10 ms·
The problem is that you can only sell prestige if there is strategic ambiguity between the two categories.
by MiroF 6y ago
The problem is that you can only sell prestige if there is strategic ambiguity between the two categories.
- rhizome 6y agoAnd that ambiguity is an economy: the rich slackers are seen as smart by association with the achievements of (past) students admitted by merit, and the rabble students acquire aristocratic social cache by the same token. I'm not an economist, but I wouldn't be surprised if this is a self-powering machine.
- acruns 6y agoThat is an absolutely wonderful use of the word cache.
- arcticbull 6y agoYou're looking for cachet ("the state of being respected or admired; prestige") not cache ("hidden away for future use").
- clankyclanker 6y agoAlso not to be confused with Caché (apparently pronounced like cachet): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterSystems_Cach%C3%A9 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/InterSystems_Cach%C3%A9
- Galanwe 6y agoI will be the picky one: Caché, cache, cachette and cachet have a different pronunciation. Cachet and cachait do have the same though. Same for caché and cacher.
- MiroF 6y ago> Caché, cachet I'll be honest I have no idea what the difference is between these two.
- arcticbull 6y agoOnes French, and is the past tense of the verb cacher, “to hide”
- MiroF 6y agoNo, I meant the pronunciation!
- arcticbull 6y agoHaha it’s should be the same - but maybe that’s because I learned French in Canada.
- Galanwe 6y agoIt's different, though maybe native English speakers will struggle because there is no equivalent of "é". "et", "è", "ai" are all pronounced the same. Similar to the "e" in "best". For "é" and "er" I struggle to find a definite English equivalent sound. Sometimes "a" is close, but it depends on the accent of the speaker. Maybe the best example is just the last "é" when pronouncing "Beyoncé" or "fiancée"
- MiroF 6y ago> "e" in "best". But I pronounce chachet nothing like the e in best. It seems much more similar to a french "é" This is how I pronounce it: https://www.google.com/search?q=cachet+pronunciation&oq=cachet+p&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j69i57j0l6.1266j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8 https://www.google.com/search?q=cachet+pronunciation&oq=cach...
- closeparen 6y agoSufficiently prestigious schools are drowning in perfect applicants. You don’t even need to admit any rich slackers. Just let some of the qualified substitute money for luck.
- MiroF 6y agoThere are certainly some rich slacker/less talented people at prestigious schools, though I agree with the main thrust of your argument.
- solveit 6y ago> Sufficiently prestigious schools are drowning in perfect applicants. This is by design. There exist tests that can distinguish between the merely very good and the outstanding. Elite US universities go out of their ways to not use them, precisely so they can admit the merely very good legacies.
- MiroF 6y agoElite schools don't use them at least partially so they can take the same tests as every other school.
- lumost 6y agoA test that splits the top .1% of test takers vs. the top 1% likely isn't the best indicator of future career performance ( the source of university prestige ), or necessarily academic performance.
- rdtwo 6y agoThat’s because future career is mostly influenced by how much money your parents have.
- saagarjha 6y agoOk, a test that splits between the top 0.01% and the top 1%. One student goes to national competitions, the other is merely a decent student at your local high school. The SAT lacks the granularity to distinguish between them.
- leoc 6y agoThis is "the right mix".
- kbenson 6y agoJust because you know the relative size of each cohort doesn't mean you know if a specific person was in one or the other. There's always the possibility that someone admitted for money actually ends up excelling. I know quite a few people that got far more serious in college and ended up doing quite well even through in high school they were far from good students. That's before even considering that some small amount of what graduating from one of these schools conveys is a high likelihood of having networked with other people that will be well placed later. My naive expectation is that someone graduating with a science major from MIT might have had a harder curriculum than someone graduating from that same major from Harvard, but I also (again, naively) expect that the person from Harvard may have made contacts with people that will be more diversely placed and in more powerful positions later.
- dnautics 6y agonot really. If the auction monetary results were somehow leaked (or hell even if they were published) it's a very strong indicator of what people are willing to pay to be around kids who have brains. You're only in a bind if you're rich AND your kid is smart, because everyone will be suspicious that your kid only got in because of $$. And then, if I were rich I'd probably want my kid to have to struggle a bit to see what it's like for a change. I'm sure there are plenty of actually rich people who think like me.
- happyjack 6y agoThis.
- kmonsen 6y agoIt’s like all the silly mobile games, you need a pool of cheap players so the rich people can feel accomplished when they spend money. This is similar, there needs to be enough for people being accepted to and graduating from a university so when the rich kids also does it people think that he is smart and accomplished.
- TheOtherHobbes 6y agoThe last thing you want is rich mediocre kids believing they're smart and accomplished when they aren't. Some of them will go into politics and business, and their entitlement and delusionally rosy view of their talents will make them a national liability. You really want to steer rich slackers towards wasting their lives with dumb hedonism, keeping them as far away as possible from any activity with strategic influence.
- ben_w 6y agoNot necessarily. Fancy high-end watch bands like Rolex and Omega are not fundamentally better at telling the time than a Casio F-91W. The difference is pure prestige.