what race to mark on LS apps?

[Mr Shears]

1. There is greater genettic diversity within "black" Africa than between Africans and Europeans.
2. Overweight people have a higher incidence heart disease.

jsia 

1. I didn't write the article, and as I stated in the beginning of the post, I agree with your position.
2. Sickle Cell Anemia is not a heart disease.  It's a blood disorder - big difference.

jsia   

[redemption]

Yup. I understood where you were coming from - I was just adding information, just in case people still get the wrong idea that there is such a thing as race. (I sensed a tiny amount hestitation on your part, also)

[Mr Shears]

Yup. I understood where you were coming from - I was just adding information, just in case people still get the wrong idea that there is such a thing as race. (I sensed a tiny amount hestitation on your part, also)

Well, you're right.  I'm not denying that.  I like a quote from Scientific American where it says that someone considered "black" in America might be considered "white" in Africa.

[jnc18]

I've already pointed out that the majority of applications ask that you mark the primary race/ethnic group that applies to you or to mark the most appropriate box or boxes.  Notice that it did not ask that you mark the race/group that you'd like to be considered as for admissions purposes.

You are then required to sign every application either digitally or via certification letter to "verify that the above information is true, correct, and complete to the best of [your] knowledge."  Notice that it does not say "to the best of your benefit" or "to the best of your preference."

If you choose to do otherwise it is not only grossly exploitative, it is fraudulent.

How is this even debatable?

It's debateable because there are law schools outside the vast majority you are referring to which DO NOT elaborate further than "race/ethnicity" or "ethnic background".  As this very thread has demonstrated, there is quite a debate about how we define "race" or "ethnicity".

So you mark "white" on the majority of applications, which specify "primary" or "most appropriate", but then mark "native american" on those applications that don't in order to exploit the preferential admissions process?

How is this inconsistency any more acceptable?

There really doesn't need to be this theoretical debate about race and ethnicity, that is a an auxiliary discussion.  It's really about right and wrong.  Honesty and deception.  Self-awareness and self-delusion.

[jnc18]

I mark "white" on all applications; I am not a part of any other ethnic group that this debate might apply to.

Yeah, I know.  When I said "you", I meant it indirectly as it would apply.  In other word "a person."

Sorry about the confusion.

[AH]

Been out of the topic for sometime, but just wanted to clarify for whoever said if you mark both they discount URM.  Apparently, that isn't true.  I think it is on a school by school basis, but it seems that if you disclose they take both into account.  thought the update would be helpful for those interested in this topic.

[jnc18]

Been out of the topic for sometime, but just wanted to clarify for whoever said if you mark both they discount URM.  Apparently, that isn't true.  I think it is on a school by school basis, but it seems that if you disclose they take both into account.  thought the update would be helpful for those interested in this topic.

I meant specifically in the case if you mark both "white" and "native american".  I'm inclined to believe they have the good sense to consider it more "white" than "native american".  Especially when you have people who are clearly white marking just "native american".  Goes back to that dilution of admissions preference for Native American applicants that I was alluding to in an earlier post. 

[AH]

Been out of the topic for sometime, but just wanted to clarify for whoever said if you mark both they discount URM.  Apparently, that isn't true.  I think it is on a school by school basis, but it seems that if you disclose they take both into account.  thought the update would be helpful for those interested in this topic.

I meant specifically in the case if you mark both "white" and "native american".  I'm inclined to believe they have the good sense to consider it more "white" than "native american".  Especially when you have people who are clearly white marking just "native american".  Goes back to that dilution of admissions preference for Native American applicants that I was alluding to in an earlier post. 

The update was about cases were you do mark both.

Also, that is a very difficult thing to say.  I have a friend who looks about 90% NA who is only 20%.  I LOOK white but am a *minimum* 20%.   

like I've said before, complicated situation, impossible debate since it seems there about six sides none of which are changing their minds any time soon.  Just wanted to offer the update since this was where the question is raised.

[redemption]

Maybe I'll get around sometime to breaking this issue down into its component parts and making claims that are indisputable about each part. Then we would all agree. Until then, we are just confusing each other.

[jnc18]

The update was about cases were you do mark both.

Also, that is a very difficult thing to say.  I have a friend who looks about 90% NA who is only 20%.  I LOOK white but am a *minimum* 20%.   

like I've said before, complicated situation, impossible debate since it seems there about six sides none of which are changing their minds any time soon.  Just wanted to offer the update since this was where the question is raised.

No, I meant specifically those two races only.  As opposed to like black and white.

Also, I meant clearly based on their genetic history (i.e. 1/8 NA blood) and/or cultural upbringing (i.e. "I just found out I'm part NA a year ago"), not based on phenotypes.

I think I've kind of exhausted my opinion here though.  It was an interesting discussion and I'm satisfied that I was able to bone it so hard.