<p>I concede, I cannot prove that maverick isn’t a rector at Notre Dame. </p>
<p>I’m glad we agree that good actions don’t redeem bad actions. I’m also sorry if someone blew up your father’s free clinic, raped your child and tortured your great grandfather. All I can say is that you shouldn’t live a bitter life because of it. Oh wait, you just made that up. My bad.</p>
<p>I stand corrected on the 4-year BA/MA thing. That being said, after completing all the econ requirements plus going through real analysis before the end of the junior year and then taking graduate seminars and completing a thesis senior year sounds like a miserable four years. That really is impressive nonetheless, not unsurprising that one would go on to be a professor.</p>
<p>I’m also intrigued by the idea of students signing up for any classes they want. That does sound like an easier system. Seems like there should probably be some kind of gatekeeper though. To keep sophomores from going to law school classes and such things. I have to admit that I took a class with 3Ls when I was a sophomore and I certainly wasn’t prepared. A Congolese priest and a middle aged Iraqi woman who worked for the UN were also in that class, so at least I wasn’t the only outlier.</p>
<p>I’m also sure that all professors at Notre Dame have to teach undergraduates, unless of course they are on leave. Actually, Alasdair MacIntyre (who has an international society dedicated to his philosophy) only teaches undergraduates. Teaching is important at Notre Dame, there’s no hiding that. But Notre Dame does involve undergraduates in research; there is a conference every May for students to present their research. The grant funding opportunities are fairly substantial I believe. Rather generous too (there was an RA in Farley last year who got paid to go to taverns in Germany and talk with the locals) I’m sure Northwestern and Chicago and other schools have similar programs. I don’t doubt that. But I do wonder if the difference isn’t as big as some might think. (As for the archaeological dig, I actually know a freshman who is doing one in Italy this summer with her professor) </p>
<p>On parietals–not everything anyone writes is to disprove what you write. I supplemented your information, adding substance to your assertion. Get a grip chico.</p>
<p>“It discourages underage drinking.” God forbid they discourage students from breaking the law. I also don’t understand why co-ed bathrooms would be a good thing in anyway, unless it saves you from having to go to the far end of the hallway. I must be unenlightened. Pour it on.</p>
<p>I’ll have to amend my suggestion. If no one had sex outside of marriage then STDs could be eliminated. Even if an STD originated organically, it would only be spread to one other person, not nearly epidemic as we have now in some places. Something like AIDS could of course be transmitted intravenously, but I think almost everyone discourages that anyway. So if there were no drug use (or there were infinite needle exchanges if you want to go that route) it would cut down on that problem. </p>
<p>airbag, “condemnation of sex and drug use limit the university’s growth potential as a true bastion of free thought and research” that made me laugh dude. Not sure how condemning drug use fits in with Catholic morality as something stifling. Even NYU condemns marijuana. </p>
<p>I also have to say that if anyone wants to live independently, without those rules they can just move off-campus. It’s not unheard of guys. Papa Kramer will take care of you.</p>