>> College is for educating, not social engineering.<<
I would argue that our present prosperity rests largely on a few experiments in "social engineering" -- the GI Bill, VA mortgages, HUD mortgages, Fannie Mae, Pell grants, student loans, SBA loans, and that's all I can think of off the top of my head -- no, wait, there's DARPA net, aka the Internet. No, wait, the interstate highway system.
Backtrack to the GI bill, Pell grants, student loans -- btw, college tuition is now tax deductible in part.
The state has taken a great interest in educating the entire population, and it's paying off, big time.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I have another argument which is hard to make because it's really not PC.
What if it's true that black people have, on average, lower IQs than whites or Asians?
If we don't lower the standards a little bit for black people, then fewer blacks would go to college.
And what's so great about IQ? All by itself, nothing.
I know my own IQ is higher than average, but I don't see how high IQ makes me a better lawyer. I'm wonderful at researching and writing briefs, pretty good in court, but terrible at business, and I hate to write contracts, would be terrible as a real estate attorney, and worse as a corporate lawyer.
I know lawyers with much lower IQs who are just dynamite in court, terrific at making deals, high business acumen.
IQ doesn't measure everything important about a person. Successful business owners have average IQs, which means some of them are lower than average.
If all you go by are grades and test scores, you're really selecting for IQ. It may make sense for engineering school or computer science, but it makes no sense in law or business.
There's a joke in law school -- the A students become professors, the B students become judges, and the C students make all the money. |
