What *not* to do in your college application

phuriku
Mon, 11 Feb 2008 18:51:50 +0000

then we disagree (and on many levels). first off, I was talking about more than just applying to the university of chicago.
thirty years down the road, you may be running for president (extreme example, but it can be applyed to many things). those pictures of you that you put on the internet doing something that, at the time, was just silly and fun (maybe only slightly illegal) get dug back out. You’re no longer that person, but when you were a teenager, that’s who you were. However, people would attach that picture of you doing something that people are now saying is dumb to the presidential candidate you. It could very easily cost you the election/ whatever the example is that you want to use.
Things that you put on the internet last a LONG time.



If I recall correctly, every person running in the democratic election last year admitted to smoking pot, and I’m pretty sure it was the same case this year as well. As a young person, you say a lot of things that may be looked down upon in the future. Is that any reason to hold back what you say or think today? Should we hide ourselves until we develop into a more mature, sophisticated being? Should we hide our true selves just to impress an admissions team? Just to prevent a harsh judgment from society?



Second, I don’t think the purpose of “formal education” is to conform everyone into the same product. I would argue that that’s more of religions job, but I can see how you would say that. I do think that in many ways formal education may force people to conform (people with different learning styles have to figure out how to get by, people with different interests get by, etc.) However, and this may just be sematics, but I don’t think that’s it’s the PURPOSE of “formal education” to make everybody to conform.

Thirdly (and somewhat related to my second point), I don’t think that Chicago stands for the opposite of “formal education.” Again, this may just be how I look at the wording, but when I think of a formal education, I think getting an education across many disciplenes, and I think that that is in many ways exactly what Chicago’s goal is. To promote thinking individuals that can formulate their own opinions should be the goal of formal education.



Does it really take 4 years to ‘promote’ a viewpoint though? In addition, wouldn’t you say that the vast majority of UChicago students matriculate already having a love of academics? In that case, wouldn’t you say that it’s then the job of the Core to do nothing less than ‘teach us how to think’? How is that not conformist? Also, how do you teach a student to think and form opinions?



You may call me naive (i may be), but then again, we do disagree.



Just because I disagree with you doesn’t mean I think you’re naive.