Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

theamericanscholar.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 228 posts

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#131

Post by UweSchmidt »

dmichulke wrote: post #121
erikpukinskis wrote: post #107

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Based on past experiments, it seems that the market does a pretty good job of predicting what society actually wants and needs, whereas enlightened do-gooders aren't as good as they think. I would love to see those studies! I'm struggling to imagine how you'd even find a random sample of do-gooders, let alone measure their effect on their communities.

A good proxy is market demand. If Apple releases an iPhone and 1bn people buy it they served the needs of at least 1bn people. Of course, a whole lot of poor people (probably the other 5/6 bn) won't be affected immediately but some years later they also start benefitting and today it's almost a (used) 100$ laptop per child equivalent (except for the poorest). You can argue the same way about mpesa, bitcoin and other…

"Market demand" does not optimize globally by default. Effects can be positive or (extremely) negative.

Example: Global warming is a result of the "market", an unexpected consequence from decades of growth. It can only be countered by coordinated action.

To get back to the topic at hand: The "elites" should be the ones who lead such a transformation instead of, say, just looking to advance their carreers.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#132

Post by BipolarElsa »

PavlovsCat wrote: post #39
BipolarElsa wrote: post #3

This article is utter rubbish. Anyone who possesses an elite education will never suffer in their life. They're in the upper-echelon of society. I have no pity for them and they are not at a disadvantage. Go ahead an ask anyone accepted into Yale if they'd trade it off for the same major at po-dunk State U. What do you think their response will be? Don't be daft. This is trash.

Anyone who never suffers in their life and is not aware of the total randomness of their own birth, is damaged in a way I would NOT want to swap with. One would have to have none to not realize how much infinitely more worth the personality one can become potentially is than even full control of all of the Earth's resources and command over all people could be. It's like the difference between making someone orgasm,…

>Yes, they can buy an island, but they can't sit still on it

I would LOVE to have that problem. That's a manufactured 1st-world, bourgeois nuisance. Boo friggin' hoo. Millions of struggling working class families would give anything to have that kind of problem, and frankly it's a little bit insulting to their plight.

But that's just my opinion.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#133

Post by chiaro »

gragas wrote: post #72
chiaro wrote: post #65

It's funny. When I first read this article it must have left a strong impression for me to have recalled it now, in the wake of the election. I see someone else felt similarly. I also remember a HN comment on it saying the blame for writer's inability to communicate across the class divide was more likely a profound lack of social skills. A point of view I'm still not entirely sure I agree or disagree with.

> in the wake of the election. I see someone else felt similarly. I think that's exactly why everyone is on about "liberal hubris." It's because people like you who are so self-absorbed that you write articles about how you're too educated to talk to plumbers and how you sympathize with others who feel the same way. When you discount everyone who disagrees with you for being "uneducated" and gullible, it doesn't seem…

I didn't write the article (nor as far as I know, anything like it) so you're reading rather a lot into my comment. I wasn't even commenting on the article's own view point necessarily, but rather the degree of alienation between the two Americas it exhibited back in 2008.

I'll have to track down the original HN thread, it'd make some interesting reading.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#134

Post by [deleted] »

gragas wrote: post #72
chiaro wrote: post #65

It's funny. When I first read this article it must have left a strong impression for me to have recalled it now, in the wake of the election. I see someone else felt similarly. I also remember a HN comment on it saying the blame for writer's inability to communicate across the class divide was more likely a profound lack of social skills. A point of view I'm still not entirely sure I agree or disagree with.

> in the wake of the election. I see someone else felt similarly. I think that's exactly why everyone is on about "liberal hubris." It's because people like you who are so self-absorbed that you write articles about how you're too educated to talk to plumbers and how you sympathize with others who feel the same way. When you discount everyone who disagrees with you for being "uneducated" and gullible, it doesn't seem…

[deleted]

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#135

Post by UweSchmidt »

wyager wrote: post #93
dlo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of human trafficking in Oakland, a short BART ride away from SF. With so much problem-solving ability in nearby SF, why is this still a problem? So are homelessness, childhood hunger, etc And why do we crowd around in the Bay Area, pushing out artists and other people? Why don't we spread out across the U.S., spreading ideas and doing good?

Humans are bad at multiplying utilities. Building a service that gives $100 of utility to ten million people is probably better for society than improving the nutrition of a few hundred children in SF. People tend to over-value charitable endeavors that fall into certain categories, like helping the homeless or feeding the children. I suspect it's a societal mechanism for encouraging practical charity that was a lot…

Humans are also bad at prioritizing and good at rationalizing, and conveniently forgetting huge problems that happen just out of sight.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#136

Post by eropple »

DocSavage wrote: post #92
dlo wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a lot of human trafficking in Oakland, a short BART ride away from SF. With so much problem-solving ability in nearby SF, why is this still a problem? So are homelessness, childhood hunger, etc And why do we crowd around in the Bay Area, pushing out artists and other people? Why don't we spread out across the U.S., spreading ideas and doing good?

I think you are stereotyping Stanford grads, particularly older ones. There are plenty of Stanford grads outside the US as well as on East Coast, etc. There are also plenty of Stanford grads in medical and science careers. By the time he's done, Bill Gates will have done more to impact disease and save lives in the world than probably thousands of your volunteers, yet he was a techie that built a start-up and sounds…

> And sometimes it comes later in life.

And more and more often, it does not come at all. The effective noblesse oblige of, say, the New England rich is by-and-large dead outside of New England in favor of a very exploitative, plantation-society-esque Southern "liberty".

There are enclaves where this isn't the case. It's hard to call San Francisco one, because the city and its very, very rich residents have done all they could to chase the poors away. (It is one of many reasons I refuse to consider living there.)

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#137

Post by gnicholas »

Mz wrote: post #81
gnicholas wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

At the time when I was in the NMS pipeline, if you listed a school that you wanted to attend when you took the PSAT/NMSQT, that school would give you the scholarship if you became a finalist. The best idea was to say "undecided" and to maintain the ability to designate any school once committed. My older brother learned this the hard way—he listed a school (October of junior year) that he decided (April of senior yea…

I am 51. Age 17 was long ago and far away. I have no idea how it worked.

Yeah, my experience is now 20 years old, but it looks like (to your sibling comments' point) the NMS amount has only gone up a little in that time—to $10k. Meanwhile, tuition+fees (at least at my alma mater) has gone up by over 75% during that time.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#138

Post by spc476 »

edblarney wrote: post #96
Mz wrote: post #11

The remarks here on HN dissing this article piqued my curiosity, so I began to read the article. It's been a long ..year...and I am super tired, so I am not going to manage to actually read the whole thing. But, I was one of the top three students of my graduating high school class and I turned down a National Merit Scholarship to one of the top two universities of my home state. I think I made the right call and I t…

If you didn't know you were 'upper class' then you were definitely not, although I grasp what you are saying. 'Upper class' means generational wealth and status, your grandfather was wealthy, a diplomat, and admiral, head of a large multinational, and you can trace your lineage back at least 8 generations, and likely back to before you were even Americans ... your family has had status for that long. But yes - some p…

Um ... my family has been tracked back to John "Tuscarora Jack" Barnwell (came to the colonies in 1701---https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barnwell_(colonist)) but I'm not "upper class" my any means. I'm not sure what you meant by that.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#139

Post by edblarney »

spc476 wrote: post #138
edblarney wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you didn't know you were 'upper class' then you were definitely not, although I grasp what you are saying. 'Upper class' means generational wealth and status, your grandfather was wealthy, a diplomat, and admiral, head of a large multinational, and you can trace your lineage back at least 8 generations, and likely back to before you were even Americans ... your family has had status for that long. But yes - some p…

Um ... my family has been tracked back to John "Tuscarora Jack" Barnwell (came to the colonies in 1701--- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Barnwell_(colonist) ) but I'm not "upper class" my any means. I'm not sure what you meant by that.

That you can trace your lineage, does not mean you are 'upper class'. But 'upper class' people can usually trace their lineage quite far back.

Everybody in the upper class definitely knows they are in the upper class. It's not a 'revelation' you get when you are an adult.

Likely quite a few people think they are in the upper class and really are not.

I'm going by classical definition here, not the 'new world' American version of upper class, which is usually just economic.

Re: The Disadvantages of an Elite Education (2008)

#140

Post by jondubois »

I graduated from one of the top universities in my country (top 50 in the world) and we learned pretty much exactly the same material as they did at MIT.

In reality I don't think there is any significant difference in terms of education quality between the top #1 university and #100 for any given field.

But the difference in terms of opportunities after finishing MIT vs finishing some other good university is massive. It seems that if an investor or prospective employer hears the word 'MIT', 'Harvard', 'Stanford' or 'Yale' when you make a pitch, somehow you're considered to be much smarter than the rest.

I think it's partially due to this elitist mindset. 'Elites' seem to think that people who went to an elite college are many times smarter than everyone else - But the real difference is actually social connectivity.

People who went to an elite institution are closer to capital - This gives them more influence. They are more likely to become investors and employers themselves. Their elitist world view (rooted in the false perception that they make up an intellectually distinct group) means that they are more likely to hire/fund people who also studied at elite universities.

Elites think that people like them congregate around knowledge, but in reality, they congregate around financial capital disguised as knowledge.

Post reply on HN