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

In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

news.yale.edu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

221–230 of 363 posts

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#221

Post by btilly »

tomrod wrote: post #214
btilly wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It is evidence that academia doesn't require evidence for left-wing claims. So to the extent that they do that, insisting on evidence from conservatives is discrimination. (I'd prefer that everyone's claims require evidence.) But https://www.johnlocke.org/academics-support-discrimination-a... speaks more directly to your question. Conservatives are discriminated against in academia for being conservative.

Doesn't this just mean that conservatives believe Marxism is an unacceptable worldview, since it exists? Why would we police evidence-based thought in academia?

If the thought in academia which leads to Marxism was actually evidence-based, then it should be easy to cite evidence for Marxism. You'd just have to read what they say and quote their arguments.

But it is not. Evidence for Marxism that I've seen boils down to rhetoric. Evidence against Marxism involves mass famines, low economic productivity, failed predictions, and so on. Therefore a significant fraction of Marxists in academia must support it for reasons other than the evidence.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#222

Post by megaman821 »

MSFT_Edging wrote: post #127
aceHN wrote: post #48

If your goal is equal opportunity you can look at socioeconomic class without considering race. Fundamentally the idea that race must be considered to achieve diversity is an inherently racist idea - you don't believe some races will get in without help.

In the US, race is very much tied to socioeconomic status and class. It's not a 100% indicator, but its essentially what the quoteunquote CRT in schools was meant to show. Many black communities are not poor simply because they're poor, but of on-the-books policies of redlining, discrimination, and overpolicing that enabled a wealth gap to form in the post-war period. Many white families were able to buy houses, buil…

In this theory where do Asians, South Asians and Jews fit in? Most do not come from generational wealth. Many are recent immigrants to the US, and actually supporting family members from their homeland (basically the opposite of generational wealth).

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#223

Post by Aunche »

itsoktocry wrote: post #193
Aunche wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that the wealthy and powerful can fake socioeconomic class. In fact, they already do for financial aid. I recall two of my classmates got accepted by Harvard. One was the son of a doctor, and the other was the daughter of a lawyer. The doctor's son said that he was turning down Harvard because they didn't give any financial aid. Meanwhile, the lawyer's daughter said she actually got a lot of financial…

> In fact, they already do for financial aid. I recall two of my classmates got accepted by Harvard. So you could figure out the financial circumstances of these classmates, but Harvard couldn't? Or are you saying they outright committed fraud?

I don't think it was fraud so much as loopholes. I'm not sure how she did it, but a common strategy is for give custody of the child to a grandparent, who on paper is poor and has 0 income.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#224

Post by _-david-_ »

svnpenn wrote: post #202
_-david-_ wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is more diverse: 1. Admiting a black boy who is living with both parents and who have a net worth of over $100 million 2. Admitting a white boy who grew up in poverty in Appalachia and lived in a single parent household

False choice. The article is about racial diversity, as is my comment. Economic diversity is important as well. You don't have to have one or the other, you can have both. Unless the school is only admitting one person per year, as in your scenario. Please don't try to distort the issue.

First, schools have a limited number of admissions so they may very well have to choose in a situation like this.

This is not strictly about racial diversity. The article also mentions ethnic diversity so it is clearly more than just race.

They explicitly mentioned socioeconomic situations as well.

> In their amicus brief, Yale and the other schools said that during their admissions processes, they obtain and review extensive information regarding each applicant’s life experiences, accomplishments, talents, interests, and goals. That information includes an applicant’s socioeconomic background, parental education level, whether languages other than English are spoken in the home, educational experiences, military service, leadership skills, “and all the other intangible characteristics that are crucial to ascertaining how an applicant will contribute to the university community.”

They are clearly also looking at socioeconomic situations along with race.

Maybe you should take your own advice: "Please don't try to distort the issue."

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#225

Post by antonymy »

golemotron wrote: post #147
GenerocUsername wrote: post #122

Kuntz Law: in ANY/ALL resource constrained systems, giving advantage to 1 individual directly gives disadvantage to another. This is true whether it is seats on a bus, distribution of aid money, or college admission. You cannot give race based preference without simultaneously race based discrimination

That's true and the reason why the real answer is dealing with the resource constraints. Economic growth solves a lot of problems.

Ivy league schools have finite space for new students, you can't really fix this with more money. In the first place these schools don't need more money, they're some of the richest institutions in the country and only growing richer: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-11-17/ivy-leagu...

So I think a policy fix is in order.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#226

Post by stdsTho8 »

btilly wrote: post #169
api wrote: post #118

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I largely agree, but here's an attempt at a "steel man" of the opposing point of view: Unjust discrimination is complex, often subconscious, and deeply rooted in institutional structures and culture. It's too complex and elusive to address directly beyond the obvious removal of explicit regulations (desegregation) and finger wagging. Those things have already been done and yet extreme inequalities persist, so address…

BS. It starts at kindergarten and before. Minority children should enter schools where they have a chance, with the resources to take advantage of that chance. But we don't. And here in California, blacks graduating high school on average only read as well as 8th grade blacks. Attempting to create equality of outcome after that is a lost cause. I can think of a dozen policies that would be more effective at helping b…

I wonder why reading Anglo-gibberish is a standard?

Does a bridges proper engineering rely on detailed emotional understanding of Shakespeare?

Human language is only 5,000 years old they say. Leaving human intuition for quantity millions of years to fine tune itself; enough food, enough heat, to prevent biological death.

Nothing about human biology is fueled or relies upon grammatically correct English and everything to do with correct use of mathematical measurement.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#228

Post by tomrod »

nailer wrote: post #149
MSFT_Edging wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the US, race is very much tied to socioeconomic status and class. It's not a 100% indicator, but its essentially what the quoteunquote CRT in schools was meant to show. Many black communities are not poor simply because they're poor, but of on-the-books policies of redlining, discrimination, and overpolicing that enabled a wealth gap to form in the post-war period. Many white families were able to buy houses, buil…

> In the US, race is very much tied to socioeconomic status and class. Great! So looking at socioeconomic status will also address socioeconomic status caused by racial discrimination. Glad you understand and agree with the parent.

How do you identify socioeconomic class?

Tax returns? Paystubs? Accounting for wealth generally?

Wealthy folks typically don't make a large wage, they receive a dividend on investments and large loans against collateral.

Note that this is critical to consider if we are to discriminate based on socioeconomic class.

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#229

Post by svnpenn »

_-david-_ wrote: post #224
svnpenn wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

False choice. The article is about racial diversity, as is my comment. Economic diversity is important as well. You don't have to have one or the other, you can have both. Unless the school is only admitting one person per year, as in your scenario. Please don't try to distort the issue.

First, schools have a limited number of admissions so they may very well have to choose in a situation like this. This is not strictly about racial diversity. The article also mentions ethnic diversity so it is clearly more than just race. They explicitly mentioned socioeconomic situations as well. > In their amicus brief, Yale and the other schools said that during their admissions processes, they obtain and review…

so what is your argument? or do you even have one?

The schools seem to want to be able to use race, IN ADDITION to other factors. What is the problem?

Re: In Supreme Court brief, Yale and peers defend use of race in admissions

#230

Post by tomrod »

zo1 wrote: post #148
scythe wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It should be noted that neither class nor race is a reindeer-style glowing red nose. There's an recent trend in England of people faking lower-class roots to take advantage of targeted programs, and there are indicators that white Americans are pretending Native ancestry for college admission.

Ignore that background too then. Just use parental or individual income and have some sort of scale, done. This isn't rocket science and the fact that we have to argue about blatantly obvious racism and favoritism just shows how much we've been gas-lighted, and we've had our good intentions twisted and actively exploited by those that benefit from this. Many years from now, we will be holding these black people accou…

> Many years from now, we will be holding these black people accountable for the generational harm and un-earned benefits they've stolen from our current generation's youth.

This is a pretty extreme assertion.

Post reply on HN