<p>1) <em>generally</em> asian ppl drive really bad</p>
<h2>2) <em>generally</em> im asian</h2>
<p>3) <em>generally</em> im an awesome driver</p>
<p>Yeah still doesn't make sense.</p>
<p>i dont know if you actually did any acting but thats hard, and as for the old money, of course they dont need to work.</p>
<p>im saying if an ordinary guy sets out to really commit himself to work, he will succeed, granted that he has some smarts to go along with his work ethic.</p>
<p>to matt</p>
<p>your just putting * where there never were stars read the original statement not that straw man made by Iam</p>
<p>"i dont know if you actually did any acting but thats hard"</p>
<p>I did and it was actually fun. And I didnt get paid a red cent.</p>
<p>"im saying if an ordinary guy sets out to really commit himself to work, he will succeed, granted that he has some smarts to go along with his work ethic."</p>
<p>Then the same rule should apply to everyone else. Even if you start at a disadvantage, if you work hard and have some smarts you should succeed.</p>
<p>Thats why comprehensive review is a good idea.</p>
<p>oook? whats your point? im saying due to socioeconomic reasons, minorites either do not work hard, or do not have the smarts</p>
<p>"oook? whats your point? im saying due to socioeconomic reasons, minorites either do not work hard, or do not have the smarts"</p>
<p>Which do you consider more sucessful, the student who is of low income and has held a steady job and earned a GPA of 3.2 or the upper-middle class student who earns a 3.8 GPA without a job.</p>
<p>A GPA isn't the only measure of work ethic and academic ability.</p>
<p>boy i really let hell and its mother loose, huh? </p>
<p>my bad.</p>
<p>anyway, back to the UCI admissions thread, yeah? we're clutter spamming the topic. </p>
<p>anybody else get an admission letter yet?</p>
<p>anyone accepted to the Information and computer science major ??</p>
<p>coll4me, did you complete all your required prereqs?</p>
<p>You guys shouldn't be attacking WingZer0 so much. He has a more politically incorrect view of things, but he's not labeling blacks as genetically inferior. He's making a statement that should be looked into more closely - is there something going on in the young african-american community that is responsible for the low college attendances and highschool dropout rates? In fact, his views seem more in line with black conservatives - <a href="http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3707%5B/url%5D">http://capmag.com/article.asp?ID=3707</a></p>
<p>PLEASE, bring this discussion somewhere else.</p>
<p>I'm going to make a few last comments before I let this go.</p>
<p>First off, you cannot make a statement about "some" and apply it to "all". This is a logical fallacy. Just because you observe "some" instances, does not make it true in "all" cases. This is not an opinion, but a LAW of logic. This is also the downfall in stereotypes. They are NOT true.</p>
<p>If you make a claim, you must provide factual evidence. This is your argument summed up:</p>
<p>Claim: As a whole, blacks do not perform as well as whites academically. (Evidence from test results, scientific studies)
Conclusion: Most blacks are not studious. (Evidence: your own observations, admittedly without fact or tangible evidence)</p>
<p>A more fair example would be:</p>
<p>Claim: When income level and home environment is controlled, the education gap ceases to exist. (Evidence: scientific studies)
Claim: As a whole, blacks/hispanics do not have an equal level of income level and home environment as whites. (Evidence from surveys, studies, and census data.)
Conclusion: An educational gap exists holistically between blacks/hispanics and whites.</p>
<p>Do you see how my argument is linear and easy to follow? My argument can also be proved based on textual evidence from statistics and survey data. So we're to believe your conclusion based on your observations? The sample you're taking from the entire black population is so minute, it cannot be regarded as factual evidence. (This goes back to the some to all logical fallacy). Therefore, since your evidence is very weak, your argument becomes weak. From a totally objective point of view, if you can't see this then we have no point in discussing it further. Just the facts, ma'am.</p>
<p>
coll4me, did you complete all your required prereqs?
</p>
<p>yes, with the exception of one math course (discrete math) which none of the community colleges in my area offered. </p>
<p>I hear that the ICS major in UCI is the most demanded and lots of people apply for it and they are really really selective. I feel kind of nervous....</p>
<p>I hear its demanded, but not the most demanded. Here are the ICS stats, <a href="http://www.ics.uci.edu/ugrad/recent/index.php%5B/url%5D">http://www.ics.uci.edu/ugrad/recent/index.php</a>, the GPA average is only a 3.31 for transfer. </p>
<p>I'm trying for Computer Science myself. Missing my last calc course.</p>
<p>to kudos.</p>
<p>your basically saying the exact same thing ive been saying all along. i told you many, many times that socioeconomic reasons are to blame, and i stated that it was my opinion one of the factors that is spawned by this socioeconomic inequity is the vicious cycle of ill educated parents. because the parents are not educated, they place no emphasis on education to their kids and therefore they dont study. all your doing is taking offense to my opinion of them not studying, which COULD be the case, i dont know. what i do know and i stated again many many times to you, but it seems you just like to disregard it, is that the socioeconomic factors are the true and real cause of the lower grades, intelligence, and what have you. i never said not studying to be fact so stop constantly putting words in my mouth.</p>
<p>Hey... KudosMyHero, that is a a little nice review for "critical thinking" which I have just finished taking months ago :D Yes, you are doing INDUCTIVE REASONING if i'm not wrong; again, for INDUCTIVE reasoning, we can only be at MOST 95% confident... it will never be 100% if it is not deductive one.</p>