Affirmative action extended

Great Debates
1

I have been opposed to affirmative action for some time, regarding it as little more than reverse discrimination. However, a recent argument was proposed to me: affirmative action cannot be defended in terms of equitability, but it can be justified because by exposing students to diversity for four years, colleges better prepare students for the diverse real world. This argument seems convincing to me, and so I now support affirmative action.

 However, there is a further application to this principle that even the proponents of affirmative action seem to have missed.  It concerns a group that are even more disadvantaged in the college application process than those helped by the current system, and who also form a significant fraction of people in the real world.  That the open-minded progressives among us have not made the perfectly logical extension of their current doctrine to help this downtrodden class is amazing, to say the least. 

 I speak, of course, of the stupid applicants.  None can deny that stupid applicants face a distinctive disadvantage when applying to colleges, who assign great importance to test scores and grades.  Because of an accident of birth (for attributing stupidity to other causes would require an admission of personal responsibility, a particularly heartless case of "blaming the victim"), these individuals must work harder than their peers to be competitive in the college application process.  Expecting them to work harder to be admitted to the same colleges as their luckier friends, a clearly discriminatory expectation.

 Neither can one deny that college graduates will not have to deal with stupid people.  One of the most wonderful things about our world is its diversity in intellectual ability; we should prepare college graduates to celebrate such diversity rather than avoid it.  Having desegragated college classes will be a first step towards this.

 It may be argued that giving such benefits to stupid applicants will dilute the intellectual meritocracy of college; however, this conception of college admissions reflects an antiquated, discriminatory viewpoint.  Since we already loosen some academic standards in order to further racial diversity, it seems reasonable to so so to further the even more important intellectual diversity.  There is little reason, therefore, not to apply affirmative action for stupid applicants.

 I hasten to add that I do not suggest this change for my own benefit; I myself cannot gain from benefits given to stupid applicants.
2

As a current college student, I can say I haven’t seen the lack of stupid people in school. In fact, the diversity of stupid people in college is rather astounding. There are the stupid people who didn’t read the syllabus. And the stupid ones that cheat. And the stupid ones who think that paying tuition entitles them to a C. The stupid ones who don’t follow directions. The stupid ones who are whizzes at memorization, but can’t figure anything out logically to save their grade, and the stupid ones that can think, but space even the simplest facts. The stupid ones who come in for a final hung over. My favorite was the stupid person who responded to the independant study classes’ instructor’s email on what the syllabus was with “and what time will this class meet.”

Then there are the stupid instructors - yep, they are out there too. The ones that can’t figure out that their class is even being derailed, much less take corrective action. The ones that spend so much time overcompensating for stupid that they don’t manage to teach. Or the alternative, the ones that haven’t figured out that they are teaching a 100 level college course at a not terribly well respected state school and not a graduate level course at Columbia.

Now, as the last paragraph implied, I don’t go to a great, highly respected university. But I used to. And the same level of stupidity existed there. So I think there is plenty of stupidity in college and we don’t need affirmative action to address it.

3

Grandfathered in, eh? (“little more than reverse discrimination”?!)

4

Gee, why do I think you’re not interested in serious debate?

BTW, there are many students who get admitted to even the most distinguished colleges with subpar academics. Why? Because they too contribute to a diverse student body in some fashion. Maybe one is an actor, or one is a football player. Maybe one scored poorly on his SAT, but wrote outstanding essays, has good grades, and has extensive community service.

This somehow to you is “working harder then their peers?” Why? Because one person has good grades and doesn’t do community service, and the other person has mediocre grades but does do community service, somehow the latter person has worked harder than the first?

But I guess the fact that colleges already do make allowances for the “stupid” as you call them won’t get in the way of your OP, will it?