Catholic professor and she's a Lutheran.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Most of America's elite Catholic Universities have long since ceased to be dependably Catholic. You can find a Thomist here and there if you look (you can occasionally even find Thomists in secular school philosophy departments if you look hard enough), but many others are rather liberal ("liberal" in this case meaning disagrees with the Church's teaching on ___ and wants to teach that way). Certain of them do make some effort to follow the Church's teachings, such as Villanova (their website is refreshingly good), Catholic University of America, and occasionally Notre Dame. But yes, the idea of the university as a place devoted to finding the truth and serving Christ is a little removed from the current modern reality.

It seems the Catholic universities find themselves in something of a bind when making decisions between being on the cutting edge of their fields and being Catholic. If they hire a professor with academic pedigree from a secular university that professor may not agree with the Church's teachings on ___. Or they can go the Catholic route but their rankings might not be the best. In contrast to the elite schools, there are a few smaller Catholic schools such as Franciscan Univ in Steubenville, Ave Maria,  and Wyoming Catholic College (Going there would be awesome!!) who went the latter route.

[TJ in Oregon]

I agree that government funding is a big reason why professors lean Dem,  but I suspect religiosity is also a big reason.  Not a single professor goes to my church, whereas about 100 students go at least occasionally.  It seems most are irreligious and those who do go would attend Jewish or liberal Protestant services mostly.

It isn't unusual at all for faculty to avoid a church where students go and that doesn't necessarily mean they don't go to church. Lots of people in a college town want to stay away from the undergrads or feel institutions with undergrads aren't catered toward them.

College faculty are still less religious than most Americans regardless. I also agree that this is a major factor behind their politics. But why are they less religious than most Americans? Is it, as some here might suggest, that once people are more educated they look past the rudimentary myths and superstitions that common folk adhere to such as religion? Are they further along the arc of social progress that includes secularization? Is it due to the perceived conflict between science and religion with intellectuals choosing the former? Is it because the academe are more likely to have asked questions on the subject and therefore are more likely to hold unpopular views? Is it because professors have less empathy (statistically) than most Americans and empathy is correlated with religiosity?