<p>Excellent replies, offthetreadmill.
I truly appreciate your dialogue.</p>
<p>No, the "why is this a higher tier school" was a serious question.
I don't see why it's a higher tier school.</p>
<p>I wasn't familiar with the school until this year.
I figured I would apply to it and see what happens.
I didn't have to write any essays or fill out many forms.
I don't think I paid a fee, either. It was quite simple.</p>
<p>It really does seem like the cost of education relates with a school being higher tier.
It doesn't seem like quality/quantity of education has any part in it.
But I do understand the more money a school gets, the more money it can put into buying equipment.</p>
<p>And I'm more interested in the equipment than sitting in a lecture hall most of my time.
I don't think a lot of high schoolers here really know what it's like to be in college after a while.
When you realize you could have read and memorized everything faster than the professor is describing, you start to get really impatient with the fact that lectures occur. And lectures are often better suited as question and answer periods, but professors rarely want that to occur; at least the few places I have been. It seems like professors want to build a type of work ethic, such as "show up everyday" ethic. Otherwise, it does seem like a form of oppression.</p>
<p>Maybe it's too early to think about the masters degree, but I've talked to professors, and I've learned it about equipment and training under the right people.</p>
<p>The "stupid" comment is to suggest the inability to learn. I would be unlearnt if I decided to go to Loyola. </p>
<p>Premise: Too much cost in time and money in order to obtain the bachelors degree.</p>
<p>Enthymeme: I could save time and money by finishing at a public university.</p>
<p>With that said, in my case, it would seem like a "blow my money" school. As in, "go into debt school." Perhaps the upper-middle class America would be suitable to go. But with the recession and attacks on the middle class, it's impractical for me to go. Heck, I'm not really middle class anymore, because of this bail-out issue with the automobile industry and congress. I'm affected by that, too. I'd say my status in the past few months got shot down to lower class. </p>
<p>Of course, this relates to my scenario. I was not using this statement to relate to others who want to go there, which is why I had supplied the other sentences. I suspect those who are willing to go there after doing as many courses as I did must have a very good reason. I could only see social status or perhaps some climbing of the divine ladder to occur: Going to better schools allows a person to go to an even better school after graduating.</p>
<p>I care about the quality of education, but I also care about not spending another three years in school. I don't feel like spending my entire life going to school and being in debt. I'm getting a little tired of the process, really. Which is why I said I could care less. </p>
<p>I think it would have been ethical for Loyola to reject me. Accepting me was unethical. Perhaps some would say, "But that's an awesome school!" Ok? So, I suspect they're going to let me play with MRIs and expensive equipment when I have free time on weekends without supervision. I kind of doubt that. I could be wrong. A person has to be supervised, on a research team, and more. And that would take time; time that would be taken away from earning credits that apply toward the bachelors degree. I could only see Loyola accepting me as wanting to make money off of me with knowing how many of my credits would transfer. Otherwise, it would be a pain to go part-time for another four years. I think that's asking too much of a person, unless Loyola would slingshot me to a place like John Hopkin's.</p>
<p>I think Loyola would be a great school for a masters degree. Because of that, I truly considered being a part-time student in order to obtain a bachelors degree. Going part-time would save a lot of money. The part time deal seems brilliant, but then again, I'm not a freshman anymore. Were I a freshman, I would take it up. This refers to me previous saying it would be stupid for me to go. I would be stupid to go. Or would I? Hence, would you disagree? Logically, would a person raise social status by going there, thus leading to greater educational statuses? Also, I am aware the new pope doesn't like certain things in biology being done, and I have interests in genetic engineering and so forth. Thus, which makes me question the ethical boundaries a scientist would encounter at Loyola, which is a Catholic school. I think it would be unethical and un-Christian to go to a Catholic school and desire to do such things. I would be labeled as a hypocrite, and perhaps the school would be hypocritical. I don't think such things are just. As of late, I'm trying to read about people who have been on the last pope's bioethics advisory, such as Robert J. White and so forth. I'm trying to get a better understanding of how I should take things. But I wouldn't want to do something unethical.</p>
<p>I posted a message, because posting a message is easier than spending two more years at an institution.
I also think my language courses transfer, but those don't apply toward the bachelor's degree.</p>
<p>Anyway, I'll say I could have worded things better.</p>
<p>I hoped people would be able to critically analyze things instead of me going into detail about each and everything.</p>
<p>And you did a decent job, offthetreadmill. </p>
<p>I don't think you needed to rhetorically question some statements. I mean, the idea was to disagree with the statements. So, do you disagree that it's not worth going there? And if so, why? That's what I was aiming for. I'm aiming for someone to say, "You should really take on the debt and loss of time to go to this school, because it will help you get into better schools and higher-paying jobs." And then the ascended person would even give sources or some personal experiences.</p>