4 ms·
So DEI is an obvious political hot-potato but that the idea that the group with all the money and power are somehow being discriminated against is just silly.
by jmyeet 3y ago
So DEI is an obvious political hot-potato but that the idea that the group with all the money and power are somehow being discriminated against is just silly.
Why? Because none of these discussions deals with the real bias in university admissions: legacy admissions. Harvard's undergraduate class hovers around 35% who are legacies. This is the very essence of anti-diversity and entrenching generational wealth and power. It should be front and center in any college DEI discussions.
The problem is it doesn't end there. Having a Harvard undergraduate degree opens up so many doors for graduate school, residencies for doctors, academia, etc.
So before you get worked up on the topic of DEI (on either side), please give a thought to legacy admissions.
- yarg 3y agoIntelligence is largely hereditary (people's intelligence is generally unlikely to be significantly higher or lower than that of their parents). So if the parents were high quality academic students, there's a far higher than average likelihood that the same will be true of their children. (The same is true for athleticism, and no-one would be surprised or think it was unreasonable that LeBron's son was offered scholarships just for who his father is.)
- jimbokun 3y agoThat’s not the point. In addition to any inherent advantages for children of graduates from elite universities, there is an explicit bias in their favor for admissions decisions.
- yarg 3y agoYes, an explicit bias in favour of students more likely to be useful to the university.
- jmyeet 3y agoAn inbuilt assumption of what you say is that you believe in meritocracy, specifically that the powerful and wealthy are that way at least part by merit. The flipside of this assumption is that poverty is a personal moral failure. Personally i reject both of these assertions. So much of wealth can be attributed to imperialism, war, slavery, segregation, instituational discrimination and so on. But let's assume what you say is true: if the wealthy are that way out of merit and they have more ability, intelligence or whatever, why do they need an davantage in college admissions at all? Wouldn't their own merit shine through? Wealth already gives a host of advantages: opportunities, tutoring, access to people and not having to, say, work jobs to just survive. On top of all those advantages, why do they also need systemic bias in admissions? The system is unfair by design because it needs to be for those who benefit from it.
- jorvi 3y ago> An inbuilt assumption of what you say is that you believe in meritocracy, specifically that the powerful and wealthy are that way at least part by merit. That is not what a meritocracy is. Meritocracy means our brightest and most capable lead us, instead of democracy where it is basically whoever can play the political game the best.
- hallway_monitor 3y agoBret Weinstein suggested this on his podcast - that we select leaders because they would do the best job - and we DON'T let them self-select. They're called to serve similar to jury duty. I don't recall how the selection would be done, which seems like the harder part.
- yarg 3y agoWhen did I ever say that the children of wealthy alumni should be prioritised? I'm not assuming that the wealthy are there by merit, I'm assuming that the competent are. And yes, universities will admit the idiot sons of the rich, just because of a donation - but that's an entirely different conversation to one regarding the prioritisation of the children of alumni who already proved themselves to be useful.
- HDThoreaun 3y agoLegacy makes a lot of sense from an admissions standpoint. Having rich/connected peers is the main point of harvard for everyone else applying. I think what people have a problem with with DEI is that it largely seems counter to their goals of maximizing prestige and career success of graduates.
- johnneville 3y agoi would guess that the biggest incentive for legacy admissions is related to maximizing donations from the alumni parents but i'm just speculating
- jimbokun 3y agoWhy can’t we be against both legacy admissions and DEI admissions? Let’s eliminate all the forms of unfair bias.
- ilc 3y agoThere is always a hint. Let's say I am an Eagle Scout. I want to write about something I did as an Eagle. Well, guess, what. I've told you a metric F-ton about myself.
- warkdarrior 3y agoThe only solution is to ban participation in any organizations of any sort before one attends college.
- jimbokun 3y agoWhat makes that unfair? Being an Eagle Scout can convey information about your talents and character. It's explicitly favoring people over immutable characteristics like race or what university your parents attended that is unfair.
- ilc 3y agoNothing is wrong with it, but it gives a STRONG hint on demographics I bet.