<p>
</p>
<p>Ah. But “being familiar” (as is, have heard the name) isn’t really enough to be able to say that something is prestigious. Being both actually knowledgeable and having discerning taste in that given area are what counts. </p>
<p>That’s the problem with how the Asian community defines prestige. It’s all about “have I heard of this – if I have, it must be good quality; if I haven’t, it mustn’t be.” So they’ve all heard of Berkeley but they haven’t heard of, say, Harvey Mudd. Or Middlebury. Or Haverford. Or whatever. So they ascribe prestige to Berkeley based on “having heard of” rather than on considerations of what the actual quality is. Berkeley may very well deserve its standing; that’s not the point. That community overinflates awareness and considers it identical with quality. They have a problem conceiving that there are very fine, equally as fine, schools over here that they just haven’t heard of. </p>
<p>** 1) We haven’t heard of it! 2) Well, then it can’t be any good!** The second statement does not flow as a logical conclusion from the first. It is illogical. It is about as illogical as my saying that Villa San Michele can’t be a very good hotel since I’ve never heard of it.</p>
<p>That speaks directly to why so many of us on CC roll our eyes at the repeated “This is what the Asians think” threads. “What the Asians haven’t heard of” means nothing. “What the general public hasn’t heard of” means nothing. Why would we care about illogical conclusions?</p>