Stanford, Princeton, MIT Choose ONE!!

Colleges and Universities A-Z Princeton University
21

<p>

</p>

<p>But unless you will be taking classes in every single department ever, the relevance of the latter part of your post is disputable.</p>

<p>Having many friends at both and having visited both, I can tell you with absolute certainty that Stanford has a vibe that is affected by Silicon Valley. The consequences of that are obvious.</p>

22

<p>Princeton… How can you possibly resist Hoagie Haven?</p>

23

<p>All you’ve learned from posting this thread is that people have different opinions and certain colleges aren’t right for everyone. Who woulda thunk it?</p>

24

<p>

</p>

<p>Let’s assume you are studying physics at Princeton and you later find you are more interested in chemistry, or biophysics. Would you wish Princeton is also top-notched in chemistry and biophysics? What if you are interested in interdisciplinary study? You don’t want to be in a place which is super strong across different areas? </p>

<p>If you want to be a good econmist, you might want to explore knowledge in other areas such as mathematics, statistics, optimization technique, and social science. These are areas beyound pure economics. If you want to be a good biomedical engineer, you may want to go to a university super strong in biology, medicine, and engineering. Stanford is super strong in virtually all areas. That is why Stanford is so great in interdisciplinary subjects and Stanford people invented a lot of modern technologies.</p>

25

<p>

</p>

<p>Let’s assume you are studying in physics at Princeton. You later find you are more interested in chemistry, or biophysics. Would you wish Princeton is also top-notched in chemistry and biophysics? What if you are interested in interdisciplinary study? You don’t want to be in a place which is super strong across different areas? </p>

<p>If you want to be a good econmist, you might want to explore knowledge in other areas such as mathematics, statistics, optimization technique, and social science. These are areas beyound pure economics. If you want to be a good biomedical engineer, you may want to go a university super strong in biology, medicine, and engineering. Stanford is super strong in virtually all areas. That is why Stanford is so great in interdisciplinary subjects and Stanford people invented a lot of modern technologies.</p>

26

<p>

</p>

<p>Let’s not assume – let’s let the OP simply resolve this issue himself.</p>

<p>There are very few fields where Princeton and Stanford are weak. If you are going to go into hypothetical situations, what if the OP wanted to study Classics? Or to become a medievalist? Or mathematician? Clearly Princeton wins.</p>

<p>Hence the inherent problem with using your justification.</p>

27

<p>A little on Princeton Engineering. Something that I just posted in a Duke Robertson program vs. Princeton Engineering thread:</p>

<p>Dunnin, no I don’t see how that might create superior access to faculty time and attention.</p>

<p>I am an alumnus of Princeton as a ChE. and it would be hard to get close to the availability that I had to top professors at Princeton, particularly the ChE. professors.</p>

<p>My senior thesis was a laboratory experiment that lasted for the whole year under one of the top professors in the particular field in the world. He was avaliable any time for me to walk into his office and ask questions, or even call him at his home at night. I even took a graduate school course taught by him. The results of the thesis were published in one of the main Journals in the field, along with his name and a graduate student a year later. This is not just Engineering, you will see this in most other Princeton departments.</p>

<p>I literally was given my own office to perform my laboratory work for the whole year. No one was allowed in the space during that time.</p>

<p>International?</p>

<p>Very few in the field worldwide would not recognize the significance that I studied under this professor.</p>

<p>More international?</p>

<p>I later graduated from Stanford Business School with an MBA and became an Investment Banker.</p>

<p>This is typical of the well roundedness of the Princeton education and the closesness with top professors by the undergraduate students.</p>

28

<p>

</p>

<p>Wait, so you’re saying that the well-roundedness of Stanford isn’t relevant, but only Princeton’s is? Remember, you’re the one who brought up the issue of well-roundedness when you made the dubious claim that Princeton “is certainly the most well-rounded of the three.” Now you’re backtracking by saying well-roundedness doesn’t matter because datalook demonstrated that Stanford is more well-rounded than Princeton.</p>

29

<p>

</p>

<p>I don’t believe you. This is what I said in another thread: </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Fyi, the post count is currently 12.66 per day.</p>

30

<p>The following thread in the “college search” forum proves Stanford > Princeton. You’ll see why:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/897142-i-am-curious-pick-one-stanford-princeton-mit.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/897142-i-am-curious-pick-one-stanford-princeton-mit.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

31

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s not what I am saying. There is a difference between being strong in a lot of departments and having a “liberal arts” atmosphere. If you can ONLY take classes in your major’s department, the fact that all departments are strong is not necessarily a very relevant factor. The culture of Princeton is more liberal-artsy than that of Stanford, in curriculum and students.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Although this make shock you, what you believe doesn’t matter at all. PROVE it or move on.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>All I see is why Princeton and Stanford are different but equal schools.</p>

32

<p>

</p>

<p>Who said the following again??</p>

<p>

</p>

33

<p>

</p>

<p>Unlike Princeton, Stanford does not practice yield protection: </p>

<p>

</p>

34

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m rapidly losing my confidence in your ability to think properly. Look at my two statements. Now consider them. Slowly, so you make sure to understand that they are not on any level contradictory.</p>

<p>Now prove your statements or demonstrate how moronic your posts are further through your refusal to do so.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You are not qualified to make that judgment because you lack data.</p>

<p>Also note that the study is the opinion of one set of researchers, and outdated.</p>

<p>iamtbh, you can’t discredit what cannot be discredited. In this case, Princeton. You are only pointing out your own ignorance through each post. I suggest you stop making yourself look worse and worse. It isn’t even effective – no one is being convinced.</p>

35

<p>

</p>

<p>When did I say your two statements are contradictory? My point is that there is no way for JA12 to prove whether or not he is a Princeton BS (no pun intended)/Stanford MBA. Given the frequence and nature of his posts, I believe he is a Paper Tiger. But I doubt he is a true Cardinal. Stanford MBAs do not have this much time on their hands. Nor are they so illogical.</p>

36

<p>

</p>

<p>Thank you for the admission that you too are not a Stanford graduate.</p>

<p>You have no basis for your claim whatsoever and therefore it is not worth considering. This forum works based on the principle of accepting certain statements based on trust. JA12 has given me some reason to hold back full acknowledgment that he is a graduate of either school in the recent past. He could be an alumnus from awhile ago, for example. That’s fine.</p>

<p>To claim definitely that he is not because of some abstract reasoning of the worthiness of two schools is absurd and therefore must be justified. You are essentially claiming that another poster is completely fabricating a biography. Because of the strength and implication of that claim, you are obligated to justify it, lest you undermine the principle on which this forum operates.</p>

<p>And you have yet to resolve the issue of the relevance and reliability of the study you published.</p>

37

<p>

</p>

<p>Read the NBER paper. The RP researchers proved for Stanford (and HYM), a linear relationship between SAT scores and admissions chances. Such a relationship did not obtain for Princeton, unfortunately.</p>

38

<p>Proper diction is appreciated; it ensures that your sentences are coherent.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>1) Cite the study relating to Stanford</p>

<p>2) Prove that Stanford does not practice yield protection now</p>

<p>3) Prove that Princeton practices yield protection now</p>

<p>If any one of these three points goes unanswered, then obviously you understand that you cannot belabor an unproven point.</p>

39

<p>

</p>

<p>(1) I never said where I matriculate because unlike you, I don’t feel the need to ■■■■■ for my university.</p>

<p>(2) I am 19 (which I did reveal). So, as of now, I have only graduated from high school.</p>

<p>(3) I do not write 12.66 posts per day.</p>

<p>(4) I do not call other people “rejects,” which both you and JA12 called me. Is this an “Old Nassau” tradition or something?</p>

40

<p>

</p>

<p>Past performance is a good indicator of present and future results. Princeton has a history of yield protection; Stanford does not.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Did you miss this?</p>

<p>

</p>