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

On Elitism

stanford.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 116 posts

Re: On Elitism

#31

Post by elblanco »

richardw wrote: post #22

What's the motivation for writing the article? To me, there's always some way to feel superior by pointing fingers. I think he's driving his own brand of elitism. (Somebody please accuse me of the same thing, and let's see if we can recursively create a singularity)

The number of articles and editorials I've read in the last 5 years, written by people from tier-1 schools, decrying the tyranny and ill-manners of the unwashed masses, and the unfairness towards graduates of these so-called "top" schools, is enough to convince me that the reputation that grads from these schools have for being pompous windbags who went to these schools not for the education, but for the name brand, is well deserved.

This article (hosted not insignificantly at standford.edu) is an absolutely textbook example of this phenomenon.

Articles like this one, and numerous professional interactions with people who introduce themselves as "Suzy Sue, I went to Yale" or "Marcus Markk, I went to Harvard"...and then repeatedly fail to perform up to the expectations I'd have for community college dropouts...I've never heard somebody from a tier-2 or 3 school introduce themselves in this way.

After so many of these kinds of experiences, when I hire people, a degree from a tier-1 school is an automatic mark against, not a mark for.

Re: On Elitism

#32

Post by drats »

richardw wrote: post #22

What's the motivation for writing the article? To me, there's always some way to feel superior by pointing fingers. I think he's driving his own brand of elitism. (Somebody please accuse me of the same thing, and let's see if we can recursively create a singularity)

>What's the motivation for writing the article? Well, he managed to name-drop Stanford, MIT and Google in a short article with the nutritional value of cardboard. Everyone knows that after the first job or two flashing a ivy-league CV around it starts to matter what you have achieved not where you went.

Re: On Elitism

#33

Post by scott_s »

gizmo wrote: post #27
scott_s wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A/A+ students are, by definition, more successful at school than B+/A- students. That's the only sense of the phrase I meant it in.

Not by definition, because the definition of success at school isn't "getting high grades". School is not the end, it's only a means. If I had to give a single metric for success at school it would be 'education'; those who learn more are more successful at school. This isn't necessarily reflected by test scores.

It's the metric that is used to judge academic success.

Really, all of this is besides the point that the author was trying to make. You're getting caught up in his example, but ignoring his point. Grades are a metric of a kind of success. I agree that education is more important than grades, but that's not what the example was about.

Re: On Elitism

#34

Post by omgsean »

scott_s wrote: post #24
Confusion wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is still a ridiculous point: A/A+ students are not necessarily smarter, more successful, more intelligent, whatever-you-want-to-call-it than B+/A- students. His sole defense of that assertion is if you're so damn smart, wouldn't it take you just slightly more effort to get an A which I cannot characterize as anything else but a total lack of any sense of what someone may want to do with his time, other than obt…

A/A+ students are, by definition, more successful at school than B+/A- students. That's the only sense of the phrase I meant it in.

"A/A+ students are, by definition, more successful at school than B+/A- students. That's the only sense of the phrase I meant it in."

More successful in school. There is very little value in getting high grades until the later years of high school. Working hard in middle school is a waste of time. The smartest kids would do the minimum amount of work to pass their classes and ensure they have a solid understanding of the material. Especially when you look back and remember how much of the middle school curriculum involved drawing bubble letters and pasting printed photos on to Bristol board.

Re: On Elitism

#35

Post by psyklic »

The author writes about himself, "Coming from two universities with world-renowned Computer Science departments (MIT and Stanford) and having worked at a top-tier software company (Google) as well as at several less high-profile companies ..."

Meaning, of course, that he is not elitist -- he just had to share these crucial facts about himself.

Re: On Elitism

#36

Post by daveying99 »

I think the guy has some smart points. But the fact that he has the MIT dome picture on his blog counters the point that if you're a high achiever from a top-tiered university, you don't need to show external signs of achievement...

Re: On Elitism

#37

Post by elblanco »

timwiseman wrote: post #14
xiaoma wrote: post #7

> "The smartest kids in the class had reputable externally-recognizable marks of status --- their top-ranked grades on exams and homeworks --- and thus did not need to assert their intelligence." Having the top grades on exams and homework doesn't in any way demonstrate that those kids are the smartest in the class. Grades are correlated with intelligence to some degree, but much more strongly correlated with work-et…

True, but they hold something that is generally recognized as a mark of intelligence. Whether or not it is actually a mark of intelligence is irrelevant to his point.

And for being duped into believing this little lie, Mr. Guo has singularly proven that Stanford folks are not as smart as their reputation makes them out to be.

Re: On Elitism

#38

Post by elblanco »

tokenadult wrote: post #2

The blogger doth protest too much, methinks. We learn all about his academic credentials almost as soon as the blog post begins, but don't hear anything about his real-world accomplishments beyond attending great schools. What does everyone think of the blogger's academics page? http://www.stanford.edu/~pgbovine/academic.htm Disclaimer: I don't know the blogger, and as far as I know I don't know any of his profession…

He's on the fast path to a research job, buried in the bowels of some company, working on middle ware. Either that or he'll simply get a teaching job at one of the schools he decries in his post.

Re: On Elitism

#39

Post by scott_s »

codexon wrote: post #15

It is probably true that people who scholastic reputation will try to make up for it in other ways. However the problem is that there may be too much authority placed in these usual standards of achievements. Philip forgets that people with academic credentials like himself are being smug when they complain about others. If your academic credentials represent you so well, why should it bother you if someone is simply…

I don't think hiding you went to a prestigious school has to be disingenuous. I can be, but it doesn't have to be.

I have a purple belt in Brazilian Jiu-Jitsu. This is a mid-level rank, but it's also the point where a competitor is considered advanced. In tournaments that don't use belt level but Novice, Beginner, Intermediate, Advanced, I compete Advanced. If I talk to a stranger about BJJ, I never start out with "I have a purple belt." I am going out of my way to avoid sounding like a braggart. I am not worried about failing to live up to my rank, but I am worried about appearing like a jerk.

Re: On Elitism

#40

Post by numair »

psyklic wrote: post #35

The author writes about himself, "Coming from two universities with world-renowned Computer Science departments (MIT and Stanford) and having worked at a top-tier software company (Google) as well as at several less high-profile companies ..." Meaning, of course, that he is not elitist -- he just had to share these crucial facts about himself.

I think the tide has really turned against name-brand institutions, leaving people such as the author in a position where they feel they have to defend themselves and their "prestige." This manifests itself in some peculiar ways, as we can see from this piece...
Post reply on HN