Law School Discussion

16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #20 on: July 29, 2005, 11:42:36 AM »
What a bunch of bull S---.  There are plenty of applicants with a better GPA from better schools who are interested in human rights work, and have done plenty of it (perhaps they weren't well off enough to do it outside their own poverty stricken neighborhoods in the States) and have better than modest LSAT scores who got dinged at Yale, and many other schools.

I love the aristocracy that hides behind the ruse of the meritocracy in the elite echelons of society.  May be I can buy my kids into Yale one day.
Yes, but what is the probability that those other kids' parents will donate $5 million to the school? Who said there was a meritocracy in this country? Performance is often the result of privilege.

Actually, privilege is generally the result of performance. Keep in mind that most wealthy families today didn't come to this country with anything -- someone had to accomplish something along the way.  Woody Allen himself certainly wasn't born wealthy.

For what it's worth, this country is certainly far more meritocratic than any other.
Of course, the argument that privilege is the result of being endowed with glorious attributes or by just working hard has been made for centuries to justify privilege. If it were accurate perhaps it would be persuasive. It ignores the difference between being born on third base, and having hit a triple.

Two kids, one rich one poor.
The former goes to the best private school in the country, the latter a lead paint infested ghetto school.
The former’s parents hire private tutors, the latter “asks mom.”
The former builds up his resume by taking a non-paying 2 year internship working for a Senator (whose campaign dad contributed to) while Mom pays for a nice apartment in Georgetown, the latter has to work at McDonalds just to pay for an encyclopedia.
The former takes Kaplan and hires a private tutor, the latter has to borrow money to buy an ARCO LSAT book.

SURPRISINGLY, the former gets a better LSAT score, has a better GPA, and has a more impressive resume. That rich kid attainted his advantage due to merit? Hardly! It is not surprising that someone who has been given the best of the best will succeed if he is reasonably hard working and intelligent, but he will almost certainly achieve more than if he was not provided with the fruits of privilege. When performance is the result of privilege, merit has a skewed meaning.

That is not to say that one cannot achieve greatness despite starting in squalor. Just ask Bill Clinton or Benjamin Franklin! However, exceptions to the rule do not constitute a counter-rule. And the assertion that most wealthy people and families "didn't come to this country with anything" is inaccurate. The only group of persons who didn't come to this country with anything were slaves, and the last I checked, Black folks haven't exactly set this country afire with its wealth. On a micro and macro level, privilege begets performance, which is then further perpetuated by privilege.

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #21 on: July 29, 2005, 03:07:58 PM »
"The only group of persons who didn't come to this country with anything were slaves" - Did you really write that? If you are going to try to impress us with your argumentative skills at least make sense.

BAFF213

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #22 on: July 29, 2005, 10:11:18 PM »
This is an interesting argument. I come from a town that is pretty well off, and speaking from experience, I tend to agree with BoscoBreaux -- those who are privileged do have more potential to "achieve greatness." However, there is a counterpoint to this, which is often noted: although those who are privileged have greater potential to achieve greatness, they often do not take advantage of the opportunities that they were born with.

There is evidence that demonstrates this "phenomenon" -- that rich kids often try to live off of their parents and don't "succeed" in life. For example, I believe there were studies showing that the majority of businesses that were handed down by parents to their children ended up going sour. I have witnessed this first hand in my town. Many people I know simply do not do sh_t. They don't care and just try to "live off of their parents," and do not really achieve anything. They appear to have no goals. It's pretty pathetic actually (though it could just be attributed to a difference in values). Also, I guess at least part of this is due to the fact these people are already rich. They basically have nothing to strive for because they're already at the "top of the ladder" (at least in terms of wealth).

So basically, privileged individuals have more potential to achieve, but often do not take advantage of it due to lack of motivation to achieve.


Of course, the argument that privilege is the result of being endowed with glorious attributes or by just working hard has been made for centuries to justify privilege. If it were accurate perhaps it would be persuasive. It ignores the difference between being born on third base, and having hit a triple.

Two kids, one rich one poor.
The former goes to the best private school in the country, the latter a lead paint infested ghetto school.
The former’s parents hire private tutors, the latter “asks mom.”
The former builds up his resume by taking a non-paying 2 year internship working for a Senator (whose campaign dad contributed to) while Mom pays for a nice apartment in Georgetown, the latter has to work at McDonalds just to pay for an encyclopedia.
The former takes Kaplan and hires a private tutor, the latter has to borrow money to buy an ARCO LSAT book.

SURPRISINGLY, the former gets a better LSAT score, has a better GPA, and has a more impressive resume. That rich kid attainted his advantage due to merit? Hardly! It is not surprising that someone who has been given the best of the best will succeed if he is reasonably hard working and intelligent, but he will almost certainly achieve more than if he was not provided with the fruits of privilege. When performance is the result of privilege, merit has a skewed meaning.

That is not to say that one cannot achieve greatness despite starting in squalor. Just ask Bill Clinton or Benjamin Franklin! However, exceptions to the rule do not constitute a counter-rule. And the assertion that most wealthy people and families "didn't come to this country with anything" is inaccurate. The only group of persons who didn't come to this country with anything were slaves, and the last I checked, Black folks haven't exactly set this country afire with its wealth. On a micro and macro level, privilege begets performance, which is then further perpetuated by privilege.

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #23 on: July 30, 2005, 05:39:34 PM »
I hope law schools are as liberal when it comes to admitting 16 year old chicks.  I was planning on trolling NU's undergrad campus for freshmen, but this could work out even better.

HippieLawChick

  • ****
  • 2475
  • Current 2L
    • View Profile
Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #24 on: August 01, 2005, 11:35:25 AM »
AmandaH: Your post about privilege being the result of "performance" sounded like the biggest pile of elitist crap of ever had the misfortune to read here. 

RockyMarciano

  • ****
  • 1309
  • Invading Ithaca this Fall
    • View Profile
Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #25 on: August 01, 2005, 12:29:21 PM »
The kid could be a genius but imagine the life he must live. I would not trade my experiences for his. I can only imagine this kid being ultra-smart but actually very alone inside. I do not know why but that comes to mind. The thing that does suck is that not many ppl have the opportunity to do the stuff he has done such as traveling to Africa. Oh yea, I remember, when I read the link I automatically thought of Bobby Fisher. That guy is weird as hell now but was one of the brightest ppl in the world.

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #26 on: August 01, 2005, 12:44:20 PM »
this thread scares me

too weird.


http://cacheofreason.blogspot.com/

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #27 on: August 01, 2005, 02:30:58 PM »
"The only group of persons who didn't come to this country with anything were slaves" - Did you really write that? If you are going to try to impress us with your argumentative skills at least make sense.

I'd agree that my statement was inartfully phrased, but the import of it can be inferred rather easily given the context of the discussion. Further, I counted 3 grammatical/stylistic errors in your last sentence, but I moved past making such criticisms when I was graduated from high school many years ago. Moreover, I rarely make arguments concerning motivations in lieu of actually addressing the merits of statements.

Served

  • ****
  • 317
    • View Profile
    • Email
Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #28 on: August 02, 2005, 08:07:19 AM »
What is it with you people and grammar/spelling?  What is the perverse impulse to point out the errors in people's posts?  Do you perceive that intelligent people have great grammar/spelling?  I hate to inform you but this is simply not so.  Besides, this is an online forum.  I don't think most take the time to proof their ill-thought-out posts.  I would much rather read a logical post laden with errors than one full of bull that is grammatically flawless.

Re: 16 year old in at yale (woody allen's son)
« Reply #29 on: August 12, 2005, 11:47:08 PM »
This one is great too. "Black folks haven't exactly set this country afire with its wealth". Awesome