If you are a truly successful person you can make + find opportunity anywhere. The idea that one needs Ivy League pedigree to succeed is ridiculous... unless one defines success by name dropping etc. There are def people who went to Ivy League schools and haven't done shyt with their lives and there are people who succeeded in spite of not having Ivy League pedigree. So it helps but is not the make or break deal you are making it out to be.I disagree. The right school can set you up for life.
To (All) the White Girls Who Didnât Get Into The College Of Their Dreams
- Thread starter Gallo
- Start date
It's all about privlage. If you go to an Ivy League school, it means you are at the pinnacle of privilege, and the idea is that privilege will follow you into your professional life.
These people feal like they are missing out on the privilege that they were entitled to. And they hate the fact that "others" are getting that privilege. You never hear them mad because a white person with a lower gpa got in. They deserve to be there. It's always the non-whites who don't deserve to be there.
These people feal like they are missing out on the privilege that they were entitled to. And they hate the fact that "others" are getting that privilege. You never hear them mad because a white person with a lower gpa got in. They deserve to be there. It's always the non-whites who don't deserve to be there.
After maybe 2-3 years of working, employers don't care about what school you went to. So the big boost from Ivy League pedigree is really from either your first job or what grad school you go to. Its also the network factor- but again, if you don't make the most of your time in school, people will be a lot less apt to help you out, and there just won't be as much opportunity for you. So I don't think it's the ticket to prestige you claim it to be.
I think what affirmative action is trying to fix is a legitimate problem. I dont know that affirmative action is the way to do it. Its reactive instead of proactive/prescriptive. Making it easier for minorities to get into college doesn't address the issues that hold us back from even thinking of going in the first place. And it skews things unnecessarily. But most of the people who complain about affirmative action are average anyway... AA is not keeping Joe Sixpack from getting into Harvard, Joe Sixpack's average intelligence and work ethic are.
I think what affirmative action is trying to fix is a legitimate problem. I dont know that affirmative action is the way to do it. Its reactive instead of proactive/prescriptive. Making it easier for minorities to get into college doesn't address the issues that hold us back from even thinking of going in the first place. And it skews things unnecessarily. But most of the people who complain about affirmative action are average anyway... AA is not keeping Joe Sixpack from getting into Harvard, Joe Sixpack's average intelligence and work ethic are.
Conjecture? Simply not true. Social standing doesn't factor into it outside of the parent's, and even then, it depends on class. For instance, my mother and most of the kids I grew up with have a negative view of higher education and generally believe me to be a snob...or, as Big Gipp would say, "they just don't understand" the difference between a state school and an elite University.
I'll assume by "Ivy League pedigree" you're referring to the top-20 schools in the nation regardless of athletic conference (Stanford, UChicago, etc.). While there are examples of highly successful individuals who did not attend top institutions, most either attended or graduated from one.
Did you just say MOST? Let's not get out of hand. That's only if you have a very limited sense of highly successful. Thank goodness I went to those type of schools and never inherited this type of snobbery. That Brown v. Yale shyt you said is ridiculous too. That degree helps you with your first job and the alumni network will look out if you reach out, but if you're not competent it means nothing.
Kid McNamara
'97 Mike Bibby
Well, if you're interested in arguing absolutes then perhaps you should respond to a different post. Again, there are people who attended "Ivy League" schools and are not successes, just as there are successful people who have attended state schools or who have no formal education. But in general, a correlation exists between those educated at elite institutions and those holding upper management positions within government/public institutions, and private industry.
Of the top-15 Fortune 500 CEOs, I randomly chose 9. They were educated at the following institutions
: Columbia, Drexel, MIT, Harvard, Harvard, UT-Austin, Georgia Tech, UChicago, and the London School of Economics. While UT-Austin and Georgia Tech are public institutions, they are still considered "elite" in their own right.
The President and his top-5 successors:
Harvard, Syracuse, Xavier, Georgetown, Yale, and Georgetown. When Xavier, a Jesuit institution, is considered the weak link in your crew,
So what are you really arguing here? That's it's possible to do this or do that? Sure, of course it is. But beyond that, we're looking at trends. Arguing absolutes is for lunatics and a$$holes.
*Waits for the obligatory, "well, true success means this and that" nonsense that will undoubtedly follow*
Kid McNamara
'97 Mike Bibby
I did say, and mean, most.
It's more than the degree. It's the quality of education, the environment, the heightened expectations, the virtually unlimited access, the alumni network, and so on.
Not sure how this is even an argument.
Well here it comes... most people don't define the baseline of success as being an executive with a seven figure salary. Just because one's "circle" defines success that way doesn't mean they have to, or they have to be in that circle, or that that definition of success isn't stupidWell, if you're interested in arguing absolutes then perhaps you should respond to a different post. Again, there are people who attended "Ivy League" schools and are not successes, just as there are successful people who have attended state schools or who have no formal education. But in general, a correlation exists between those educated at elite institutions and those holding upper management positions within government/public institutions, and private industry.
Of the top-15 Fortune 500 CEOs, I randomly chose 9. They were educated at the following institutions
Columbia, Drexel, MIT, Harvard, Harvard, UT-Austin, Georgia Tech, UChicago, and the London School of Economics. While UT-Austin and Georgia Tech are public institutions, they are still considered "elite" in their own right.
The President and his top-5 successors:
Harvard, Syracuse, Xavier, Georgetown, Yale, and Georgetown. When Xavier, a Jesuit institution, is considered the weak link in your crew,
So what are you really arguing here? That's it's possible to do this or do that? Sure, of course it is. But beyond that, we're looking at trends. Arguing absolutes is for lunatics and a$$holes.
*Waits for the obligatory, "well, true success means this and that" nonsense that will undoubtedly follow*
Kid McNamara
'97 Mike Bibby
Right, so when it comes to matters such as these, do they really need to weigh-in? Just be like most people and strive for mediocrity.
Not being a CEO of a Fortune 500 company = mediocrity?Right, so when it comes to matters such as these, do they really need to weigh-in? Just be like most people and strive for mediocrity.
Which company are you the head of breh?
Kid McNamara
'97 Mike Bibby
Not being a CEO of a Fortune 500 company = mediocrity?
Which company are you the head of breh?
I thought we were discussing ways of defining success, not whether or not one of us held such a position. Perhaps you should re-read your own post.
But again, you're just going to play this game of shifting the meaning of success until it fits your weak argument. I list highly successful individuals and you claim they do not fit your definition of success right? Is there really a point to your posts?
Outside of you being
of course.How old are you, you sound very young and full of yourself. For one you just typed up a bunch of nonsense that is not based on anything concrete with the exception of alumni network which I brought up and quality of education. You can receive a quality education outside of the Ivy League or other elite institutions. An ivy league degree gives you access to that network and some places only recruit from elite universities or have their favorites, that is true. But the idea that it will carry you through life is ridiculous. The degree does bestow automatic prestige onto you and yes, I have gotten to skip parts of the interview process or gotten call backs from places that I wouldn't otherwise, but this notion that that Ivy League degree = winning forever absent your own merit is ridiculous.
Some of the most disillusioned people at top companies are ivy leaguers who thought the world would be given to them and are out performed by people from no-name schools. You ignore the fact that a disproportionate amount of intelligent and driven people end up at ivy league schools in the first place. That's who they accept. But the idea that most good jobs require ivy league credentials is just childish. That's why I said only if you mean "elite" in a very limited sense and even then it's more of a result that there are a disproportionate amount of people from elite universities in the pool in the first place.
The dumbest shyt was that Yale v. Brown shyt that you said
The people who embrace that mentality are the people we hate at school.
Kid McNamara
'97 Mike Bibby
How old are you, you sound very young and full of yourself. For one you just typed up a bunch of nonsense that is not based on anything concrete with the exception of alumni network which I brought up and quality of education. You can receive a quality education outside of the Ivy League or other elite institutions. An ivy league degree gives you access to that network and some places only recruit from elite universities or have their favorites, that is true. But the idea that it will carry you through life is ridiculous. The degree does bestow automatic prestige onto you and yes, I have gotten to skip parts of the interview process or gotten call backs from places that I wouldn't otherwise, but this notion that that Ivy League degree = winning forever absent your own merit is ridiculous.
Some of the most disillusioned people at top companies are ivy leaguers who thought the world would be given to them and are out performed by people from no-name schools. You ignore the fact that a disproportionate amount of intelligent and driven people end up at ivy league schools in the first place. That's who they accept. But the idea that most good jobs require ivy league credentials is just childish. That's why I said only if you mean "elite" in a very limited sense and even then it's more of a result that there are a disproportionate amount of people from elite universities in the pool in the first place.
The dumbest shyt was that Yale v. Brown shyt that you said
Alright so, when you guys are actually interested in addressing my arguments instead of your own, we can resume this conversation. Again, you're using absolutes and conjecture ("some of the most disillusioned people").
I notice you completely skipped addressing my Fortune 500/Top Government Officials example though.
Obviously the Yale v. Brown comment was said in jest, though, having to attend Brown or Cornell
I think most individuals tend to forget that universities are attempting to fill their school with a certain quality of individual with certain tendencies in order to properly effectuate the social and perceptual pedigree they have either grown accustomed to having or are attempting to perpetuate.
The University of Texas is looking for a certain type of student as evinced by their own selective criteria. This girl is out cheah
over not getting in with average scores. I purposely sabotaged my own SAT and got a 1300 and still got into the schools I wanted to with full packages.
People like this girl make me sick. They are often the first ones to cry over those on welfare, social security, disability, etc. because they don't believe in entitlements, yet look for handouts by the SCOTUS.
As the Chinese restaurant owner on South Park would say, "Unbereavable."
The University of Texas is looking for a certain type of student as evinced by their own selective criteria. This girl is out cheah
over not getting in with average scores. I purposely sabotaged my own SAT and got a 1300 and still got into the schools I wanted to with full packages.People like this girl make me sick. They are often the first ones to cry over those on welfare, social security, disability, etc. because they don't believe in entitlements, yet look for handouts by the SCOTUS.
As the Chinese restaurant owner on South Park would say, "Unbereavable."
Alright so, when you guys are actually interested in addressing my arguments instead of your own, we can resume this conversation. Again, you're using absolutes and conjecture ("some of the most disillusioned people").
I notice you completely skipped addressing my Fortune 500/Top Government Officials example though.
Obviously the Yale v. Brown comment was said in jest, though, having to attend Brown or Cornell
I addressed your example, I said only if you "have a very limited sense of what elite is." You used the term "highly successful" broadly. I also noticed you never mentioned your age and if you got into said schools. I addressed everything you said, you just don't seem to be ivy-league material :obamaword:
