191–200 of 205 posts
Also, is it possible to be admitted if one is outside the typical age range of applicants (ie 18-19)?
I just don't know how these things work for you in the US, so I had to ask :)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Not to mention how politically incorrect it would be to try to call someone out on it: "Hey, aren't you Louis Smith? You said you were black on the application, but you don't look black at all!" I can't imagine it happening.
No, they're not likely to say it, but they'll know you lied about it, and that will color their perception of you. It just seems to me like a bad idea all around.
1) someone on the admissions committee must come to know you (that is, match your face to your name)
2) they must then remember that you were one of the people who identified as black on an application
3) they must then assume that you aren't actually black based on appearance alone (knowing that there are indeed many half-black people who don't look obviously black)
4) they must then decide to tell other important people about this
This just seems really unlikely in any reasonably sized school. If you really want to be careful, find out who is on the admissions committee and avoid them.
According to PBS, Race is an Illusion: http://www.pbs.org/race/000_General/000_00-Home.htm Jared Diamond concurs: http://www.learntoquestion.com/resources/database/archives/0... If you believe their arguments, there is no scientific basis for categorizing someone on the basis of race. Appearance is particularly hazardous. Therefore, why can't Asians mark black on the application? Who is to say they are not black if t…
I haven't read much on the subject, but the idea that races can't be separated based on genetics is either false, or due to the fact that we don't have enough sensitivity in the measurement. Phenotypically, I can easily identify a black person vs. an asian person, with nearly 100% accuracy. What I'm seeing are phenotypic differences in hair type, skin colour, facial structure, etc. that are all defined by genetics. I…
This is a rather hyperbolic statement. You concede edge cases, but the fluidity of phenotype means that it fails to map cleanly onto neatly delineated categories. We can look at the recent book describing the history of 'passing' reviewed here [1] for one of many examples.
>I haven't read much on the subject, but the idea that races can't be separated based on genetics is either false, or due to the fact that we don't have enough sensitivity in the measurement.
Again, I'd caution against letting your intuition be your guide on this topic. A cursory examination of the literature (i.e., 15 minutes on Google Scholar [2]) might lead you to the conclusion that: (1) genotype != phenotype, and (2) while we can reliably sort humans by ancestry using genetic information, there is variation within these clusters because the proportion of any individuals ancestry that arises from different populations also varies.
I think that the upshot is that the science is less useful when applied to a nebulous term like race, which involves a host of cultural, political and historical factors. The way we Americans define race in debates like these is a legacy of our binary 'one-drop rule' concepts of identity, and it isn't at all clear that appeals to science couched in sweeping generalizations have any connection to the biology.
[1]: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/27/books/review/Arsenault-t.h...
[2]: http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&q=genomics+race
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is race irrelevant? If the goal of a University is to recruit those with the highest SAT scores, then yes its irrelevant. But if its to foster a diverse and intellectually stimulating environment, while preparing future leaders of the world, then race (as a proxy to diverse cultures and experiences), is very relevant.
What a pity (well, not really) that race, whatever that is, is a false proxy for the diversity of outlook desired. What a shame it is far more likely to be shown by e.g.: personality type, communication style, preferred role in group dynamics, rich/poor, city/country, literate/numerate/ten other things, musical/not, and so on.
I went to a magnet high-school in the late 1990's, and at the time it was about 25% asian. My brother went there later, and by the time he finished (10 years after I had started) the demographics had skewed to 50%+ asian and the culture had changed dramatically. People were a lot less fun and a lot less outgoing, and a lot more intense and competitive.
When I went to law school I met a lot of fun, outgoing asians, so I don't want to paint things with too broad a brush, but honestly I wouldn't want my kid going to a school that was 50%+ asian. College is a time when kids should be getting socialized. Drinking, figuring out the opposite sex, even a little bit of risk taking are valuable in teaching people to navigate modern American society, and when you're surrounded by people whose parents spent 18 years telling them not to do any of those things I think you have an impoverished experience. Actually, when my brother was choosing between HYP and Caltech, I helped him lobby my parents for the former for precisely these reasons.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>> Asian families, the pragmatic authoritarians they are, are very good at hacking this system of social sorting. >> Asian authoritarian parents are just hacking the system for their family's wealth. Wow. I don't care what ethnicity your are, this is horribly offensive.
Do you mean that forensic is incorrect, or that you don't like to hear it?
Also, I DO mind. I found what he said to be VERY offensive. My family is not some conniving, money-grubbing machine that was carefully molding me from the start to take the helm of our empire when my father dies. My parents are supportive of whatever I want to do. Additionally, Asia is huge. Really ridiculously huge. I cannot fathom how anyone can feel justified in casting such a narrow stereotype upon everyone who arrives to the USA from the East. Maybe before conducting a racial ethnography you could read the American Anthropological Association's statement on "race". Basically, race and culture should not be conflated. http://www.aaanet.org/stmts/racepp.htm
I'm sure nobody is trying to be a bigot here but forensik is sure coming off that way.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do you mean that forensic is incorrect, or that you don't like to hear it?
Both. His response is a proof by example (not a proof) and sounded a lot like, "Oh my black friends don't mind when I use that word". Counterexample... I am asian, my "pragmatically authoritarian" father did not encourage me to play violin in order to win money for his bloodline. Thus forensik is wrong. QED. Also, I DO mind. I found what he said to be VERY offensive. My family is not some conniving, money-grubbing ma…
Oh please. Why even bother saying this? Apparently I claimed that all Asians are violinists! Wow!
You are trying to silence uncomfortable facts by appealing to simple populist thought-stopping cliches.
"Saying anything about race is racism!! Burn the witch!!"
Everyone on HN sees right through you. Culture is passed down generationally and culture is real. Culture is therefore linked to race. Cultural differences are real and anthropologists, sociologists and psychologists have all scientifically established that Asian-Americans are more collectivist than Euro-Americans. The collectivist values result in greater authoritarianism, less individuality, and more emphasis on conformity for the sake of maintaining group harmony. This is a rock solid scientific finding of the social sciences and you're in denial if you don't want to admit it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Both. His response is a proof by example (not a proof) and sounded a lot like, "Oh my black friends don't mind when I use that word". Counterexample... I am asian, my "pragmatically authoritarian" father did not encourage me to play violin in order to win money for his bloodline. Thus forensik is wrong. QED. Also, I DO mind. I found what he said to be VERY offensive. My family is not some conniving, money-grubbing ma…
> Counterexample... I am asian, my "pragmatically authoritarian" father did not encourage me to play violin in order to win money for his bloodline. Thus forensik is wrong. QED. Oh please. Why even bother saying this? Apparently I claimed that all Asians are violinists! Wow! You are trying to silence uncomfortable facts by appealing to simple populist thought-stopping cliches. "Saying anything about race is racism!!…
Oh yeah, all the social scientists are in agreement about the problem with the Asians? Hm, I see that you are shifting away from the race to racial ethnicity in your terminology (Asian-American). Like, I know you read (at least a review of) Tiger Mom but do you have a real source for this stuff that isn't a single autobiographical account and your own experience? This really makes you sound like you're full of shit.
>>> You are trying to silence uncomfortable facts
I'm really not uncomfortable with the fact that some of the Chinese-American friends I have are pushed really hard to "excel". What I am offended by is that you extrapolate from a similar experience to talk about all Asian people in America, "Asian values", "Asian ethics", and the "Asian mindset".
>>>"Saying anything about race is racism!! Burn the witch!!"
"She is Asian." -- Not racist. "Her family is very patriarchal." -- Not racist. "A lot of my Asian friends have overbearing fathers." -- Almost... "Asian families are very patriarchal." -- Racist. If you can't tell the difference, then quit talking about my race, fucker.
>>> Everyone on HN sees right through you.
I doubt anyone else is reading this. I just wanted to let you know that the way you speak about THE "Asian Culture" and "Asians" really offends me. Is it still unclear why? Is it clear to you why anthropologists do not produce ethnographic accounts of RACES.
>>> rock solid scientific finding of the social sciences
LOL
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is pretty close to how we did things at Princeton. You can only admit so many violin playing science hopefuls.
If I found you a dozen extra violin-playing science hopefuls with high scores and GPAs who were black you and I both know exactly what would happen. The "meh, they don't have a hook" functions as a post-hoc neutral justification of a policy whose stated goal and naked application is to discriminate on the basis of race. It's as transparent a fig-leaf as "We can't admit blacks, they might only speak Ebonics, yo!" woul…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Counterexample... I am asian, my "pragmatically authoritarian" father did not encourage me to play violin in order to win money for his bloodline. Thus forensik is wrong. QED. Oh please. Why even bother saying this? Apparently I claimed that all Asians are violinists! Wow! You are trying to silence uncomfortable facts by appealing to simple populist thought-stopping cliches. "Saying anything about race is racism!!…
>>> anthropologists, sociologists and psychologists have all scientifically established that Asian-Americans are more collectivist than Euro-Americans Oh yeah, all the social scientists are in agreement about the problem with the Asians? Hm, I see that you are shifting away from the race to racial ethnicity in your terminology (Asian-American). Like, I know you read (at least a review of) Tiger Mom but do you have a…
http://scholar.google.ca/scholar?hl=en&q=individualism-c...
Asia is simply way more collectivist than the West, and this cultural difference holds for Asians immigrants throughout the world.
You're trying to bully me with the race card into shutting up. Decades of high quality research on individualism-collectivism is not racism. It's just a genuine cultural difference that can be measured in a million ways.
By the way, black people also score lower on intelligence tests than other races, women are more enraptured by cute babies than men are, and republicans score higher on measures of magical thinking than democrats.
Hope these statements of fact help you with your witch hunt.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have heard that the admissions procedure is similar for top UK universities, Oxford, Cambridge etc. Except that they have a policy to openly discriminate against privately educated pupils. You need better exam results to get through the first filters if you come from a private school than if you come from a state school. This is because private schools drive their students harder, have better facilities, lower staf…
You are generalising and taking too much at face value. I went to Oxbridge (not going to say which) for my first uni and also interviewed at several colleges, as well as many of my friends also going to Oxford or Cambridge. 1. Neither Oxford or Cambridge university have an open policy to discriminate against privately educated students. This is just a public perception due to political pressure. In fact, in the 1960s…
I have to say though, I think the current lack of poorer kids from more ethnically diverse backgrounds is more a reflection on the terrible quality of the state education system in inner cities than it is on the universities themselves. When I was thinking about which A-levels I wanted to do (~20 years ago) it wasn't possible at any school in my borough to study the required combination of A-level subjects for a science or engineering degree at say Cambridge, Imperial or equivalent. I switched to the private system for the last 2 years of school because of this and my fellow pupils were light years ahead of me, it was a real struggle to catch up. Their GCSE maths exam (taken at age 15) was set by a different exam board than the state school I left. The first question in their exam was "Factorise the quadratic", the first question in mine had been "Whats the time?" followed by a picture of a digital clock at a railway station. I could hardly answer any of the questions in their GCSE maths exam, I'm sure they would have been able to answer all the questions in mine.