Caltech. The end.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

Folks, both UC Berkeley and UC are amazing and intellectual places.

If only we had dozens more like them.

No, we don’t need more colleges like UChicago where profs’ calling African-American students the “N” word in the name of diversity of thought. And No, we don’t need more places like UChicago where profs can express their disapproval of their women colleagues by shitting and sending their shit to them in the name of freedom of expression.

You are a dumb hater, please go back to your cave.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

<100 nobels make UChicago “intellectual” yet >100 makes Berkeley not intellectual? What kind of math is that where less is greater? And do you truly believe a ghetto UChicago professor calling his paying African-American students in his classroom the N word an expression of diverse ideas and freedom of speech and thought? Stfu.

Love how you just told me to Stfu. Way to prove my point on Berkeley being intolerant of diverse ideas.

Also next time try reading for comprehension instead of just having a knee-jerk attempt to silence others. It's intellectually lazy. It's also a logical fallacy to take one incident and apply it to the whole. We all can come up with examples that run counter to the norm.

One of the architects of the Chicago Principles is Geoffrey Stone, the idiot who kept calling his African African students in his classroom the N-word. Stone has since changed his mind about the Chicago Principle. He became a changed man, having seen the light... When he was a lost soul though, he was not an anomaly. His academic freedom of expression was backed by UChicago.

And about the distinguiahed UChicago prof Brian Leiter and his penchant for exercising his freedom of expression by taking a dump and sending his shit to women colleagues who dare to disagreed with him... well, let’s just say he’s in a good place at UChicago.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

<100 nobels make UChicago “intellectual” yet >100 makes Berkeley not intellectual? What kind of math is that where less is greater? And do you truly believe a ghetto UChicago professor calling his paying African-American students in his classroom the N word an expression of diverse ideas and freedom of speech and thought? Stfu.

Love how you just told me to Stfu. Way to prove my point on Berkeley being intolerant of diverse ideas.

Also next time try reading for comprehension instead of just having a knee-jerk attempt to silence others. It's intellectually lazy. It's also a logical fallacy to take one incident and apply it to the whole. We all can come up with examples that run counter to the norm.

Claremont McKenna is up there.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

Folks, both UC Berkeley and UC are amazing and intellectual places.

If only we had dozens more like them.

No, we don’t need more colleges like UChicago where profs’ calling African-American students the “N” word in the name of diversity of thought. And No, we don’t need more places like UChicago where profs can express their disapproval of their women colleagues by shitting and sending their shit to them in the name of freedom of expression.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, these “histories” of Oxford, Cambridge, a few Ivies, and the relationships among them are off in so many ways. Not the least of which involve the complete failure to mention their role in reproducing/fostering ties among social elites and the early American colleges role in providing clergy (and less than successful attempts to Christianize native peoples).

But, yeah, today’s Oxbridge and HYPS have very different approaches to undergrad education. Then again, there are different ways of being intellectual. And most undergrads at any of these institutions neither are nor aspire to be intellectuals. Many faculty do.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say in your first paragraph.

As for the second, the two sets of schools draw from the same group of students in the respective two countries and even compete for the same graduate students at certain levels. I'm confident you haven't been a student at either. What is puzzling to me is how you seem particularly angry at comparing the American liberal arts tradition with Oxbridge.

You’re conflating 2 different posters (maybe more). I’ve said nothing about liberal arts. And, yeah, it’s obvious you don’t understand what I’m saying in the first paragraph. That’s why I felt the need to say it. Colleges in (what would become) the UK or the US were never primarily about intellectual life.

FWIW, both of my degrees (AB/PhD) are from schools named in this post. So your confidence is misplaced.

I think they were saying your writing wasn't clear.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wow, these “histories” of Oxford, Cambridge, a few Ivies, and the relationships among them are off in so many ways. Not the least of which involve the complete failure to mention their role in reproducing/fostering ties among social elites and the early American colleges role in providing clergy (and less than successful attempts to Christianize native peoples).

But, yeah, today’s Oxbridge and HYPS have very different approaches to undergrad education. Then again, there are different ways of being intellectual. And most undergrads at any of these institutions neither are nor aspire to be intellectuals. Many faculty do.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say in your first paragraph.

As for the second, the two sets of schools draw from the same group of students in the respective two countries and even compete for the same graduate students at certain levels. I'm confident you haven't been a student at either. What is puzzling to me is how you seem particularly angry at comparing the American liberal arts tradition with Oxbridge.

You’re conflating 2 different posters (maybe more). I’ve said nothing about liberal arts. And, yeah, it’s obvious you don’t understand what I’m saying in the first paragraph. That’s why I felt the need to say it. Colleges in (what would become) the UK or the US were never primarily about intellectual life.

FWIW, both of my degrees (AB/PhD) are from schools named in this post. So your confidence is misplaced.

Anonymous wrote:Wow, these “histories” of Oxford, Cambridge, a few Ivies, and the relationships among them are off in so many ways. Not the least of which involve the complete failure to mention their role in reproducing/fostering ties among social elites and the early American colleges role in providing clergy (and less than successful attempts to Christianize native peoples).

But, yeah, today’s Oxbridge and HYPS have very different approaches to undergrad education. Then again, there are different ways of being intellectual. And most undergrads at any of these institutions neither are nor aspire to be intellectuals. Many faculty do.

I'm not quite sure what you're trying to say in your first paragraph.

As for the second, the two sets of schools draw from the same group of students in the respective two countries and even compete for the same graduate students at certain levels. I'm confident you haven't been a student at either. What is puzzling to me is how you seem particularly angry at comparing the American liberal arts tradition with Oxbridge.

Wow, these “histories” of Oxford, Cambridge, a few Ivies, and the relationships among them are off in so many ways. Not the least of which involve the complete failure to mention their role in reproducing/fostering ties among social elites and the early American colleges role in providing clergy (and less than successful attempts to Christianize native peoples).

But, yeah, today’s Oxbridge and HYPS have very different approaches to undergrad education. Then again, there are different ways of being intellectual. And most undergrads at any of these institutions neither are nor aspire to be intellectuals. Many faculty do.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

Folks, both UC Berkeley and UC are amazing and intellectual places.

If only we had dozens more like them.

As a graduate of one of the more prestigious Ivies and who also holds a degree from an Oxbridge college, I find these naysayers ridiculous.

Oxbridge was a more intellectual environment. Without question. It was more intensely academic and even social. It's also why a number of American schools have tried to duplicate the college systems of Oxbridge via their college houses. The shared heritage between Oxford and Cambridge and the early American colleges is greater than some people are trying to disclaim. To this day there is more in common between Oxbridge and the American liberal arts tradition than between those schools and most higher education institution in the world.


.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

Oh and let’s not forget the UChicago professor Brian Leitee who was widely reported in the media for his expression of ideas and thoughts by mailing his shit to four women professors who disagreed with him. One women professor reached into the package and reportedly jumped after exclaiming, “Shit!”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.

<100 nobels make UChicago “intellectual” yet >100 makes Berkeley not intellectual? What kind of math is that where less is greater? And do you truly believe a ghetto UChicago professor calling his paying African-American students in his classroom the N word an expression of diverse ideas and freedom of speech and thought? Stfu.

Anonymous wrote:Ther’s No way UC can beat UC Berkeley.

There is one way UC beats Berkeley, and that happens to be along the lines of what the OP was asking. Diversity of thought. Berkeley is a closed loop in that department, so in that particular way, it's not "intellectual" in that it tends to be intolerant of diverse ideas and can be lacking in freedom of expression.