Great Question From JCrew

[Divad Yksnal]

[ QUOTE ]
Yeah and one would think that Charles Dickens would have thought of it too.

[/ QUOTE ]

I wonder how shocked Sklansky would be if he one day became more knowledgable, and realized alot of the things he thinks are unique and profound have been deeply considered by his so-called inferiors. Is *that* the 'religious' experience he craves?

DY.

[David Sklansky]

"I wonder how shocked Sklansky would be if he one day became more knowledgable, and realized alot of the things he thinks are unique and profound have been deeply considered by his so-called inferiors. Is *that* the 'religious' experience he craves?"
DY.

If somebody comes up with 100 proofs of tough mathematical theorems and later discovers that 90 of them had been previously proved, it barely diminshes his accomplishment in my book. Meanwhile its especially silly to make that point on this thread since I could have just as easily used the name Charles Dickens rather than Jcrew.

[Divad Yksnal]

"If somebody comes up with 100 proofs of tough mathematical theorems and later discovers that 90 of them had been previously proved, it barely diminshes his accomplishment in my book"

I agree very much. I respect original thinking. I've done so much of it! Which is one of several reasons I oppose your belief that S.A.T. scores prove intelligence.

DY

[blackize]

[ QUOTE ]
Which is one of several reasons I oppose your belief that S.A.T. scores prove intelligence.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think they prove intelligence either, but it would be very difficult to argue that there is no strong correlation between SAT scores and intelligence.

[David Sklansky]

I not super gung ho on the SAT either. But to all these people who almost completely dismiss it, I ask you to comment on the fact that all of the top universities virtually never admit students without very high scores.

Given the great head start a degree from these schools give you, it would seem there would be a great uproar from lower scorers if these tests weren't reliable. And if they weren't, you would expect to see a lot more medicre scorers admitted.

[disjunction]

[ QUOTE ]
I not super gung ho on the SAT either. But to all these people who almost completely dismiss it, I ask you to comment on the fact that all of the top universities virtually never admit students without very high scores.

Given the great head start a degree from these schools give you, it would seem there would be a great uproar from lower scorers if these tests weren't reliable. And if they weren't, you would expect to see a lot more medicre scorers admitted.

[/ QUOTE ]

I disagree with the last point. My dad used to have a saying: "These places need a criteria. Any criteria. It helps them sort through the applicant pool". The SATs are important because everyone else considers them important. Yes, people grumble, you can see them grumbling here, but how can you get rid of the status quo?

But I agree that the SATs are a rough measure of something. That's probably how admissions view them, which is probably how you view them. When I applied to grad school and my advisor asked for my record, I emphasized to him that my GREs were perfect in two categories and near-perfect in the third. He couldn't care less. He said they were just looking to see that I exceeded a minimum threshold. He asked me why my grades weren't higher. [img]/images/graemlins/tongue.gif[/img]

[Artsemis]

Say you decide the money should stay there. That is not a selfless act as you are doing it out of shame for taking it back, otherwise you would have given the money before it was stolen.