New study on relative impact of Harvard Admissions Preferences

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

You point is a great one -- but it works totally against your position.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

You point is a great one -- but it works totally against your position.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

So if I ran a sports team, a team where it really helps the talented people in the community to have access to it, and then I turned away people from races x and y because I told them "sorry, I'm only interested in people of race z now" and went to get more people from race z who were nowhere near as good as the ones I turned away, just because it's my "mission" to have that many people from race z there.... you'd be okay with that?

I think the only way that would be remotely reasonable is if I didn't claim that my team was a meritocracy or that admission was based on talent, and instead called it the "rainbow team" or some such and made it very clear to everyone involved that the team's mission is primarily about racial exposure, like so each race can be exposed to a representative sample of the other races as they would find in the entire USA. And playing the sport is something we do while there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

You point is a great one -- but it works totally against your position.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

So if I ran a sports team, a team where it really helps the talented people in the community to have access to it, and then I turned away people from races x and y because I told them "sorry, I'm only interested in people of race z now" and went to get more people from race z who were nowhere near as good as the ones I turned away, just because it's my "mission" to have that many people from race z there.... you'd be okay with that?

I think the only way that would be remotely reasonable is if I didn't claim that my team was a meritocracy or that admission was based on talent, and instead called it the "rainbow team" or some such and made it very clear to everyone involved that the team's mission is primarily about racial exposure, like so each race can be exposed to a representative sample of the other races as they would find in the entire USA. And playing the sport is something we do while there.

No one is claiming anymore that it's a meritocracy are they? Unqualified athletes and legacies getting in lay waste to that claim.

If it's your team to run, do what you want. It's Harvard's class, they do what they want.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

You point is a great one -- but it works totally against your position.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

So if I ran a sports team, a team where it really helps the talented people in the community to have access to it, and then I turned away people from races x and y because I told them "sorry, I'm only interested in people of race z now" and went to get more people from race z who were nowhere near as good as the ones I turned away, just because it's my "mission" to have that many people from race z there.... you'd be okay with that?

I think the only way that would be remotely reasonable is if I didn't claim that my team was a meritocracy or that admission was based on talent, and instead called it the "rainbow team" or some such and made it very clear to everyone involved that the team's mission is primarily about racial exposure, like so each race can be exposed to a representative sample of the other races as they would find in the entire USA. And playing the sport is something we do while there.

You can certainly do what you want with your team.

Harvard does not claim to be an academics-only institution. Here’s what they say their mission is:

“The mission of Harvard College is to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders for our society. We do this through our commitment to the transformative power of a liberal arts and sciences education.“ from the Harvard website.

Note the term citizen-leaders. Harvard wants a portion of their students to graduate and serve as leaders in the future- and leadership has many aspects to it, which go beyond academic accomplishment. Leaders need to be able to interact with people from many walks of life, so it is important for a school like Harvard to admit students as many different types of backgrounds as possible.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

You point is a great one -- but it works totally against your position.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

So if I ran a sports team, a team where it really helps the talented people in the community to have access to it, and then I turned away people from races x and y because I told them "sorry, I'm only interested in people of race z now" and went to get more people from race z who were nowhere near as good as the ones I turned away, just because it's my "mission" to have that many people from race z there.... you'd be okay with that?

I think the only way that would be remotely reasonable is if I didn't claim that my team was a meritocracy or that admission was based on talent, and instead called it the "rainbow team" or some such and made it very clear to everyone involved that the team's mission is primarily about racial exposure, like so each race can be exposed to a representative sample of the other races as they would find in the entire USA. And playing the sport is something we do while there.

You can certainly do what you want with your team.

Harvard does not claim to be an academics-only institution. Here’s what they say their mission is:

“The mission of Harvard College is to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders for our society. We do this through our commitment to the transformative power of a liberal arts and sciences education.“ from the Harvard website.

Note the term citizen-leaders. Harvard wants a portion of their students to graduate and serve as leaders in the future- and leadership has many aspects to it, which go beyond academic accomplishment. Leaders need to be able to interact with people from many walks of life, so it is important for a school like Harvard to admit students as many different types of backgrounds as possible.

Citizen-leaders of the future need to be well-travelled and speak fluently two languages at least.

So, starting tomorrow, Harvard should start using those criteria to filter applicants, instead of skin color, and I'm sure they can count on your full support!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Fascinating.

So, the best way to help Asian Americans who, as you say, have been subject to much injustice in the past...is to discriminate AGAINST them in college admissions?

This is beyond absurd. It's plain obscene.

Again, many people are arguing based on an incorrect premise.

Racial balance in college admissions is not designed to hurt of help any one race.

Racial balance in college admissions is designed to help colleges better achieve their mission.

Past injustices, while horrible and possibly worthy of social correction, are completely irrelevant to this topic, and to insist they are indicates you do not understand.

Well you can definitely count me in as a person who also finds it fascinating. I haven't heard a single reason - reasonable or otherwise - for such blatant discrimination yet.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Saying that it's a "mission" is the exact same thing as saying "because I want to". It's not a reason. It's not a justification. It's not a defense against racism. Not when the stakes are so high here.

You point is a great one -- but it works totally against your position.

What if I went through life, avoiding people of a certain race even when I have a lot of power over them and it really hurts them for me to do so, and then I just claimed, "oh it's not discrimination or illegal in the slightest, I just have a mission to not interact with people from x race, and that's what I'm doing." Would that be okay with you?

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

So if I ran a sports team, a team where it really helps the talented people in the community to have access to it, and then I turned away people from races x and y because I told them "sorry, I'm only interested in people of race z now" and went to get more people from race z who were nowhere near as good as the ones I turned away, just because it's my "mission" to have that many people from race z there.... you'd be okay with that?

I think the only way that would be remotely reasonable is if I didn't claim that my team was a meritocracy or that admission was based on talent, and instead called it the "rainbow team" or some such and made it very clear to everyone involved that the team's mission is primarily about racial exposure, like so each race can be exposed to a representative sample of the other races as they would find in the entire USA. And playing the sport is something we do while there.

You can certainly do what you want with your team.

Harvard does not claim to be an academics-only institution. Here’s what they say their mission is:

“The mission of Harvard College is to educate the citizens and citizen-leaders for our society. We do this through our commitment to the transformative power of a liberal arts and sciences education.“ from the Harvard website.

Note the term citizen-leaders. Harvard wants a portion of their students to graduate and serve as leaders in the future- and leadership has many aspects to it, which go beyond academic accomplishment. Leaders need to be able to interact with people from many walks of life, so it is important for a school like Harvard to admit students as many different types of backgrounds as possible.

Citizen-leaders of the future need to be well-travelled and speak fluently two languages at least.

So, starting tomorrow, Harvard should start using those criteria to filter applicants, instead of skin color, and I'm sure they can count on your full support!

There are many different abilities leaders can have. Being well-traveled and speaking different languages can definitely be useful, as can many other qualities. Harvard most likely already does give extra points for those attributes, as they do for other aspects of an application.

Any applicant that can show the ability to spend many hours every day in a non-academic activity while achieving highly in academics is a young person schools like Harvard are interested in. Young people who are highly accomplished in academics plus another field have a lot to offer a school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Its seems like you are arguing for racial balance.

That's what colleges feel they need -- a balance of ALL races that reflects the population of the country so that students of all races can be comfortable and want to attend and the colleges can attract as many students as possible.

It's not racism because it benefits all races, (such as an Asian applicant at Notre Dame or Grinnell, a black student at Harvard or Middlebury a white student at Spelman or Morehouse) even though it may make it harder for certain students at certain schools.

So if I ran a sports team, a team where it really helps the talented people in the community to have access to it, and then I turned away people from races x and y because I told them "sorry, I'm only interested in people of race z now" and went to get more people from race z who were nowhere near as good as the ones I turned away, just because it's my "mission" to have that many people from race z there.... you'd be okay with that?

I think the only way that would be remotely reasonable is if I didn't claim that my team was a meritocracy or that admission was based on talent, and instead called it the "rainbow team" or some such and made it very clear to everyone involved that the team's mission is primarily about racial exposure, like so each race can be exposed to a representative sample of the other races as they would find in the entire USA. And playing the sport is something we do while there.

Incredibly silly example which has no bearing, but I will try to respond anyway.

If your sports team was made better by having a racial balance that reflected the population and was not biased against any specific race or races, then yes, I would think that was OK. But of course, that is impossible on a sports team, but it is reality on a college campus.

It's clear you continue to fail to grasp that the colleges feel racial balance makes them better and helps them better accomplish their mission. It's not ideological. Why is that? Why can't you understand that point, despite it being made many times?

[Anonymous]

I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

Read the data. They’re higher rated on academic and extracurricular ratings. What do you mean by merit? The ability to throw a lacrosse ball?

If you don’t think Asian american applicants are disadvantaged in the process vis a vis all other groups then there is no point to trying to convince you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

Read the data. They’re higher rated on academic and extracurricular ratings. What do you mean by merit? The ability to throw a lacrosse ball?

If you don’t think Asian american applicants are disadvantaged in the process vis a vis all other groups then there is no point to trying to convince you.

At all colleges?

Please answer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

Read the data. They’re higher rated on academic and extracurricular ratings. What do you mean by merit? The ability to throw a lacrosse ball?

If you don’t think Asian american applicants are disadvantaged in the process vis a vis all other groups then there is no point to trying to convince you.

At all colleges?

Please answer.

At Harvard and other sub 10% schools - the title of thread should be a clue for you

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

Read the data. They’re higher rated on academic and extracurricular ratings. What do you mean by merit? The ability to throw a lacrosse ball?

If you don’t think Asian american applicants are disadvantaged in the process vis a vis all other groups then there is no point to trying to convince you.

At all colleges?

Please answer.

At Harvard and other sub 10% schools - the title of thread should be a clue for you

Ah, so its only a handful of colleges affecting a few hundred students, and for this you want to make it more difficult for thousands of students at all other colleges (including many, many other Asian students). Makes perfect sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

Read the data. They’re higher rated on academic and extracurricular ratings. What do you mean by merit? The ability to throw a lacrosse ball?

If you don’t think Asian american applicants are disadvantaged in the process vis a vis all other groups then there is no point to trying to convince you.

At all colleges?

Please answer.

At Harvard and other sub 10% schools - the title of thread should be a clue for you

Ah, so its only a handful of colleges affecting a few hundred students, and for this you want to make it more difficult for thousands of students at all other colleges (including many, many other Asian students). Makes perfect sense.

You’ve completely lost me at this point. I’m not even sure what we are arguing about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I believe the reason this person does not accept your point is that they are 1) Asian American who believes they are being discriminated against, and 2) believe “merit” = “test scores.” Prove me wrong.

Read the data. They’re higher rated on academic and extracurricular ratings. What do you mean by merit? The ability to throw a lacrosse ball?

If you don’t think Asian american applicants are disadvantaged in the process vis a vis all other groups then there is no point to trying to convince you.

At all colleges?

Please answer.

At Harvard and other sub 10% schools - the title of thread should be a clue for you

Ah, so its only a handful of colleges affecting a few hundred students, and for this you want to make it more difficult for thousands of students at all other colleges (including many, many other Asian students). Makes perfect sense.

You’ve completely lost me at this point. I’m not even sure what we are arguing about.

Yes, your lack of understanding is painfully apparent.