Multi-Billionaire Oprah Whines About Sexism & Income Inequality At DNC

[barbos]

Have you never heard of a Pyramid Scheme? Herbalife? Mary Kay? Cutco?

And?

They are arguably some of the worst spread and most successful scams out there.

Scamming OFTEN involves scamming "employees" rather than "clients".

No, they are not employees. They might think they are, but they are not.
And how is that relevant again?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We probably all experience racial or sexual prejudice in some form or another. But it is mostly the young white men trying to get a college degree who do experience most of the prejudice these days.

What makes you believe that?

Racial preferences in higher education.
Your Ilk has dropped denying that it goes on, now they are arguing that it is a good thing to have e.g. more black doctors even if that means discriminating against white and Asian applicants to med school. Hostility on the Left to standardized tests and other objective measures over subjective measures like essays or "personality scores" is also part of this rot.

And note that when they tried getting rid of the objective measures during Covid they found the result was admissions even more favored the rich. Yes, they can game the SAT to some degree, but the fuzzier the measure the easier it is to game with money.

Yep and it’s long been known that SAT scores are heavily correlated with the socioeconomic attainment of the parents.

So? Does it occur to you that there might be a relationship between intellect and socioeconomic attainment?

The communists weren't able to remove the effects between generations even when rebuilding the entire educational system from scratch. Whether it's genetics or nurture, there's certainly something.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Do you have any compelling evidence to the contrary?

Sure. I made it quite explicit in the post to which you were responding:

That's a very popular story about successful people, in all fields and throughout history.

Which is an excellent reason to disbelieve it, in the absence of compelling evidence.

So the absence of evidence is supposed to be evidence?

 

[bilby]

Do you have any compelling evidence to the contrary?

Sure. I made it quite explicit in the post to which you were responding:

That's a very popular story about successful people, in all fields and throughout history.

Which is an excellent reason to disbelieve it, in the absence of compelling evidence.

So the absence of evidence is supposed to be evidence?

When evidence is to be expected? You betcha.

Even more do when the original claim is known to be a popular myth.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We probably all experience racial or sexual prejudice in some form or another. But it is mostly the young white men trying to get a college degree who do experience most of the prejudice these days.

Young Asian men get it worse.

Oh, wait, needs more context”

View attachment 47643

And, once again, we see disparate outcomes being presented as proof of discrimination.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

In my sarcastic post, I implied overlap between young white males who feel like victims of discrimination, and the InCel (involuntarily celibate) movement. I'll guess that that overlap is very real: Although I'm sure this doesn't apply to any posters here, imagined feelings of educational or political discrimination may stem from real feelings of sexual frustration.

Certainly. The basic formula for radicalization is to find an actual source of unhappiness or suffering in a person's life and push at it, blaming some group for it. Sexual frustration is a very real issue and the internet has both increased it (by making the dating pool large enough that there's an eternal hope for doing better) and made it much easier to radicalize them at the same time.

There is a long list of law enforcement agencies who have warned that the InCel movement is becoming a major security threat, e.g.

I'm not at all surprised. Most groups that are the target of radicalizers are already rather marginalized. The Incel community is not.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

And once again you attempt to derail the discussion with irrelevancies.

We use the medical school data as medical schools should inherently have a minimum standard (there should be no contamination by lesser schools), the data is recent enough to have made it to the internet, it is extremely damning and has never been meaningfully defended.

Note that the universities have responded to these allegations by hiding the data (other than when compelled to disclose it in court) rather than by addressing the issue. That's not the actions of the falsely accused, that's the actions of the guilty.

Medical schools DO have minimal standards which are actually quite high for every single student admitted to the school. I do not know what you mean by ‘contamination by lesser schools.’ What you seem utterly unwilling to comprehend is that being the best person to treat patients is not the same thing as being able to score perfect scores on tests. Different t skill sets. Being a doctor requires a lot of so-called soft skills. Those do not have 100% overlap with test taking skills.

"Lesser schools" as in not all colleges being elite and it being pretty hard to draw a dividing line.

Medical schools should all be elite, the result should be equal admissions scores. Yes, there are differences between people other than scores but why in the world should we believe that Asians are vastly inferior to blacks at such soft skills? It's absolutely blatant discrimination but since it goes the way you favor you are in denial about it.

I recently read an article in which an Asian man, a physician, if I remember correctly, joked about medical school admissions being the Asian bar mitzvah. We tend to see physicians as the apex of intellectual and professional achievement, l don’t necessarily agree but that does explain the push of many families to get their children into medical school. Please note: the PUSH of FAMILIES for their kid to get into medical school, to achieve and prove their worth. Cool but having demanding parents with high expectations does not mean that you will be a good doctor, no matter how smart you are. I’ve known plenty of students whose aspirations for medical school are their parents’ aspirations, not their own.

Sure they do--but does that mean they're not competent to do the job? Or are they discriminated against?

I know that you do not care about the needs of underserved communities but there is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities. That means being able to earn the trust of those communities and being willing to commit to serving those communities. Students who pursue medical school for the status and the bucks are not likely to serve those communities or to serve them well or for long. THAT is why there is such a drive to recruit and admit med students from across a broad range of demographics.

I don't believe discrimination in admissions is a solution to this. Underserved communities are either the result of the government (Medicaid payments are often not sufficient to maintain a practice) and small communities (not enough volume to maintain a practice.) Not because of race.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

We probably all experience racial or sexual prejudice in some form or another. But it is mostly the young white men trying to get a college degree who do experience most of the prejudice these days.

What makes you believe that?

Racial preferences in higher education.
Your Ilk has dropped denying that it goes on, now they are arguing that it is a good thing to have e.g. more black doctors even if that means discriminating against white and Asian applicants to med school. Hostility on the Left to standardized tests and other objective measures over subjective measures like essays or "personality scores" is also part of this rot.

Are you arguing that medical school acceptance rates is the reason a rational person who think that young white men trying to get a college degree experience most of the prejudice these days? Your rant literally makes no sense to me, since I believe a college degree is a prerequisite for entrance into medical school.

If that is not your argument, then what makes one think that hat young white men trying to get a college degree experience most of the prejudice today?

And once again you attempt to derail the discussion with irrelevancies

We use the medical school data as medical schools should inherently have a minimum standard (there should be no contamination by lesser schools), the data is recent enough to have made it to the internet, it is extremely damning and has never been meaningfully defended.

RVonse''s observation (bold-faced and italicized) - which started this tangent - was explicitly about the discrimination young white men experience getting into college. Medical school admissions are not relevant to that experience because 1) they are a small fraction of students in higher education, and 2) applicants ALREADY HAVE GRADUATED COLLEGE. To hammer home the 2nd point for the terminally obtuse, in order to graduate from college, one has to get into college. So unless you have any actual evidence those young white men (not boys) who applied to medical school also had trouble getting into college, the use of medical school admissions is the a derail.

Yes, he's talking about college rather than medical school. But it's the same forces at work--almost every university that's selective about admissions discriminates heavily. It's just we don't have as clean a data set to compare because when the discrimination came to light they responded by no longer providing the data.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Do you have any compelling evidence to the contrary?

Sure. I made it quite explicit in the post to which you were responding:

That's a very popular story about successful people, in all fields and throughout history.

Which is an excellent reason to disbelieve it, in the absence of compelling evidence.

So the absence of evidence is supposed to be evidence?

When evidence is to be expected? You betcha.

Even more do when the original claim is known to be a popular myth.

If it's known to be a myth then there should be some evidence that it is. Your position seems to be that it's blasphemy and thus inherently false with no proof needed.

 

[laughing dog]

We probably all experience racial or sexual prejudice in some form or another. But it is mostly the young white men trying to get a college degree who do experience most of the prejudice these days.

What makes you believe that?

Racial preferences in higher education.
Your Ilk has dropped denying that it goes on, now they are arguing that it is a good thing to have e.g. more black doctors even if that means discriminating against white and Asian applicants to med school. Hostility on the Left to standardized tests and other objective measures over subjective measures like essays or "personality scores" is also part of this rot.

Are you arguing that medical school acceptance rates is the reason a rational person who think that young white men trying to get a college degree experience most of the prejudice these days? Your rant literally makes no sense to me, since I believe a college degree is a prerequisite for entrance into medical school.

If that is not your argument, then what makes one think that hat young white men trying to get a college degree experience most of the prejudice today?

And once again you attempt to derail the discussion with irrelevancies

We use the medical school data as medical schools should inherently have a minimum standard (there should be no contamination by lesser schools), the data is recent enough to have made it to the internet, it is extremely damning and has never been meaningfully defended.

RVonse''s observation (bold-faced and italicized) - which started this tangent - was explicitly about the discrimination young white men experience getting into college. Medical school admissions are not relevant to that experience because 1) they are a small fraction of students in higher education, and 2) applicants ALREADY HAVE GRADUATED COLLEGE. To hammer home the 2nd point for the terminally obtuse, in order to graduate from college, one has to get into college. So unless you have any actual evidence those young white men (not boys) who applied to medical school also had trouble getting into college, the use of medical school admissions is the a derail.

Yes, he's talking about college rather than medical school. But it's the same forces at work--almost every university that's selective about admissions discriminates heavily. It's just we don't have as clean a data set to compare because when the discrimination came to light they responded by no longer providing the data.

In simple terms, you are using a biased extrapolation that has no basis in reason.

 

[Toni]

And once again you attempt to derail the discussion with irrelevancies.

We use the medical school data as medical schools should inherently have a minimum standard (there should be no contamination by lesser schools), the data is recent enough to have made it to the internet, it is extremely damning and has never been meaningfully defended.

Note that the universities have responded to these allegations by hiding the data (other than when compelled to disclose it in court) rather than by addressing the issue. That's not the actions of the falsely accused, that's the actions of the guilty.

Medical schools DO have minimal standards which are actually quite high for every single student admitted to the school. I do not know what you mean by ‘contamination by lesser schools.’ What you seem utterly unwilling to comprehend is that being the best person to treat patients is not the same thing as being able to score perfect scores on tests. Different t skill sets. Being a doctor requires a lot of so-called soft skills. Those do not have 100% overlap with test taking skills.

"Lesser schools" as in not all colleges being elite and it being pretty hard to draw a dividing line.

Medical schools should all be elite, the result should be equal admissions scores. Yes, there are differences between people other than scores but why in the world should we believe that Asians are vastly inferior to blacks at such soft skills? It's absolutely blatant discrimination but since it goes the way you favor you are in denial about it.

I recently read an article in which an Asian man, a physician, if I remember correctly, joked about medical school admissions being the Asian bar mitzvah. We tend to see physicians as the apex of intellectual and professional achievement, l don’t necessarily agree but that does explain the push of many families to get their children into medical school. Please note: the PUSH of FAMILIES for their kid to get into medical school, to achieve and prove their worth. Cool but having demanding parents with high expectations does not mean that you will be a good doctor, no matter how smart you are. I’ve known plenty of students whose aspirations for medical school are their parents’ aspirations, not their own.

Sure they do--but does that mean they're not competent to do the job? Or are they discriminated against?

I know that you do not care about the needs of underserved communities but there is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities. That means being able to earn the trust of those communities and being willing to commit to serving those communities. Students who pursue medical school for the status and the bucks are not likely to serve those communities or to serve them well or for long. THAT is why there is such a drive to recruit and admit med students from across a broad range of demographics.

I don't believe discrimination in admissions is a solution to this. Underserved communities are either the result of the government (Medicaid payments are often not sufficient to maintain a practice) and small communities (not enough volume to maintain a practice.) Not because of race.

There is a difference between being ( theoretically) competent to do a job and being suited to do a job. My husband once told me he thought he would be a good doctor. He’s very intelligent, earned top grades as an undergrad and earned his Ph.D. In a field not related to biology or chemistry or physics. He would be a terrible doctor. He isn’t good around sick people. He is one of those people who nearly faints at the sight of blood. If we watch Call the Midwife or any medical type show, I end up telling him when it is safe to look. On paper, he would make a great candidate for medical school ( assuming he took the MCAT and his score was in line with his GRE score. I go with him to medical appointments that are beyond just routine ones because he forgets to ask questions or doesn’t quite remember what the doctor said —because it’s not within his knowledge or interest base. He’s better, in part because I talk about whatever medical issues arise but no, he would not make a good doctor. One of the brightest people I know rebelled against her academic parents ( biology and chemistry) and applied to medical school. I was in class with her—she easily earned the top score on any test in classrooms full of people going to go to medical or veterinarian schools. But she found everything related to biology boring. She took more math and physics classes for fun. She had top grades, top MCAT scores. She did not get into med school because, as brilliant as she is, she is not particularly good with people. Instead she earned her PhD in mathematics and is a tenured mathematics professor which is what she seems made to be, as anyone who knows her would say.

Lots and lots of brilliant, accomplished people would make terrible doctors, no mater how good their grades or their MCAT scores.

You seem to believe that medical schools ( and whatever you consider ‘elite’ schools) have different standards for applicants based on demographics. No. They have a range of scores which, along with recommendations, interviews and personal statements they use to make decisions about admissions. In the case of Ivies, and actually some other universities, they admit some ‘legacy’ students who might not make the cut if it were not for their family members. There are students who are admitted because of their athletic or musical abilities whose grades might not earn them a spot. And so on.

Underserved communities are often underserved because of the poverty level of much of the population. It demonstrates a very poor grasp of history or a deliberate refusal to recognize history to not know and understand that many people live in poverty precisely because of racial discrimination. Not all. Appalachia, for instance, has a higher rate of poverty because of historical policy that supported wealthy mine ow ers while allowing the owners to keep there withers in near slave conditions, poorly paid, owing everything to ‘the company’ as one example.

I’m sorry that you seem unable or unwilling to understand or accept those facts but you are the only person who can change that.

 

[Toni]

We probably all experience racial or sexual prejudice in some form or another. But it is mostly the young white men trying to get a college degree who do experience most of the prejudice these days.

What makes you believe that?

Racial preferences in higher education.
Your Ilk has dropped denying that it goes on, now they are arguing that it is a good thing to have e.g. more black doctors even if that means discriminating against white and Asian applicants to med school. Hostility on the Left to standardized tests and other objective measures over subjective measures like essays or "personality scores" is also part of this rot.

And note that when they tried getting rid of the objective measures during Covid they found the result was admissions even more favored the rich. Yes, they can game the SAT to some degree, but the fuzzier the measure the easier it is to game with money.

Yep and it’s long been known that SAT scores are heavily correlated with the socioeconomic attainment of the parents.

So? Does it occur to you that there might be a relationship between intellect and socioeconomic attainment?

The communists weren't able to remove the effects between generations even when rebuilding the entire educational system from scratch. Whether it's genetics or nurture, there's certainly something.

Of course there can be a relationship between academic achievement and socioeconomic background. Wealthy parents tend to be able to purchase a lot of advantage for their kids, including access to ‘the best’ schools, tutors, enrichment t activities, and, importantly, influence. How do you think Donald Trump got anywhere? It was not because of his intellect or his work ethic. It was because of his daddy’s money, gained by cheating and exploiting people who were poorer than he was. Do you think the Trump family is the lone example?

Academic attainment is not the same thing as intellectual or academic ability.

 

[Bomb#20]

I know that you do not care about the needs of underserved communities but there is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities. That means being able to earn the trust of those communities and being willing to commit to serving those communities. Students who pursue medical school for the status and the bucks are not likely to serve those communities or to serve them well or for long.

No doubt. But...

THAT is why there is such a drive to recruit and admit med students from across a broad range of demographics.

... that is not a parsimonious explanation. That is a dinosaur egg explanation.

Back in the Tang Dynasty when I was a kid, the Yucatan meteorite impact at the time of the KT boundary hadn't been discovered yet, and the popular press's prevailing explanation for the extinction of the dinosaurs was that mammals ate their eggs. This was clearly an incorrect explanation even if nobody had a better one at the time. It was clearly incorrect because at the end of the Mesozoic Era, 80% of animal species went extinct, not just dinosaurs. Something really bad for ecosystems evidently happened all over the world. The hypothesis that everything else died because of a natural disaster that didn't also wipe out the dinosaurs, and coincidentally mammals got really good at eating dinosaur eggs at about the same time, multiplies entities unnecessarily. It is much more probable that whatever killed off the ammonite mollusks and whatnot was sufficiently un-picky about what it was killing to take out the dinosaurs as well. One cause is more parsimonious than two.

Universities in general are engaged in a massive drive to recruit and admit students from across a broad range of demographics. This is not because there is a huge need for art history majors to provide art history services in underserved communities. If your hypothesis about med students were correct then there would have to be two unrelated causes that independently result in the same behavior pattern in university admission officers. That multiplies entities unnecessarily. It is much more probable that whatever motivation causes Harvard admission officers to lie about Asian applicants' personal qualities as an excuse to hold them to higher academic standards than students of other races is sufficiently un-picky about its collateral damage to take out medical school applicants as well. "There is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities" appears to be a post hoc rationalization for a policy that was originally adopted for some other reason.

(The obvious parsimonious explanation, accounting for undergraduate and graduate admission patterns alike, is being openly displayed by the author of posts #325 and #326 and by the four people who "Liked" her blatant illogic: Western Culture is evidently hosting a widespread religious belief that people are interchangeable representatives of the ethnic groups their ancestors belonged to, that certain occupations' ethnic composition ought to match that of the workforce at large, and that discrimination can be measured by lumping people with those they look like instead of by examining the decision-making process. The hypothesis that university policymakers are typically infected by this parasitic meme simultaneously explains both medical school behavior and university behavior in general, with no need for multiple specialized explanations for different subcategories of institution. But it might be something else. Either way, one cause is more parsimonious than two.)

 

[Toni]

I know that you do not care about the needs of underserved communities but there is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities. That means being able to earn the trust of those communities and being willing to commit to serving those communities. Students who pursue medical school for the status and the bucks are not likely to serve those communities or to serve them well or for long.

No doubt. But...

THAT is why there is such a drive to recruit and admit med students from across a broad range of demographics.

... that is not a parsimonious explanation. That is a dinosaur egg explanation.

Back in the Tang Dynasty when I was a kid, the Yucatan meteorite impact at the time of the KT boundary hadn't been discovered yet, and the popular press's prevailing explanation for the extinction of the dinosaurs was that mammals ate their eggs. This was clearly an incorrect explanation even if nobody had a better one at the time. It was clearly incorrect because at the end of the Mesozoic Era, 80% of animal species went extinct, not just dinosaurs. Something really bad for ecosystems evidently happened all over the world. The hypothesis that everything else died because of a natural disaster that didn't also wipe out the dinosaurs, and coincidentally mammals got really good at eating dinosaur eggs at about the same time, multiplies entities unnecessarily. It is much more probable that whatever killed off the ammonite mollusks and whatnot was sufficiently un-picky about what it was killing to take out the dinosaurs as well. One cause is more parsimonious than two.

Universities in general are engaged in a massive drive to recruit and admit students from across a broad range of demographics. This is not because there is a huge need for art history majors to provide art history services in underserved communities. If your hypothesis about med students were correct then there would have to be two unrelated causes that independently result in the same behavior pattern in university admission officers. That multiplies entities unnecessarily. It is much more probable that whatever motivation causes Harvard admission officers to lie about Asian applicants' personal qualities as an excuse to hold them to higher academic standards than students of other races is sufficiently un-picky about its collateral damage to take out medical school applicants as well. "There is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities" appears to be a post hoc rationalization for a policy that was originally adopted for some other reason.

(The obvious parsimonious explanation, accounting for undergraduate and graduate admission patterns alike, is being openly displayed by the author of posts #325 and #326 and by the four people who "Liked" her blatant illogic: Western Culture is evidently hosting a widespread religious belief that people are interchangeable representatives of the ethnic groups their ancestors belonged to, that certain occupations' ethnic composition ought to match that of the workforce at large, and that discrimination can be measured by lumping people with those they look like instead of by examining the decision-making process. The hypothesis that university policymakers are typically infected by this parasitic meme simultaneously explains both medical school behavior and university behavior in general, with no need for multiple specialized explanations for different subcategories of institution. But it might be something else. Either way, one cause is more parsimonious than two.)

Well, no.

It is a FACT that there are many medically underserved and unserved communities throughout the United States and it is a FACT that this has always been the case. It is also true that medical schools are waking up to this need as racism has decreased (ever so slightly) and the understanding that persons of color both need medical services that actually meet their needs and that persons of color can make fantastic doctors. Medical schools also keep track of where their graduates end up and how well they do, and in what settings. They are aware of what sort of student does not attempt to work in underserved communities and which sorts do and who does and does not last through the challenges. Unfortunately those bits of information seems to have missed some people.

Maybe spend less time reminiscing about your childhood and get a bit more current. We cannot be much different in age and even I am aware of just how little health care there is in more rural and more poor areas compared with wealthy suburbs and nice urban neighborhoods. I've even learned enough about some other cultures --and some perspective on middle class white culture to know what some of the barriers to getting and following medical advice are.

If I can do it, so can you. I have faith in you.

 

[Bomb#20]

Well, no.

It is a FACT that there are many medically underserved and unserved communities throughout the United States and it is a FACT that this has always been the case. It is also true that medical schools are waking up to this need as racism has decreased (ever so slightly) and the understanding that persons of color both need medical services that actually meet their needs and that persons of color can make fantastic doctors. Medical schools also keep track of where their graduates end up and how well they do, and in what settings. They are aware of what sort of student does not attempt to work in underserved communities and which sorts do and who does and does not last through the challenges. Unfortunately those bits of information seems to have missed some people.

Maybe spend less time reminiscing about your childhood and get a bit more current. We cannot be much different in age and even I am aware of just how little health care there is in more rural and more poor areas compared with wealthy suburbs and nice urban neighborhoods. I've even learned enough about some other cultures --and some perspective on middle class white culture to know what some of the barriers to getting and following medical advice are.

If I can do it, so can you. I have faith in you.

Translation: "There is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities" is a good enough reason to justify the practice.

You appear to have not understood a word I said. I didn't offer an opinion about whether it justifies the practice. Maybe it does. Maybe medical schools should be allowed to discriminate against Asians, for that very reason. But that has no magical power to change an unparsimonious explanation into a scientific one. It's perfectly possible for something to be a post hoc rationalization for a policy that was originally adopted for some other reason, and also a good enough reason on its own merits to preserve the policy.

 

[Toni]

Well, no.

It is a FACT that there are many medically underserved and unserved communities throughout the United States and it is a FACT that this has always been the case. It is also true that medical schools are waking up to this need as racism has decreased (ever so slightly) and the understanding that persons of color both need medical services that actually meet their needs and that persons of color can make fantastic doctors. Medical schools also keep track of where their graduates end up and how well they do, and in what settings. They are aware of what sort of student does not attempt to work in underserved communities and which sorts do and who does and does not last through the challenges. Unfortunately those bits of information seems to have missed some people.

Maybe spend less time reminiscing about your childhood and get a bit more current. We cannot be much different in age and even I am aware of just how little health care there is in more rural and more poor areas compared with wealthy suburbs and nice urban neighborhoods. I've even learned enough about some other cultures --and some perspective on middle class white culture to know what some of the barriers to getting and following medical advice are.

If I can do it, so can you. I have faith in you.

Translation: "There is a huge need for physicians to work in these communities" is a good enough reason to justify the practice.

You appear to have not understood a word I said. I didn't offer an opinion about whether it justifies the practice. Maybe it does. Maybe medical schools should be allowed to discriminate against Asians, for that very reason. But that has no magical power to change an unparsimonious explanation into a scientific one. It's perfectly possible for something to be a post hoc rationalization for a policy that was originally adopted for some other reason, and also a good enough reason on its own merits to preserve the policy.

No you don’t understand what I wrote.

Medical schools use MCAT scores, GPAs, recommendations, interviews and more to determine who to admit.

Having a high MCAT score and high GPA does NOT mean you would be a good doctor.

It dues NOT mean you would make a better doctor compared with someone who scored a bit lower than you did.

It means you got the higher scores.

Median cal school is not like a game of basketball where the team with the most baskets wins the game.

Medical school is not a game. It is a rigorous program comprised of intense education and training.

I have a couple of examples of very intelligent people I know well who had great grades and test scores who are good, bright people but who would make terrible doctors. One applied to med school and did not get in and instead became a mathematics professor. Now it is true that often physicians get paid more than college professors but it is hard to see how she failed by ending up in a career that suits her intellect and personality. The other never applied to med school…because he actually didn’t want to become a doctor and as much as I love him, he would have hated medical school and he would have hated being a doctor.

Those are two people I know off the top of my head who would make lousy doctors despite being highly intelligent. More people would make bad doctors than would make good ones. It is the job of medical schools to sift through candidates to decide who is likely to be successful in their program and as a physician and who is not, from among the large number of applicants each year.

Unless you can determine that they never admit Asian applicants with lower gpas and MCAT scores, all you’ve demonstrated is that on average Asian students score more highly on MCATs and have higher gpas on average than black students or NA students.

So what?

 

[Rhea]

I have personally interacted with MDs who may have done great on the MCATs, and may have thought they were doing great at medical school, and who are objectively SHITTY DOCTORS because their communications skills are shitty. They don’t listen to the patient and take multiple visits to resolve something that should have been resolved in one visit, but they talked over, interrupted and failed to gather evidence that was available because they thought they could win by reading a chart because they were so enamored of their academic prowess.


The data on who DOES serve in under-served areas is clear. Why would medicals schools not use this data? Seriously, why are some of you arguing to NOT use this data in evaluating who will be a good doctor?

Note: I live in an under-served area. The data about who stays here versus who forces me to get a new provider every two years is right in front of us.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

You seem to believe that medical schools ( and whatever you consider ‘elite’ schools) have different standards for applicants based on demographics. No. They have a range of scores which, along with recommendations, interviews and personal statements they use to make decisions about admissions. In the case of Ivies, and actually some other universities, they admit some ‘legacy’ students who might not make the cut if it were not for their family members. There are students who are admitted because of their athletic or musical abilities whose grades might not earn them a spot. And so on.

Two possibilities:

1) They have different standards.

2) There's some huge reason Asians won't make good doctors.

If it were the other way around you would certainly be calling this discrimination.

Legacy admissions and sports admissions are separate issues.

I would like to see evidence whether the money they bring in is enough to cover the positions--something that I have never seen addressed. And I don't like sports admits.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

So? Does it occur to you that there might be a relationship between intellect and socioeconomic attainment?

The communists weren't able to remove the effects between generations even when rebuilding the entire educational system from scratch. Whether it's genetics or nurture, there's certainly something.

Of course there can be a relationship between academic achievement and socioeconomic background. Wealthy parents tend to be able to purchase a lot of advantage for their kids, including access to ‘the best’ schools, tutors, enrichment t activities, and, importantly, influence. How do you think Donald Trump got anywhere? It was not because of his intellect or his work ethic. It was because of his daddy’s money, gained by cheating and exploiting people who were poorer than he was. Do you think the Trump family is the lone example?

Academic attainment is not the same thing as intellectual or academic ability.

Faith based thinking. It must be money because it's not possible that there might be any other factor.

Yet in the cases where it most certainly isn't money (Poland, China) the effect persists.

 

[Toni]

So? Does it occur to you that there might be a relationship between intellect and socioeconomic attainment?

The communists weren't able to remove the effects between generations even when rebuilding the entire educational system from scratch. Whether it's genetics or nurture, there's certainly something.

Of course there can be a relationship between academic achievement and socioeconomic background. Wealthy parents tend to be able to purchase a lot of advantage for their kids, including access to ‘the best’ schools, tutors, enrichment t activities, and, importantly, influence. How do you think Donald Trump got anywhere? It was not because of his intellect or his work ethic. It was because of his daddy’s money, gained by cheating and exploiting people who were poorer than he was. Do you think the Trump family is the lone example?

Academic attainment is not the same thing as intellectual or academic ability.

Faith based thinking. It must be money because it's not possible that there might be any other factor.

Yet in the cases where it most certainly isn't money (Poland, China) the effect persists.

I was unaware of large numbers of Chinese and Polish students taking SATs.

Your faith in your personal opinion that Asians and white people are just smarter than other people is evident.