<p>For what it’s worth, some of the most brilliant people I’ve known went to po-dunk colleges or none at all and I’ve met some truly, truly stupid people from top tier Ivy League schools. So many factors go into why someone goes to a school. </p>
<p>If you think there’s a correlation between genius and GPA / test scores, you’re definitely not a genius so the whole question seems irrelevant since it’s not an issue of finding your peer group. Do you just want to bask in the glory of people smarter than you? The true geniuses aren’t in institutional academia. You’ve been deceived by a lifetime of propaganda if you think they are, Saugus. Recovery will be slow but you’re on the right track.</p>
<p>^
Yes, there are many smart people, and GPA is definitely a good way to weed the lazier ones out of that pack. The OP asked about geniuses. That’s a whole other level. Most genius minds aren’t capable of operating within the limited vision of academia or the restrictive structures designed to serve the masses, even if they only accept 7% of those masses. Remember, the top schools must be able to cater to intellectually mediocre blue blood offspring and athletes who cannot be allowed to fail for political, financial, or other reasons.</p>
<p>If you ever have the honor of knowing a true genius, this reality becomes clear.</p>
<p>That’s interesting. So all the real “geniuses” are actually independent studying? Potentially for science/math, but I doubt it for humanities and social sciences.</p>
<p>And yeah, of course not all geniuses at at Harvard/MIT/Cal Tech. John Forbes Nash went to Carnegie Mellon for undergrad. Yale probably gets a lot in the humanities/social sciences, but probably not that many in math/science.</p>
<p>And it doesn’t really matter to me at all. I’m just curious whether we get those types too, or if Harvard/MIT get them first. Berkeley probably has quite a few.</p>
<p>@Applejack</p>
<p>Eh. I’m mostly over the educational/prestige/recruiting differences. Those are all the same. The thing that’s bugging me now is that I feel like I “lost” the admissions game, even though I should be perfectly content. It’s kind of hard to explain. It doesn’t mean anything at all, but I’m just bad at not getting exactly what I want when I work towards it. Not the best approach. That’s actually all unrelated to this, though.</p>
<p>^I see where you’re coming from, because I would’ve been disappointed at getting so many rejections with those stats as well. You did, for the most part, lose the admissions game. But the good news is, there are plenty more games to come, including doing well at Cornell, getting into grad school, finding a job, settling into a career, starting a family - all of which are probably more important than the game you just lost.</p>
<p>and over the course of time, most “visionaries,” “leaders,” and “successful” people actually went to pretty crappy colleges or no colleges at all, so I think the odds are actually against the elite schools when it comes to this argument.</p>
<p>^ Saugus, you are still a little bit (i.e. overly) obsessed with HYPM. They are indeed great schools, but they are not quite the automatic nirvana you imagine them to be (there are some disappointments/failures from those schools) – and they are not the only distinguished schools. Additionally, if you think that Cornell doesn’t produce its fair share of amazingly successful/smart alumni, then you ignored the link above to a very long list of incredible Cornell alums.</p>
<p>I was just wondering how Cornell beats out HYPM for potential Rhodes Scholars, etc. There is really no difference, but just perception alone would cause people to go to HYPM, right?</p>
<p>^ Saugus, when I see what I consider to be obsessive/compulsive posts like your last couple, I start to revert to the opinion that the Cornell community may be better off if you changed your mind, and opted for Cal. You really need to somehow break loose from your HYPM fetish, and realize that Cornell is a phenomenal and venerable university. (As is Cal in its way). Then you can get on with being content/happy as an undergrad, rather than disgruntled and ungrateful for the outstanding opportunities that did land on your plate.</p>
<p>I agree that affirmative action policies in the college admissions process are ridiculous.</p>
<p>Something that you should consider, though, is that all the current famous alumni of various universities applied decades ago. The college admissions process was very different in the '70’s; acceptance rates were much higher. It’s not really fair to compare the MIT class of 1975 to the MIT class of 2015, because in my opinion, the class of 2015 will be far more qualified on average. Also, there is a great deal of luck in the college admissions process these days that was not nearly as present back then.</p>
<p>These days, plenty of very qualified candidates end up going to schools “beneath” HYSPM etc. Only time will tell how successful they end up being, there’s really no accurate standard of comparison right now.</p>
<p>Relax. I’m perfectly happy with Cornell. I was merely responding to your earlier implication that I was still obsessed with HYP. I’m not, it just kind of sucks to see things like that. HYP does not have business courses and P has grade deflation.</p>
<p>@GregFields</p>
<p>Luck is exactly why I think the middle 50% at Ivies + MIT/Stanford/Duke are largely the same. I would imagine the top 10% would be stronger at HY than Cornell. But anyway, it doesn’t matter. Purely curiosity.</p>
<p>Chuck Feeney, co-founder of the duty free shoppers group, is an alumn from the Cornell hotel school and anonymously donated $350 million to Cornell to develop the new tech campus in Manhattan. He didn’t want the recognition. Really cool philanthropist:</p>
<p>Read that thread. The guy does a good job compiling all the info. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That might or not be true. Even if it is, the top 10% at HYP are probably marginally smarter. As shown, Cornell’s top students are just as capable in getting prestigious scholarships, winning national competitions, etc. I’ve met some genius level guys here that could probably go toe-to-toe with any student at HYPSM. Like norcalguy mentioned, the problem for Cornell is it has a larger pool of students in the lower end of the spectrum.</p>
John Nash is a good example of someone whose formidable level of intelligence was considered genius within the confines of academia. But is it really genius to, essentially, figure out that putting a Burger King next to a McDonald’s is going to benefit both more? I know I’m simplifying, but essentially his most famous assertion was that acting in the interest of the group is better for an individual than acting in one’s own interest alone. </p>
<p>If that’s the bar you’re setting for genius, then, yes, there are plenty of people capable of that level of insight at Cornell.</p>
<p>Saugus there are a lot of very smart people here and despite your 2300+ and 4.0 GPA there will still be tons of students who are smarter/much smarter than you. The most memorable students and the ones who make the biggest impact are the ones who pursue things outside of their grades and test scores. I think this is why a higher proportion of people coming out of HYP become world leaders because they always had the intrinsic motivation to do something better than play the violin or be a student council president.</p>
<p>Once you get here you’ll realize that academic wise there probably isnt that great of a difference between a Cornell kid and another ‘upper’ ivy kid because you’ll find that the difference between a 2200 and a 2300 is about 4 questions on the SAT (IE almost meaningless). That’s why a top student at Cornell can go to any law school/med school/ and obtain any job they want (there are lots of kids each year who go to HBS/JHU med/work at Goldman Sachs/do Teach for America/etc.). Top students here are absolutely on par with top students from ANY school out there. However, if you want to become someone memorable than I really don’t think any college specifically can help you become president/CEO/etc. that type of drive is completely independent of where you went to school.</p>
<p>^^
It’s definitely correlative and not causative. Same reason there are so many famous Eagle Scouts. The skills in scouting probably don’t do much for the person, but they were driven to attain it.</p>
<p>You seem to be misinterpreting the intent of my question, though, although you did answer it. I’m not so egotistical as to think I would be anywhere above the 75th percentile at best.</p>