usa today academic team

Parent Cafe
53

<p>

What I want is probably not very important to the selection committee, but …if somehow they did become drunk enough to appoint me I would select the brilliant mathematician who I thought would be most likely to change our world for the better. I believe this is what the best of the post-graduate fellowships do. I believe that is what our best colleges try to do (to some extent and with some other criteria at play although I’m nowhere near as convinced of that ;)).</p>

<p>It appears you hold the belief that there are not enough brilliant personable people out there to fill the slots and that the Rhodes folks have to settle for second best in the brilliance area. That is hardly supportable. Other posters and I disagree with that. I believe there are strong candidates, brilliant personable candidates, that don’t make the cut at their school- much less the cut to be at the cocktail party. Why would you think otherwise? </p>

<p>And finally , the tedious part of your post. Again. I am not “grumpy” or angry, or mad, or defensive and you need not attempt to paint me that way. I have been on my best behavior and tried to make my posts less threatening to you as you seemed very sensitive . I have deliberately refrained from saying things like “The Rhodes folks don’t want brilliant Nick-Nolte-on-a-3-day-bender-looking-booger-picking-dorm-hermits.” Click for Nick.:wink: </p>

<p><a href=“http://www.brainfleas.com/WindowsLiveWriter/NolteNowakAnnounceMarriage_C79D/nick_nolte.jpg[/url]”>http://www.brainfleas.com/WindowsLiveWriter/NolteNowakAnnounceMarriage_C79D/nick_nolte.jpg&lt;/a&gt; I just disagree on very basic assumptions you make. I learned long ago not to argue in a box built by the other guy. It is always a losing proposition and logic doesn’t have a thing to do with it. You built a box that wasn’t well-founded.</p>

<p>BTW, if the Rhodes committee is lurking about and about to select the selectors , I hear tequila is pretty good stuff.</p>