<p>
I repeat: Maybe she would have turned down Harvard and Stanford, maybe not. You cannot say that aglages, without knowing what scholarships she might have gotten and other things. </p>
<p>Logical fallcy 2: incomplete information. aka Suppressed Evidence
Without knowing scholarships, financial status, love of the university or dignified’s daughter you can not make any sort of decision about whether dignified’s daughter would or wouldn’t attend UCSD OTHER than relying on what dignified has said b/c she presumably knows the whole story.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree, thanks Nuclear Penguin. Even assuming AA is wrong ( a position I do not agree with)- How is my using AA any different from others using
legacy preferences
family connections to get a job
aglages using the fact that she is white & a woman to gain a better job/a boyfriend/ or
more attention from police when she needs help?
aglages taking scholarship money from a women in college fund.
aglages benefitting from the AA that made white women a majority on college campuses
She didn’t choose to be white or a woman BUT
She is all of the aforesaid things. So she uses them as advantages.</p>
<p>Aglages, you should stop taking advantage of the system yourself, which I bet you do,each and every day. </p>
<p>But only silly people would not use any advantage they have.</p>
<p>Note:
See, I argued AA from a Machiavellian standpoint. I hope it will make more sense to you, aglages.</p>