[286] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Affirmative action
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Hesky Fisher)
Sat Apr 28 13:42:17 2001
Message-ID: <004701c0d00a$79f93740$8700dd12@mit.edu>
From: "Hesky Fisher" <hfisher@MIT.EDU>
To: <mit-talk@MIT.EDU>
Date: Sat, 28 Apr 2001 13:41:37 -0400
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Where in the rulebook does it say that difficulty is related to quality? No
MIT ego could bear the thought of making any part of the MIT experience
easier. It seems to be a matter of masochistic pride. However, I'm fairly
certain that difficulty and quality are often related only due to
circumstance. There are many examples (I'm sure you can come up with some)
where there is arbitrary difficulty and pain associated with a class that
leaves you with little more than relief when it is over.
> Richard Tibbetts wrote:
> > - MIT hurts. Currently MIT abuses it students pretty hard. In my
> > opinion, much of this abuse is unnecessary. Fixing this is hard
> > though, because differentiating between good and bad abuse is hard.
> > But before MIT goes and cranks up the difficulty/pace they might
> > want to try and cut back on the mental trauma. Not that I would
> > object.
>
Matt Craghead wrote:
> I've never been convinced that this is really true. MIT has
> consistently underwhelmed me in its difficulty of coursework.
>
> Maybe if MIT tried harder to admit the best students, rather than those
> who belong to "disadvantaged" groups, this erroneous perception would go
> away. :)
>
> --
> Matt Craighead, MIT Class of 2002
> President, MIT Objectivist Club
> http://web.mit.edu/objectivism/www/
>
