<p>read what dooit wrote</p>
<p>uyulove, I meant to criticize the statement (I thought you agreed with it).
Also, I hate that attitude of I'm this race, so I know - like I'm black so I know exactly the problems of every black or I'm Asian, so I can criticize Asians while you outsiders cannot - I hate double standards. </p>
<p>firewalker, an anonymous statistician wrote an online article predicting the proportions of various races if cognitive ability were the sole measure for admission. Here: <a href="http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/color_of_meritocracy.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.lagriffedulion.f2s.com/color_of_meritocracy.htm</a> Scroll down to the bottom, 2nd to last chart. He concludes that Asians would be 17.0% of the population, and that non-Jewish non-Hispanic whites currently get shafted under the current system, as their IQ is the lowest of the three non preferred groups (Ashkenazi Jews, East Asians, and European non-Jewish Whites). He predicts that if every high eligible high school student applied to UC Berkeley, and admission was similarly dependent on cognitive ability, that Asians would make up 35.5% of the school. He takes the real racial proportions of applicants in 1990, and concludes that if admissions were decided by cognitive ability, Asians would make up 49.6%.
Note: IQ disparities between races are not disputed by psychologists, or more specifically psychometricians. Rather they argue about whether the disparities are genetic, environmental, or some combination of the two. So, if the article was done properly, with the correct information, it sidesteps the whole nature v. nurture debate.</p>
<p>Then again, it contradicts the Princeton article. Of course, they are operating on different principles.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you were actually a likely candidate for admission then you wouldnt be so angry about AA cause you would know that you have a high chance of acceptance and you're not the one who likes to blame others for his/her own faults
[/quote]
</p>
<p>DiamondT, didn't you already try this quote? I COMPLETELY KILLED YOUR THEORY!</p>
<p>2280
4.29 GPA</p>
<p>I HATE AA</p>
<p>let me repeat it: I am a kid with great stats against AA because it's not fair.... you just like it because it helps you</p>
<p>DiamondT, 2400 GPA, 4.0UW GPA with 10 APs, and I hate AA. Your theory stinks.</p>
<p>high five megalomaniac!</p>
<p>btw, people like Aegie and DiamondT are just URMs who favor AA because it helps them get in easier</p>
<p>there we go. wondered when the anti AA kids would come out of the woodwork. *high five</p>
<p>And...
Apprantly 50% of the reason why Asians have higher IQs are related to their genetics...:
<a href="http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...i-bai042505.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_relea...i-bai042505.php</a></p>
<p>Although I should not base it on that one fact alone, asians tend to have higher IQ's than other races. (Although it's hard to determine "IQ" in the first place) so although I wouldn't call asians "magically" smarter than others it is true that they do have higher IQ's.. It would be just like many African Americans who are usually more physically talented (not always, I'm sorry if this offending anyone) than other races "sometimes..."</p>
<p>Have you actually looked at the professor's credentials????? You better go look up J. Philippe Rushton...The concept of heredity/genetics is fine when applying to INDIVIDUALS but to apply them to whole groups is ludicrous...</p>
<p>The work this professor has done follows the post of nbachris. His work loves to divide people into 3 different groups- mongoloids, causcasoids, and negroids. In his research, negroids(too agressive) are more promiscuous, have more children they don't care about, are less intelligent, are most agressive, etc. Mongolids(too weak) are on the extreme side, being more intelligent, least agressive, least promiscuous, having the least amount of children etc. Causcasoids, coincidentally are the perfect balance...This is the man the KKK turns to when they need to have "evidence" to back up their claims. On top of that this man has been awarded money by the the Pioneer Fund, a group founded by Wickliffe Draper. Their original beliefs were that eugenics should be studied to improve American society and give credibility to the idea that procreation of white americans was necessary for the overall good of the country.</p>
<p>A study was done by Northwestern U. and Columbia U. demolishing the idea that genetics has a LARGE influence on IQ (if you believe there is a general one).</p>
<p>
[quote]
high five megalomaniac!</p>
<p>btw, people like Aegie and DiamondT are just URMs who favor AA because it helps them get in easier
[/quote]
</p>
<p>wow, that was bitter. okay i'm for aa, and i'll list my stats before you go into your ad hominems: 2250, 4.4, 11 aps etc
i'm from a low-income family, a part of the "bottom 3%" of all elite college applicants (quotes the admissions dean of amherst), and interestingly enough, i'm also a korean male.
you see, race-based affirmative action does not benefit me at all. but you have to look at the socio-economic discrepancies: 75% of all elite college applicants are part of a middle class or high income family. is that fair? no. success shouldn't breed more success without merit; you can't compare a kid from a high class to a kid from a low class (there are too many lurking variables for you stats whizzes) and it's simply ignorant to do so. if we're talking about race-based aa, however, you should probably note diversity. there are things that a urm can contribute that a wealthy, caucasian kid can't. we're also talking about private colleges here! they can do what they want! race-based aa in public colleges has already been eliminated a few decades ago (a proposition by us citizens, btw); however, private colleges are entities of their own. if a college wants to promote racial diversity in its campus, allow it do so. so check your facts and quit whining about diversity.</p>
<p>"negroids(too agressive) are more promiscuous, have more children they don't care about, are less intelligent, are most agressive, etc. Mongolids(too weak) are on the extreme side, being more intelligent, least agressive, least promiscuous, having the least amount of children etc. Causcasoids, coincidentally are the perfect balance..."</p>
<p>What is this crap? Why do you call J. Philippe Rushton a professor? OK, maybe he is a professor-- but a professor of racism. I have loving and caring parents. Yellows were the one who invented the powder, kung-fu, tai chi, etc. Tell me that they are least aggressive. Did he read about the epopee of the samurais, or did he hear about the bloody history of the chinese dynasties? Furthermore, if the earth were to collapse, it would do so in China or India. Did he check the populatioon of those countries? Come tell me that Blacks make more children, and that Yellows don't. Yeah that's true in his f*** up head. No wonder the KKK turned to him for back up. Did he know that the most famous serial killers are Whites? Tell me he didn't know that? The worst killing in the history of mankind was engendred by Whites. Yes, I mean the World Wars.
I do not think that a race is better than the other. Trying to determine such a thing is just trying to lead the world toward chaos. That is exactly waht Adolph Hitler did. When you'll find a race better, then within that race, you'll try to even compartmentalize those who are better and those who aren't. For illustration, within Whites, there were Aryans who are the master race for the Nazis. It never ends.
If you're looking for intelligent people, ask me. I will tell you what it is to be intelligent. Somebody who has everything, does not need to work, and just study all the time to have good grades isn't intelligent. Now, somebody who works 37 hours a week, take 14 credits at school (hard classes of course,) and still has a 4.0 gpa without studying, is intelligent.</p>
<p>berthran</p>
<p>I have the same sentiments as you...this Rushton guy is extremely offensive...I really have no idea why he is a professor. What individual would want to learn from him? Unfortunately, he has published some books on his work...these works are used by the KKK, Stormfront, nazis, pretty much any hate group. He tries to determine and stereotype behavior based on your skin color...wonderful. But seriously, go look up his work...you will be amazed.</p>
<p>Asian Male. 36 ACT, 800 800 790 SAT II's 4.0 GPA w/ 9 AP's and 4 college courses, deferred from Harvard, but still in favor of AA.</p>
<p>Quit *****ing and making personal attacks like claiming that all URM's are lazy or that your opponents on this thread are just lazy URM's and are only for AA because it personally helps them.</p>
<p>Look at nbachris2788's post, makes a great argument. The whole argument against AA is premised on the fact that racism in America is dead, which is just not true.</p>
<p>That IQ is based on genetics is just stupid. The IQ test has always been a biased test and not a very accurate test of true intelligence.</p>
<p>There is tremendous social pressure, both external and internalized for minorities to live up to the stereotype. That's why those "Asian Pride" asians who are borderline asian supremacist **** me off. They've so internalized the identity imposed upon them by the white majority that they have begun to enforce it themselves. </p>
<p>Being yellow has nothing to do with talent at violin or math, just like being black has nothing to do with talent at basketball. All these apparent traits are emergent properties of a society which dictates that those are the proper activities for minorities to leave the "normal" of a white background untouched.</p>
<p>All that being said, Affirmative Action is an imperfect tool. It's a bludgeon where a dagger is needed, trying to fix a problem at a procedural level when the real solution would be at an interpersonal level. However, it is still necessary until that real solution can be implemented.</p>
<p>I think a lot of the replies here are a bit extreme</p>
<p>I'm just going to reiterate what most people said and add a bit.</p>
<p>Obviously AA is not going to accept anybody solely based on race. But it does help to be an URM if you have a similar stat/or the application as a whole with another person who is not an URM. I don't think anyone would disagree that being an URM helps to an extent. Again, AA would not ACCEPT anybody solely based on race, but it would give an advantage to URMs(how much? no one really knows) solely based on race. I think AA is gradually losing its purpose, as there are more and more URMs with highly educated (and rich) parents who push them to study and do well in school.</p>
<p>I don't think graduation rates are very helpful. Most of the applicants to the nation's top universities are capable and smart enough to go though workload in college, yet only a small fraction of them are accepted. Yes, the URMs who had that tip-preferance in their acceptance are well qualified(at least I hope so), and therefore they have pretty high graduation rates at top universities, but so were many other applicants who were equally qualified. The thing I don't really agree with is that the colleges would give tip-preferance to the URM between applicants with similar applications(yes, applications as a whole).</p>
<p>URMs are NOT inherently any inferior. Some of you would say that their communities do not encourage education as much, but I think that's a rather big generalization, which may be frustrating to some people who do not fit this kind of generalization. I guess colleges consider that these exceptions are not big enough to change their mind about AA.</p>
<p>Just a random note(not really related to this topic), I have known several korean kids who went back to Korea every opportunity they have to attend special "SAT program" supposedly from early in the morning to night. They were obviously rich enough to do that and some of their parents even published books under their kids' names to look good for the colleges (less than 10% was actually written by the kid), and hired 10 different tutors for the kids. I personally think these are very annoying and not helping at all in colleges to reconsider AA. I am not specifically referring to koreans who do this- I am referring to anyone who does this, and I just happened to know these kids because I am a Korean immigrant myself.</p>
<p>I understand that people would be getting tired of this issue, and I apologize.</p>
<p>Oh, and ivies and other top universities have rather strange admission systems, so just because an URM with low stats and little EC got accepted, it doesn't necessarily mean it's AA's work, so let's be careful when using examples comparing people.</p>
<p>I would like to know where you are getting all of this information about how affirmative action is for lazy URMs. I don't think you really understand the repurcussions your words have. I am an URM. I was told in 8th grade I got into my highly competitive high school because I am black. I had a 4.0 gpa in 8th grade in the highest classes my grammar school offered. I had 99th percentile test scores. I was a student body officer and I participated in many activities inside and outside of my school. Coincidentally, I was told this by a white waitlisted legacy who had around a 3.5 gpa and who has never tested well. She eventually got into the school because of her legacy status and the fact her parents made a hefty donation. But I endured weeks of gossip and horrible comments about my intelligence.
Because of the effect these comments had on my 8th grade mind, I did not perform my best during my first year of high school. When a child is told that they don't belong somewhere, it affects him/her in a very negative way. I was even told by my guidance counselor "people like you don't usually do well at this school."
I am going through the same thing right now but for different reasons. I am also lower-income and have extenuating family circumstances. My friend told me how lucky I am because I will have a lot to write about in college essays. He says that he wishes he could have my life just so he could get into college. I have worked my butt off for the past four years of high school. I do not need to hear ignorant opinions that about generalize the whole black community. Furthermore, I would like to know how many black, hispanic and native american students attend the colleges that you are mad at. Obviously not very many or AA would not be needed.</p>
<p>What's AA doing? Trying to get more black people into Colleges and Universities?
You see too many black people on campus nowadays? So why you guys crying?
What, not enough rich white boys can buy their way into colleges anymore? Why, you worried that your legacies and connections won't matter as much now?</p>
<p>Ok, great, some of you guys have the stats to get into colleges by yourself,
so get out of this thread.</p>
<p>good points, good points. i think we scared them off :)</p>
<p>Shaddix, the question of intelligence's origin is far from settled, and is especially contentious due to the huge political implications. So please stop putting on airs as if it were. What is wrong with noting aggressiveness, intelligence as measured by whatever tests, child-bearing tendencies etc? Saying something is the perfect balance is not scientific though, and that is bias (but not necessarily racism).</p>
<p>Not to say that one side or another is true, but what leads to the world to chaos is a failure to observe the law, not uncovering unsavory knowledge. Saying otherwise legitimizes a violent response to anything remotely offensive/critical. And besides, to say nothing of his evil character, Hitler couldn't be honest with himself anyway, as that would imperil his ideology (like acknowledging superior performance of Jews).</p>
<p>"Yellows were the one who invented the powder, kung-fu, tai chi, etc. Tell me that they are least aggressive. Did he read about the epopee of the samurais, or did he hear about the bloody history of the chinese dynasties? Furthermore, if the earth were to collapse, it would do so in China or India. Did he check the populatioon of those countries? Come tell me that Blacks make more children, and that Yellows don't.""
So the engineers who worked on the Manhattan project are akin to Heavyweight boxing champions in agressiveness? And samurais were not the entire society but a subset thereof. Perhaps they made the general society (everyone besides them) even more submissive due to their domineering actions - I don't know. The aggressiveness of the ruling party does not imply that the general populace is similarly aggressive. The fertility rate is per capita, or by couple, not by total population. Hundreds of years ago, British women gave birth to more children, but more of them died. More fertile? Yes. I imagine the same happens in Africa today- high fertility, low survival, at least relative to rich country standards, due to living conditions, wars, etc.</p>
<p>"Did he know that the most famous serial killers are Whites? "
Did you know the black homicide rate is 7x higher than that of whites? (And black on white crime is more frequent than white on black crime)
<a href="http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm%5B/url%5D">http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm</a>
"The worst killing in the history of mankind was engendred by Whites. Yes, I mean the World Wars."
African countries lack the weapons of war to kill on such a massive scale. And yet there are still perennial civil wars in sub-Saharan Africa, with massive amounts of deaths and injuries. </p>
<p>Your reasoning is rife with non sequiturs. These responses are just superficial parries.</p>
<p>"Being yellow has nothing to do with talent at violin or math" Maybe if you got into Harvard early, I would believe you (Just kidding). Please try to match the intelligence suggested by your statistics and give an honest look at both sides of the debate - acknowledge your own lack of knowledge, and stop affecting that you are the supreme arbiter of truth. There are respected figures on both sides of the debate. To be truthful you should limit what you say to what you can cite, or what is implied therein, as I try to do (I encourage you to call me out on such violations), and classify your speculation as such.</p>
<p>Edit: Race based AA is still quite prevalent among public colleges, such as the University of Michigan and plenty others. I think most of those opposing AA (including me) respect the right of private institutions to practice it of their own volition, but do not support the government mandating it one way or another. I said in a previous post in this thread, that you have to distinguish between advocating the removal of government enforced AA (or imposing a ban on AA), and saying why AA shouldn't be practiced (but government intervention is inappropiate).</p>
<p>Don't sound self-righteous,
it makes you look dumb.</p>
<p>Stop posting crap not even worth responding to.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>i agree 100%... i didn't say you can compare people of class, i said RACE! Make it based on income levels... that's diversity and those people deserve an advantage because they CLEARLY don't have the same opportunities... as for race, that's wrong</p>
<p>Ashernm: You think you are smart? No you are not. When you talk about the wars in subsaharan Africa, did you know that those wars are instigated by the Occident? I bet you did not know that. There are so many things that are hidden from you, and that you have no idea about. You are not worth my time.</p>