<p>I worked with a guy whose father felt that an Ivy League education was critical for success. He had two siblings who went to Ivy League schools but he apparently didn’t make the cut and ended up at SU. He got his MS at a relatively prestigious school, but I get the impression that he feels he never measured up. Seems like a type of child abuse to me.</p>
<p>My friends were all middle class and none of us felt any pressure to go to an Ivy. My grandfather was a Columbia grad, but there was never any pressure on me but to do my best.</p>
<p>Agreed, Ivy League snobbery isn’t child abuse but making your child feel inadequate and worthless because he couldn’t get into an Ivy League school is abusive.</p>
<p>Since we can’t have an adult conversation on a question that contains the word “abortion”, I reworded my question.</p>
<p>If you were considering getting pregnant, but there was a high probability that your child would have a low IQ, would you choose not to have a child, and what would be the minimum IQ threshold be.</p>
<p>The Ted K thesis suggested here is highly specious. Put high IQ, young age, an experiment, Harvard, and anti-government violence together and someone thinks they have a groundbreaking story. Whether he was schizophrenic or not is immaterial. And he managed to complete his degree, earn a Ph.D., and teach in college, so the experiment theory as a young undergrad is a stretch at best. MANY offenders who do seemingly bizarre, big scale things have strong anti-government views. Sometimes this happens in the context of a delusional system and sometimes for other reasons that cause severe disaffection (like with many terrorists). The fact that he had a high IQ is certainly germane to HIS specific story but there is nothing transferable about his story (meaning that there is no correlation between genius and violence, while there is perhaps a somewhat more arguable correlation between genius and madness). Every offender has his or her story. A good historian/psychologist can make any offender’s story make sense (and should). A similar, extensive story could be written about any offender with any IQ roughly from 75 and above. </p>
<p>But this takes us very far afield in its attempt to distort the discussion. Compare to violence at VT, Bard at Simons Rock, UVA, Oklahoma City, Newtown, Boston, etc, etc, etc.</p>
<p>whats with all the “provocative” questioning? </p>
<p>Whether or not emotional abuse occurred (sounds like this is a tale, perhaps third hand) is pure speculation. Your impression that he may have felt he didnt measure up is just that, your impression. Maybe he thought hid dad was a colossal jerk.</p>
<p>Why do people put the weight of the world on their kids’ four years of undergraduate education? No one is going to die because there are 10% fewer brainiacs at University of Washington than at Washington University in St. Louis. No one is going to suffer irreparable harm from having to sit next to a lax bro or a ditzy sorority girl in an introductory poli sci course. No bright kid is going to be bereft of like-minded peers to socialize with and (gasp) date ANYWHERE if he or she has an open mind and sees people for who they are.</p>
<p>Like luisarose, I was “the smart one” at my high school. I knew what it was like to feel stifled among kids who seemed superficial and dense and anti-intellectual. Great things were expected of me because of my academic achievements and potential. I couldn’t wait to get out of my oppressive high school environment and head off to my elite college.</p>
<p>But here’s the thing: the elite college was not the idyllic place I imagined. It was great, but going there wasn’t a revelatory experience. Was I surrounded by brilliant people? Yes. Were there also jerks and dumb***es and stubbornly closed-minded people? Yup. Was it basically the same as in real life, with people we like and people we don’t? Absolutely. We all choose associations with others based on shared attributes and values and interests. Sometimes we click with someone and really have no idea why–we just know we like him or her. (This often happens within minutes of being introduced to a new person, and of course has nothing to do with academic pedigree or expansive vocabulary or anything else. It’s just instinct. And it works.)</p>
<p>People may not realize it but some of the comments here are coming across as really intolerant and out of touch with reality. Bottom line: if you can afford a prestigious university, or you have enough financial need that you won’t have to pay the full price–by all means send your kid there if you think he or she will fit the best there and have the best options after graduation. But please–quit insisting that a strongly intellectual environment or incredible opportunities can ONLY be found at these places, or that smart kids can only succeed within a narrow group of undergraduate institutions. It’s just not true.</p>
<p>Back on topic…bottom line is that most people like and desire nice things. “Prestige” schools are considered nice things by most of us. We all have our own tipping points in our calculations in the prestige vs value question, and the decision often is tougher when the “prestige” starts blurring in terms of how “prestigious” it is and when the amount of value in the value choice is high. Harvard is the most symbolic signifier in the discussion. How often do you see the statement made on this site that “well, if it’s Harvard it’s worth paying full price compared to a full ride flagship option.” And it’s not only or even primarily because one will get a superior education at Harvard (they likely will) but more so because of the value over a lifetime of having gone to and getting to say ‘Harvard.’</p>
<p>And I’ll answer this with no hesitation at all…if my kid got in HYPSM (and a handful of others), even with some relatively prestigious, decent merit aid options as alternatives, I would gladly find a way to pay for it and indeed would advise my kid to choose it (barring some other big reason not to do so, like related to the kid’s mental/emotional health or something like that).</p>
<p>But to pick a school just because it is “prestigious” but may not be a good fit for the student makes no sense to me. If a student wants to major in engineering, Yale, Columbia, Brown, etc, even though they offer it, may not be the right choice.</p>
<p>Kennedy, did I write something that offended you? If so, I apologize. Or is there something you didn’t understand that I could explain more effectively?</p>
<p>Final, not offended but why do you think it is necessary to “compare violence” or discuss abortion on a college thread about prestigious colleges? But I accept your apology if you agree to stay on topic.</p>
<p>Like, Harvard doesn’t offer that major, or isn’t good with a particular learning disability, or very strongly prefers rural. It’s like saying “in general, most people…” And hence, the yield rate (and the vast majority of those not picking it are picking another very similar option…Yale, Stanford, etc).</p>
<p>I didn’t discuss or reference abortion a single time. And I responded to someone else using Ted K as an example to show something that I found fallacious and potentially problematic in its portrayal of mental illness.</p>
<p>Exactly. I remember when we visited one of these “prestigious” school, we discovered that the department my S was interested in was dessimated with 3 major faculty (small dept) having left or were about to. Scratched that school off the list.</p>