<p>And all of this is relevant to the OP how? :)</p>
<p>Considering how little information the OP has given on the student’s reason for wanting to transfer, it is not surprising that the thread has wandered away from relevance to the OP’s question (which, given the lack of specific information, seems like a way to start a prestige war thread).</p>
<p>To review the bidding, sally305, in post #50, the OP wrote
</p>
<p>This seems to be part of the issue for the OP’s son, who is interested in international relations and Russian, and not so much in computer science or other “techie” fields.</p>
<p>texaspg countered with the example of the person he knows, who developed a new means of analyzing basketball teams, and is apparently making a lot of money from his insight. This does not seem to be the type of intellectualism that the OP’s son is seeking.</p>
<p>I don’t have a way of telling whether the topological insight used by the person in texaspg’s example is new, topologically speaking. If it is new to mathematicians, then I would say that it is intellectual, albeit with a non-intellectual application. But then steam engines didn’t seem to be intellectual, and the field of thermodynamics was inspired to a significant extent by the analysis of steam engines–and it is certainly an intellectual field (or at least it was, while discoveries were being made). Yet again, it’s not the sort of intellectualism that the OP’s son seems to be seeking. </p>
<p>Several posters seem dismissive of the idea that discussing the meaning of life represents intellectualism (xiggi? texaspg? perhaps I am mis-remembering). I see merit in college students discussing the meaning of life, if they are inclined to. Without rating the intellectualism of discussion topics relative to each other, if the OP’s son knows about 100 Stanford students without having found anyone who is interested in “his” topic, it seems to me that the odds of that happening would be pretty low if Stanford were rife with students who wanted to talk about the meaning of life. </p>
<p>As a side note to the OP: Stanford used to have a Russian house, where the students spoke only Russian to each other, to improve their fluency in the language. Films in Russian were often shown at the house. Presumably that’s no longer there? It was a great old Victorian house on a hillside just up from the campus, with a number of similar houses.</p>
<p>“who developed a new means of analyzing basketball teams, and is apparently making a lot of money from his insight”</p>
<p>I said NBA is spending millions which is not the same as him making the money. They are making roster moves based on the analysis on what they are lacking on their team and finding players to plug in. It means they are betting big on what the tool is spitting out for them and signing the type of players they need. </p>
<p>This kid is mostly getting the fame (was featured in GQ and discussed by Obama).</p>
<p>Sally - OP has left the building?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stanford has the Slavianskii Dom:
[Slavianskii</a> Dom | Student Affairs](<a href=“http://studentaffairs.stanford.edu/resed/profiles/theme/slav-dom]Slavianskii”>http://studentaffairs.stanford.edu/resed/profiles/theme/slav-dom)</p>
<p>Quantmech wrote: “But then steam engines didn’t seem to be intellectual”</p>
<p>I guess this discussion about non intellectual things comes from the connotation vs. the denotation of the meaning of intellectualism. </p>
<p>Intellectualism is about “the theory that knowledge is wholly or mainly derived from pure reason; rationalism.” or “the exercise of the intellect at the expense of the emotions”</p>
<p>So a basketball application or a discussion about computer science or steam engines certainly counts as intellectualism.</p>
<p>If the OP is still around, I would suggest that your son makes sure he is not falling into the grass is always greener trap, or the “data point of 1” trap (e.g. extrapolating trends from finding one person who is having a great intellectual experience at college X).</p>
<p>Wisconsin has a special Russian Flagship program. </p>
<p>[About</a> | Russian Flagship Center - UW Madison](<a href=“http://www.russianflagship.wisc.edu/content/about]About”>ABOUT – Russian Flagship Program – UW–Madison)</p>
<p>Getting back to the OP’s situation, this is my own politically incorrect take on it. if I had to wager I would bet that the son, as someone who was accepted to Stanford, was a bit of a superstar in high school, and that came with many perks related to his social life. At Stanford the perks are gone, as he is ordinary, other students do not find him particularly interesting or impressive, and it is far more difficult to woo young ladies. At Wisconsin, he knows he would not be the superstar he was in high school, but he could be well above average, certainly elite enough and interesting enough to make friends and woo young ladies more easily. Given the likelihood that his social life would improve, he reasons his attitude and motivation would improve and that would result in better performance academically. That is all perfectly reasonable.</p>
<p>Boy - has this thread twisted and turned and headed off into the weeds!</p>
<p>(not that there’s anything wrong with that)</p>
<p>It looks like the OP hasn’t posted on this thread in a while so I wonder if the OP’s actually following it anymore.</p>
<p>The OP has transferred to a better, more enriching, college forum.</p>
<p>^ the local bar?</p>
<p>Chances are the OP’s son (or daughter) heard about this discussion thread (there is enough information to figure out who this person is actually is) and told his parent to ‘Stop talking about him’ on the internet. haha… parents do whatever it takes to help out their kids and sometimes may not choose the best method. But ya gotta love 'em!!! </p>
<p>And… there is some pretty good advice on this thread.</p>
<p>Slavianskii Dom seems like just the thing for the OP’s son! He should meet many like-minded students there. Even if he cannot live there this year, presumably there are many of the programs that non-residents can participate in.</p>
<p>Ahem, ahem, GladGradDad and collegealum314, re the “heading into the weeds” and “a better, more enriching college forum:” It seems to me that if the OP’s son feels that he cannot find intellectual conversations at Stanford (or at least, has not found them), then it does make some sense to discuss what “intellectualism” is, in that context. There are clear divergences of opinion as to what is intellectual. Some of the examples seem to me to fit Stanford’s environment, but probably wouldn’t count as intellectual at St. John’s (to attempt to take a non-controversial example, as opposed to the University of Chicago).</p>
<p>I just looked at this thread, but just wanted to say that I think students at UChicago and Columbia really are more likely to find themselves in “intellectual discussions” than most other places. They both have a core curriculum which ensures that practically the whole first year class is reading, discussing, and writing essays about a common set of philosophers, etc. It’s only natural that some of these discussions will continue in the dining halls and dorms.</p>
<p>If I am understanding correctly (which is often NOT the case), the young man in texaspg’s example does big data analysis. I would be delighted if those of you who do understand such things would head off into the weeds to discuss whether big data analysis is or isn’t an intellectual pursuit and if it depends on how it is being used.</p>
<p>Thanks. :)</p>
<p>Sticking my neck out and risking being accused of being a ten-year-old who has hijacked QM’s computer . . . 
. . . and writing from somewhere out in the weeds (double ):</p>
<p>I think the person(s) who developed the code that performs the topological analysis were engaged in an intellectual pursuit.</p>
<p>When I mentioned “spreadsheet analysis,” I had in mind devising one’s own spreadsheet to accomplish something that might not be totally obvious. Generally speaking, I would rate running a canned program as less intellectual than spreadsheet analysis, no matter what the canned program was being used for. Subsequent uses of the data could well be intellectual though, if the user was actually doing something with them, as opposed to simply reading them out. Direct application would not count for me as “doing something with them.” By “doing something,” I mean subjecting the program’s results to further analysis.</p>
<p>There might have been an intellectual component involved in structuring the basketball data input, though.</p>
<p>The intellectual challenge in bioinformatics lies in methods development–understanding enough biology to have an idea what to even look for. I think this field is seriously underdeveloped at present.</p>
<p>QM - I don’t really think the boy would care a whit about whether you think it is intellectual or not and neither do I. The pursuit of a passion needs no one’s validation.</p>
<p>Of course, I agree with #179, texaspg, and I would be glad to call the application of the program to basketball data clever, as an example of lateral thinking. I think you offered it as an example of something intellectual at Stanford? </p>
<p>In terms of the OP’s posts on the thread, though, one of the son’s complaints was a lack of intellectual discussion at Stanford. What really matters in response to the OP is what the OP’s son thinks of as intellectual, not what anyone else thinks. </p>
<p>If the OP has completely given up on this thread, I could understand that. :)</p>
<p>I would count pondering the results as “doing something with the output,” alh. Did you mean you are trying to understand the output (intellectual), or trying to understand the analytical tools (also intellectual)?</p>