wchou

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by wchou 13y ago

   Are you trolling? Your original premise was that the article was unsurprising since _someone_ (Asians and Whites) must bear the downside of pro-minority AA: > Well, if minorities are being positively affected, then majorities (in this c
2. 2.▲
   by wchou 13y ago

   Your second statement shouldn't be true unless Whites and Asians are treated differently in admissions.
3. 3.▲
   by wchou 13y ago

   I meant racially biased against Asians. Look carefully at the logic statement I wrote - it means that one of two things must be true: 1. There exists racial bias specifically against Asians in admissions. 2. Qualified White applicants outnu
4. 4.▲
   by wchou 13y ago

   Consider the following true statement: IF there were more qualified Asian applicants than qualified White applicants (ratio > 1) _and_ admissions was not racially biased, THEN there should be more Asians than Whites in the student body.
5. 5.▲
   by wchou 13y ago

   That ratio cannot possibly be > 1 considering that there are more White students than Asian students at these colleges.
6. 6.▲
   by wchou 15y ago

   "Everybody does it" is not a compelling argument to ignore an issue like this (e.g. American slavery, etc.). Apple may be singled out because the contrast of the scandal and their lofty position as market leader makes for a compelling story