Great show today. Coincidental to my post of today. Starts here continues on my site. In response: Larry Summers, Washington Post column, July 1, 2023, and The Free Press, Bari Weiss interview, July 22, 2023
Ditch elite athletics? Rather, run it like a noble club, I say. Say yes to anyone who can learn the art of sailing and proper use of knife and fork while holding up one’s end of an intelligent conversation. Harvard has a history, with Yale and Princeton and several others of carrying the old boy tradition as a legacy and I’m thinking that’s not a bad thing. Private colleges and universities play by different rules than public institutions, having stronger claim to sovereignty. And sovereignty is core to the idea of a university. Harvard was home to Emerson, Thoreau, Pierce, James and Holmes. The axis of America’s intellectual gravity ran through there, still echoes through the halls. They’re over the walls, they’d say, and not in jest. Holmes wounded on three occasions, left on the field for dead.
Label phobia is the new pandemic. Among the standard labels by which one may be classified as irredeemable, to be cast into the fiery pit, whether racist, sexist, or homophobic ableist—that of elitism is amongst the most dreaded. Its all about the common man. Bottom rail on top now. But its not a lottery. It may be that anyone can be president, but that should not be the case. Society brings its leaders forth from a pool established to meet its enterprisal needs. Its not about fairness. And justice is observance of the rules. Proudly wear the elite label. Much depends on these few stout fellows pulling on their oars. It is by exclusivity that excellence is distilled. May the motto be Amplectere Excellentia.
That the University might produce the Renaissance man (inclusive use of pronouns throughout) presumes recognition and cultivation of the facets of one’s character, not remiss of all the things that make a person complete in the art of being human. While SAT scores hould be given considerable weight, they are no final arbiter of merit. Question is what qualities and in what combination will best compliment the University’s evolving concept of itself, as a complex fabric of interlocking relationships. For that concept to have meaning it must be based on a tactility transcendent of statistics or of generalized formulations insuring mediocrity. Elite education has two functions, to provide students with the means to integration within the social fabric, and to bring forward the new elite.
Too often rules designed to guard against abuse insure no one to get their proper due. Statistical perspectives may ignore the unique features of an individual or discount a different way of seeing problems. Broad, non-standardized assessments, based on personal essays and interviews, may be subject to the biases of the interviewer. But while the question of who should be admitted may not be guaranteed a proper answer, truth may oft be best approached on foot. Statistical tools can provide bias free metrics of basic academic preparedness and capacity, raw measurements of intelligence, but say little as to the moral system by which information is to be ordered and prioritized. Personal essays, interviews and background reviews bring the subjective into play, relying on the disinterested intellectual integrity of the evaluator, assumes a culture wherein such is the default case. Rules are helpful up to the point of transgressing justice at which point some flexibility may be appropriate. Moral growth requires an understanding of moral complexity, of moral ambiguity. Tailoring one’s life to pre-made boxes can be all consuming. Higher education stands in danger of producing well-spoken empty suits.
The university admissions policy will necessarily reflect its vision of itself and applicants will be considered in light of its own replication; it will seek out those who reflect its complexities and traditions. The elite university will serve the elite community upon which the health of the larger community is highly dependent.
The extent to which the private university has become, through the fulsome expansion of programs beyond its formerly cloistered environs, an institution dependent on public financing has weakened the hand of those who would see the university as an island of tranquility in a restless sea, as both a repository of wisdom and an engine of discovery, as a bastion of tradition within protected space, not from what may offend but from external distraction from interests, from political direction or popular causes. The degree to which an institution is independent is that extent to which it can rely upon its own resources, is to the extent that it can act on its own authority, shape its programs to reflect its vision of its self and its place in the larger world. Might a smaller university reliant upon tuition and its own endowment better preserve that sovereignty? Might better guard the flame of truth?
The emphasis would seem to be on creating a marketable brand, rather than on the knowledge-centric mission of the organization. Essential to that mission is the reality of the fabric of the university and how people and ideas fit into relational patterns in accordance with the ethos of the institution. A great institution is both excellent and unique, intolerant of anything less than excellent, and jealous of its own special nature, reflective of tradition and intent.
Hardship Olympics, Glen Loury podcast: Loury and McWhorter are correct to point out the degree to which admissions has come to focus on victimhood rather than excellence. The mission of the university is the pursuit of academic excellence. It may be argued that diversity contributes to the realization of broad societal goals relating to societal excellence. But these are not academic excellence, which is the mission of the school, but rather represent social engineering goals imposed upon the institution according to extralegal mandates with the amorphous goal of ‘social justice’, which everyone is for but which escapes definitive formulation, has a lot of moving parts, is an unsettled branch of study. The university is amiss in thinking of itself as having a ‘higher’ purpose than that of its narrow mandate as a repository of wisdom and an engine of discovery
The athletic traditions of colleges and universities play often outsized roles in the formation of the image of the institution, and not coincidentally, may constitute a major source of revenue, coaches often paid more than college presidents. As we see amateur athletics professionalized, and integrated into the emergent phenomenon of gambling ubiquity, one may be forgiven for having lost track of the current logic behind college sports. Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eaton, someone said.
Dropping some of those elite sports that few in Kansas play would send a powerful virtue message and free up funds for games more supportive of the bottom line and constitute a move in the direction of dispelling any remaining vestiges of the institution as something special, or as having undue respect for traditions that profited from the slave trade. The cathartic realization of the privileged that, far from special, they are as common as dirt, can atone for having thought themselves as special, give a leg up, as they take a step down.
But really, how much does the upkeep of the boathouse really cost. And if he can keep up, academically, we’d really like to have him on our team. Might one not put in a word with Dean Picklewort over sherry this afternoon? And didn’t the Ivies invent football? Before the Romans made it gladiatorial the Greeks pursued a wreath of laurel.
As to legacy, did Kermit get a leg up as grandson of Theodore? Or John Quincy on the strength of his father’s sojourn at the font of wisdom on his way to creating a new order? Pre SAT so hard to say. Was a time coming from a good family counted for something, might be presumed to have good manners, have an established sense of propriety. Accept then that the elite bastion of learning will resemble a club, where much of the argument may happen behind closed doors. As many arguments should and might more quickly be resolved.
Diversity, in terms of college admissions, might be enhanced by recognition of the difference between public and private schools, the later properly having much more leeway than the former in the design of their product. The public institution is first responsible to the common welfare of its citizens. The private institution’s mandate is first to its own self-formulated mission. If Harvard wants to be a club, or should choose to have its student body made up of athletically endowed decedents of endowers, so be it. Prospective students not attracted to that club might choose another school thereby promoting innovation and diversity in institutional offerings. There does not come immediately to mind a reason that private schools should be directed in their admission programs by public policy, unless on the teat of the public dole. ... continued on my newsletter
Great show today. Coincidental to my post of today. Starts here continues on my site. In response: Larry Summers, Washington Post column, July 1, 2023, and The Free Press, Bari Weiss interview, July 22, 2023
Ditch elite athletics? Rather, run it like a noble club, I say. Say yes to anyone who can learn the art of sailing and proper use of knife and fork while holding up one’s end of an intelligent conversation. Harvard has a history, with Yale and Princeton and several others of carrying the old boy tradition as a legacy and I’m thinking that’s not a bad thing. Private colleges and universities play by different rules than public institutions, having stronger claim to sovereignty. And sovereignty is core to the idea of a university. Harvard was home to Emerson, Thoreau, Pierce, James and Holmes. The axis of America’s intellectual gravity ran through there, still echoes through the halls. They’re over the walls, they’d say, and not in jest. Holmes wounded on three occasions, left on the field for dead.
Label phobia is the new pandemic. Among the standard labels by which one may be classified as irredeemable, to be cast into the fiery pit, whether racist, sexist, or homophobic ableist—that of elitism is amongst the most dreaded. Its all about the common man. Bottom rail on top now. But its not a lottery. It may be that anyone can be president, but that should not be the case. Society brings its leaders forth from a pool established to meet its enterprisal needs. Its not about fairness. And justice is observance of the rules. Proudly wear the elite label. Much depends on these few stout fellows pulling on their oars. It is by exclusivity that excellence is distilled. May the motto be Amplectere Excellentia.
That the University might produce the Renaissance man (inclusive use of pronouns throughout) presumes recognition and cultivation of the facets of one’s character, not remiss of all the things that make a person complete in the art of being human. While SAT scores hould be given considerable weight, they are no final arbiter of merit. Question is what qualities and in what combination will best compliment the University’s evolving concept of itself, as a complex fabric of interlocking relationships. For that concept to have meaning it must be based on a tactility transcendent of statistics or of generalized formulations insuring mediocrity. Elite education has two functions, to provide students with the means to integration within the social fabric, and to bring forward the new elite.
Too often rules designed to guard against abuse insure no one to get their proper due. Statistical perspectives may ignore the unique features of an individual or discount a different way of seeing problems. Broad, non-standardized assessments, based on personal essays and interviews, may be subject to the biases of the interviewer. But while the question of who should be admitted may not be guaranteed a proper answer, truth may oft be best approached on foot. Statistical tools can provide bias free metrics of basic academic preparedness and capacity, raw measurements of intelligence, but say little as to the moral system by which information is to be ordered and prioritized. Personal essays, interviews and background reviews bring the subjective into play, relying on the disinterested intellectual integrity of the evaluator, assumes a culture wherein such is the default case. Rules are helpful up to the point of transgressing justice at which point some flexibility may be appropriate. Moral growth requires an understanding of moral complexity, of moral ambiguity. Tailoring one’s life to pre-made boxes can be all consuming. Higher education stands in danger of producing well-spoken empty suits.
The university admissions policy will necessarily reflect its vision of itself and applicants will be considered in light of its own replication; it will seek out those who reflect its complexities and traditions. The elite university will serve the elite community upon which the health of the larger community is highly dependent.
The extent to which the private university has become, through the fulsome expansion of programs beyond its formerly cloistered environs, an institution dependent on public financing has weakened the hand of those who would see the university as an island of tranquility in a restless sea, as both a repository of wisdom and an engine of discovery, as a bastion of tradition within protected space, not from what may offend but from external distraction from interests, from political direction or popular causes. The degree to which an institution is independent is that extent to which it can rely upon its own resources, is to the extent that it can act on its own authority, shape its programs to reflect its vision of its self and its place in the larger world. Might a smaller university reliant upon tuition and its own endowment better preserve that sovereignty? Might better guard the flame of truth?
The emphasis would seem to be on creating a marketable brand, rather than on the knowledge-centric mission of the organization. Essential to that mission is the reality of the fabric of the university and how people and ideas fit into relational patterns in accordance with the ethos of the institution. A great institution is both excellent and unique, intolerant of anything less than excellent, and jealous of its own special nature, reflective of tradition and intent.
Hardship Olympics, Glen Loury podcast: Loury and McWhorter are correct to point out the degree to which admissions has come to focus on victimhood rather than excellence. The mission of the university is the pursuit of academic excellence. It may be argued that diversity contributes to the realization of broad societal goals relating to societal excellence. But these are not academic excellence, which is the mission of the school, but rather represent social engineering goals imposed upon the institution according to extralegal mandates with the amorphous goal of ‘social justice’, which everyone is for but which escapes definitive formulation, has a lot of moving parts, is an unsettled branch of study. The university is amiss in thinking of itself as having a ‘higher’ purpose than that of its narrow mandate as a repository of wisdom and an engine of discovery
The athletic traditions of colleges and universities play often outsized roles in the formation of the image of the institution, and not coincidentally, may constitute a major source of revenue, coaches often paid more than college presidents. As we see amateur athletics professionalized, and integrated into the emergent phenomenon of gambling ubiquity, one may be forgiven for having lost track of the current logic behind college sports. Waterloo was won on the playing fields of Eaton, someone said.
Dropping some of those elite sports that few in Kansas play would send a powerful virtue message and free up funds for games more supportive of the bottom line and constitute a move in the direction of dispelling any remaining vestiges of the institution as something special, or as having undue respect for traditions that profited from the slave trade. The cathartic realization of the privileged that, far from special, they are as common as dirt, can atone for having thought themselves as special, give a leg up, as they take a step down.
But really, how much does the upkeep of the boathouse really cost. And if he can keep up, academically, we’d really like to have him on our team. Might one not put in a word with Dean Picklewort over sherry this afternoon? And didn’t the Ivies invent football? Before the Romans made it gladiatorial the Greeks pursued a wreath of laurel.
As to legacy, did Kermit get a leg up as grandson of Theodore? Or John Quincy on the strength of his father’s sojourn at the font of wisdom on his way to creating a new order? Pre SAT so hard to say. Was a time coming from a good family counted for something, might be presumed to have good manners, have an established sense of propriety. Accept then that the elite bastion of learning will resemble a club, where much of the argument may happen behind closed doors. As many arguments should and might more quickly be resolved.
Diversity, in terms of college admissions, might be enhanced by recognition of the difference between public and private schools, the later properly having much more leeway than the former in the design of their product. The public institution is first responsible to the common welfare of its citizens. The private institution’s mandate is first to its own self-formulated mission. If Harvard wants to be a club, or should choose to have its student body made up of athletically endowed decedents of endowers, so be it. Prospective students not attracted to that club might choose another school thereby promoting innovation and diversity in institutional offerings. There does not come immediately to mind a reason that private schools should be directed in their admission programs by public policy, unless on the teat of the public dole. ... continued on my newsletter