3 ms·
> You want the kids of rich people to win the next generation unquestioned? I am not the person you were replying to, but no. However, the person who wins shou
by maceurt 7y ago
> You want the kids of rich people to win the next generation unquestioned?
I am not the person you were replying to, but no.
However, the person who wins should be the more qualified person based on merit not based on some standard of suffering. Just because you had a harder environment does not mean you are more qualified than someone with an easier environment.
- robotresearcher 7y agoI agree completely. But there should be some heterogeneity available in the routes to success. Not all bright kids are ready and trained for the SATs. I was not and luckily I found another route in 1990s England. I’m trying to keep some alternate routes open.
- sgift 7y ago> However, the person who wins should be the more qualified person based on merit This has never been the case and will never be the case as long as some people are rich and other are poor. A "standard of suffering" tries to show that. Maybe it's a bad idea, but the current system is extremely bad, so people who dismiss this better come up with a better alternative.
- okaram 7y agoWhat do you mean by merit? Ability? Capacity? Effort? Worthiness? Ability at what? Are the SATs a good measure of that?
- maceurt 7y agoProbably the best/ most ubiquitous method we have right now. It would be trivial to improve our tests of merit compared to the almost impossible task of testing how well a student would do free from environmental factors.