This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
Can't help but feel like the entire thrust of your post is based on an erroneous model of the American university system that consists entirely of undergrad. Yes, getting into Harvard out of high school for your cake-walk Bachelors is a "filter". Getting a PhD, in any actually academically rigorous field, and especially at Harvard, is a completely different matter. Following, someone with a PhD (or even a Masters degree) from any state school is going to be seen as higher status than someone who only got their undergrad at an Ivy, and will be treated as such in the job market. I think you're vastly overselling what an Ivy League bachelors degree inherently gets you, and underselling the formative nature of rigorous American Grad school programs.
I don’t think my Masters from ASU in Global Management means a 1/100th of that of any Ivy Bachelors.
If you feel otherwise, please, I’d like to hire you to help me land a better paying career.
More options
Context Copy link
To add, SCOTUS clerks aren’t doing menial labor like disclosure. They go straight to appellate practices because contra the main post they now spent a few years writing opinions for some of the best judges and Justices in the world (unless you use the misfortune to clerk for KBJ)
More options
Context Copy link
Here in the UK it's the opposite way around. An Oxbridge undergrad is seen as significantly higher status than an Oxbridge Masters (ignoring certain very difficult and very prestigious courses, but they are collectively tiny), which just requires you to be in the top 10% and have the money to pay for it mostly. PhDs are at the top but so few people have them that it doesn't particularly change the bulk.
You can always go to Oxbridge for Land Economy or whatever, which is probably harder to get into than UCL for engineering or math. Modern languages is easy to get into. Greek and Latin slightly harder but filter for those wealthy enough to go to public school from the outset, so you’re not competing against the general population. Getting into Oxbridge is also much easier than getting into HYS in the US. As I understand it, if you have perfect grades in the UK, have personality and charisma at interview, and don’t go for one of the hardest courses / colleges you will probably get in. That isn’t true even at the elite American schools that have more meritocratic (not fully, which is none, but more than average) admissions.
The Civil Service Fast Stream is fully affirmative (sorry, positive) action-ified and has been since at least the early 2010s, as is pupillage for barristers, where diversification in terms of gender, race and social class (ie hugely reducing the number of posh white men who went to elite schools) has been the central priority since about the same time.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
Yes. I hire for technical roles (actual science and engineering, not programming) on occasion, look at resumes and do interviews more that occasionally, and it cannot be overstated how little a prestigious institution for a Bachelor's degree matters. Actually, its probably a counter signal, especially if BS from Prestigious Institution is followed by Graduate Degree from Less Prestigious Institution. That pretty much screams "DEI pick, lawsuit waiting to happen, do not hire."
Best results? BS from a good state school or Jesuit college, followed up with a worthwhile grad degree from a school thats respected in the field. Shows personal growth, not coasting.
The value of an Ivy undergrad degree is the networking, that's it (other than maybe Math at Harvard or Princeton). Want a rigorous education? Go to big state U and pick the hardest major, or a Jesuit school and argue philosphy against people with a 500 years worth of cliff notes.
I did this. Would not recommend if one wishes to enjoy their undergrad years.
Engineering or pre-law?
Pre-law majors actually are infamously some of the worst law students, along with education majors. It's mostly a degree offered by crappy online schools. All else equal it's actually a black mark on your application, and aspiring lawyers are encouraged to major in literally anything else.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link