Reply to Turns out, Harvard students aren’t that smart after all

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Turns out, Harvard students aren’t that smart after all"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Entitlement is when you are less qualified and feel you have to bring in non-merit characteristics to demand you be admitted.
[/quote]

"non-merit characteristics".  Why do you get to decide what constitutes merit to Harvard?

That, right there, is my definition of "entitlement".[/quote]

DP  Because being a particular race inherently has no merit.
[/quote]

Then being a relatively mediocre athlete or the kid of an alum has no merit either. [/quote]

No, an athlete has demonstrated merit and adding the descriptor “relatively mediocre (dreadful grammar BTW)” isn’t relevant as the PP’s point addressed the idea of non-merit characteristics. One could also argue that being a legacy applicant has some merit in that it increases alumni engagement which leads to an increase in donations which benefit all students.[/quote]

and this is how white people twist themselves into logical contortions to justify their advantages.

first, regarding legacies, their only 'merit' is who their parents are. that is no different than a URM. and the tie between legacy admits and donations is speculative on your part.

[b]Regarding athletes, we're talking about college and not a sports team, so what does being an athlete have to do with anything? [/b]

but, even accepting that, we're also talking about harvard. their sports teams, in almost all cases, are subpar compared to other universities. the typical harvard recruit wouldn't make the team at another college. Put more simply, being recruited to play football at harvard makes you roughly the 1000th best football player in the country for your year. How is this 'merit'?

you don't like the term 'relatively mediocre"?  I was trying to be kind. How about shitty instead? In every other discipline, whether it be the arts, science, music, etc. Harvard expects a student to be the very top of their peer group (they literally rank kids on extracurriculars with the question - do you have national recognition?). Only in athletics does Harvard reward poor performance.[/quote]

Are you from the US? Just because you don think they are important doesn't mean that college sports matter to students and alumni. Even at an Ivy, more students will turn out for a rivalry game that any academic event and more alumni will care about who won The Game than anything else that will happen on campus. [/quote]

i am. the number of students who attend one rivalry game in one sport doesn't justify anything. besides, if that's your justification for athletes, then limit it to the few sports and everyone else fends for themselves.

I would also think plenty of alumni and prospective students want to support or attend a college with racial and ethnic diversity. So if that's your standard, it's fine too.

Look, I think Harvard and other schools should be able to take students based on URM, first gen, legacy, athletics, etc. My problem is people who try to draw artificial distinctions between these things. and say this one is justified and this one isn't. They're either all good or all bad.[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics