<p>I mean, one is hardcore studious, and one is hardcore laid-back.</p>
<p>But both seem to share a common similarity: they both seem to be very impractical and out of touch with the "real world". Which might be why both of these schools seem to love me a lot more than all the others.</p>
<p>I applied to both, because I think they both engender diversity of study. I think the out of touch with the real world thing is probably a good point.</p>
<p>By “love you a lot more” do you mean send you tons of literature in the mail? Because UChicago is notorious for sending stuff out to kids who are smart but not good enough to get in. This will (they hope) get said students to apply and boost the school’s rankings. I didn’t fall for it.</p>
<p>They sent me a ton of stuff and I wasn’t getting in. A-holes. lol</p>
<p>Note: OP is a prospectivce grad — not undergrad — student.</p>
<p>Yeah, I think he’s talking about the impression he got from interviews, although really, I think what the OP likes about the schools is probably more important that how much they like him, which could be due to weakness in the department, need for more UW grads, or some other random thing like that.</p>
<p>Always joke with my friends that going to U of C (my third choice after Brown and Colgate) would have been so different than my life here at Brown, because of the rigid core and the whole “where fun goes to die” attitude, but I think the sort of avant-garde attitude of both sort of makes them similar. Granted, I know very little about Chicago since I don’t go there.</p>
<p>Oh woah - very good point about the avant-garde attitude of both! That’s like the best way to describe them.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah - that’s actually what the precise reason probably is. Brown does have an issue with attracting highly talented applicants.</p>