Hacker News Reader

Comment by whalesalad | Hacker News Reader

It’s a private school. I don’t understand the issue.

It might not be a legal issue, but it can still be a moral one. We should try to make this society at least somewhat meritocratic.

How do Women’s schools fit into that?

...the same way men's schools do?

Not suggesting that there is anything wrong with women's schools ... just pointing out that nothing in life is a meritocracy.

You're right in that pure meritocracy without bias doesn't exist. It never has, and probably never will. However, the post you replied to argued that we should strive for a more meritocratic society, and I think we can all agree that some societies are more meritocratic than others. That's what I take issue with on your point.

I challenge you to name a perfect system in the universe that was created by a human. Just because perfection doesn't truly exist doesn't mean we shouldn't strive for it anyway. Or else what's the point in even being here?

My understanding of the issue is they are a private non-profit and in exchange for the tax benefits of non-profit status they agree to not discriminate.

It'd be less of an issue if the entry process wasn't advertised as meritocratic, I suspect.

Is it advertised as meritocratic? Many students do gain acceptance on merit. That doesn't preclude other students getting in on connections.

People assume that people going to a college have a minimum level of competence, where $$$ is not one of the elements factoring into that competence.

I’d posit that assumption is what is invalid, not this behavior.

Are they an accredited institution? A degree is more than a piece of paper.

The topic here is around admissions.

You generally need to be admitted to get a degree.

Yes, but you don't get handed a degree just for being admitted.

That's less true for expensive private schools than it is for less exclusive public universities. Nobody gets kicked out of USC for poor grades.

They receive tax payer money, so have some accountability to the public?

In addition to tax benefits, they are primarily funded by federal student loans.

Buying a service doesn’t get you a right to say how the they should run their business.

It does when you're the biggest customer.

I agree. Just because you accept some tax breaks should not, in my opinion, mean that you stop being a private organization. If a university's standard is lowered because the rich, not the best are admitted, that will be reflected in the academic standards of the university and would make it less attractive.

Can I reword that to: "Just because I receive public funding I shouldn't have to act like a publicly funded organization?"

Also, I totally reject this on the basis that education is a public service that allows economic mobility - restricting it to the rich, whether in a public or private setting - is immoral.

"Also, I totally reject this on the basis that education is a public service that allows economic mobility - restricting it to the rich, whether in a public or private setting - is immoral."

So because you have to pay for something, only the rich will afford it? Just like only the rich surf the internet, because AT&T charges a subscription?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com