[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / g / ic / jp / lit / sci / tg / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports / report a bug ] [ 4plebs / archived.moe / rbt ]

Due to resource constraints, /g/ and /tg/ will no longer be archived or available. Other archivers continue to archive these boards.Become a Patron!

/lit/ - Literature

View post   

[ Toggle deleted replies ]
File: 74 KB, 686x386, EC0EFD1A-E4F2-4FDA-9BDC-14CAED73E5DB.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]
18215964 No.18215964 [Reply] [Original]

I’m having a huge inferiority complex and an envy against those who have the opportunity to study at those “prestigious” universities. My uni is ranked around 200th in international rankings and ,although it’s one of the best in my country, I’m forced to feel like a big fish in a small pound. Do the qualities of lectures, professors and your fellow students really stand out from the rest of universities in the world? I’m sure there are a lot of people going to Oxbridge and Ivy League on this board, so please share your experience.

>> No.18215990

the reason to go to oxbridge or an ivy league is to make friends with classmates who will go on to join the elite and help you advance your career later in life. otherwise there are amazing professors to be found at every level of school

>> No.18215992

In 2021?
Yes, very different. They’re worse. Ivy League universities are a joke in most subjects

>> No.18216032

You can easily find courses by MIT, Oxbridge etc. online in sites like Coursera. Most of the benefit is just knowing people, the material itself is not that different except maybe on a few majors and only compared to crappy courses in smaller schools (computer science tends to be super rigorous and heavy on math compared to other places for example).

For braindead majors like business or whatever it's not like they teach anything worthwhile to those guys anywhere, but it sure is useful for later career prospects if you went to the same parties as other rich preppy assholes for 4 years.

>> No.18216046

quality goes down at more prestigious universities
reason is more focus on research, less on teaching & learning
top schools hire researchers who couldn’t care less about lecturing
students at those places tend to be either highly competitive or privileged
There is a popular myth that debauchery and poor moral conduct is common among students at liberal arts colleges in the United States of America. In reality, what you observe is a concentration of this sort of activity at the Ivy league universities and a few others associated with wealth. What you are missing out on is access to politics, popular media, television, the print publishing industry, and other highly deceptive and manipulative industries. It is much nastier than you think, and moral and ethical compromise is much more common. If you really care about that stuff, then convert to Judaism. See how they view the world.

>> No.18216048

99% of college courses are professors proselytizing what they personally believe or were educated to believe everywhere. So the core is exactly the same across all schools and every now and then you get a professor who believes this or that and tries to impart it to you as if a matter of fact. Is that quality? No, not really. It’s pretty much all worthless bullshit, especially if writing is your goal.

>> No.18216081

The “prestigious” universities have become shells of their former selves, presently existing as beehives of anti-intellectualism and penis inversions

>> No.18216168

No because you literally learn everything from a textbook (if you're doing a worthwhile technical subject) so lectures are completely pointless unless you're a brainlet. I didn't even attend any lectures at all last year in a few of my modules, just read the textbook. Got the top mark in those modules.

>> No.18216179
File: 219 KB, 1125x1558, 1619187131210.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

You really aren't missing out on anything. "Elite" universities are a meme. It might be worthwhile if you're studying humanities, since you can't just learn that from a textbook. But if you're doing a non-STEM subject you may as well kys since you're wasting your time.

>> No.18216181

>I’m sure there are a lot of people going to Oxbridge and Ivy League on this board, so please share your experience.
You said it, I'm not sure if there are people form Oxbridge or Ivy in this board but they aren't too different from literally everyone else. Most of them aren't intellectuals and those who are can be found in every university.

Good and shit teachers can be found in every university, I would go as far as to say that you can find the same type of shit both in Ivy and some random third world university. This obviously hurts many people, although not as many as before because there are many people who feel that the name of their universities is more important that what they learned there, and sadly, it's kinda true.

>> No.18216186
File: 174 KB, 790x640, 1620606563025.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Also those universities are filled with women (as are all universities). Make of that what you will.

>> No.18216238

some of them stream or upload their classes, they're nonsense and they cover up how overpriced they are by making you think you have a special experience

>> No.18216255

Depends more on the professor. For good lectures, the teacher needs to be not just good at his or her field, but at presenting as well. The best researchers are often not good at giving lectures. I go to a fairly no name university and I've seen both, known names in their field stumbling through a lecture and stuttering, and teachers that gave almost 4 hour lectures that you didn't want to end because they were so good.

I may be wrong at this, but I think you'd see the best lectures at middle of the pack universities. People there know their fields already but it's not full of the fully research focused professors that don't know how to or don't care about teaching. Plus it's not quite as competitive for teachers or students that it induces too much stress.

>> No.18216267

My dad is a corporate executive and as such has interviewed many people in his day. He says that while there are no doubt many brilliant people in these schools, Harvard and Yale are the only two universities where he has encountered graduates who came into an interview and thought that simply name dropping their alma mater was enough to impress him and land a job.

>> No.18216281

The highest scoring physicians in my country are interestingly enough from relatively newly founded middling universities. There seems to be far more of a focus on teaching properly than funnelling people into academia. The most renowned of the university hospitals produces middle-of-the-pack doctors.

>> No.18216288
File: 93 KB, 1280x720, 0DD39F55-34C7-4BD2-8AD3-CC5CE44D00CA.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>Oh hey Anon, John Fish from Harvard here. Let me tell you why I love Harvard: You see, at Harvard, I feel like I am a part of the Harvard family. When you go to Harvard you are under a lot of pressure because it’s Harvard, but since you go to Harvard, it’s cool because it’s Harvard. Btw did I mention I go to Harvard?

>> No.18216337
File: 189 KB, 1190x796, field of study versus selectivity.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The short answer is no. Due to the high volatility in course quality, it is quite probable that the courses at your university for your particular subject in that specific year is better.
The only single reason (besides vanity) to join those expensive places is networking. This is highly dependent on your field.
In STEM, you learn the exact same "actual" material while paying 5x the price for your license. Physical theories don't change with the college and there is no miracle of pedagogy making you learn it better in the Ivy League. As boomers retire, this is finally entering business practices. I work in electronics R&D near Cambridge, England and even here "prestigious" pieces of paper delivered by the town colleges don't carry special weight compared to sheepfuckinstan, Wales.

>> No.18216338

I haven't attended an Ivy League school, though I have been in a top-14 school. And I can tell you that my experiences are what can be expected from a complex and diverse social environment. There have been professors who escaped communist regimes. There have been avowed neo-Marxists who advocate for the violent overthrow of not just one government, but all Western governments. And there have been all sorts of people in between, from alcoholic professors who gave out As like Biden giving out stimulus checks. In some classes, the curve was so crazy, you could end up with a 20% on a midterm and still finish with a C.

As for the (entirely subjective) quality of lectures, again, I can't speak for Ivy League schools, but I can say that it'd be inordinately difficult to actually quantify that sort of thing. You can say that because some institutions have larger endowments, more prestige, etc., that they attract better talent. And more talented students- which could mean more time dealing with substantive matters and less time dealing with people who need remedial classes or a complete mini-course on the underlying fundamentals before even getting started.

Ultimately, professors are fairly risk-averse and follow whatever standards have been set by their relative departments and professional associations. So, in truth, most of their lectures are just powerpoints highlighting the important points from the assigned textbooks (which, at better schools, are often written by the very professors themselves).

Yes, teachers can have an amazing impact on students and their development. The right teacher can make even calculus seem interesting and relevant. Nonetheless, the lectures are far less important than one's individual work ethic and their ability to ferret out what facts need to be regurgitated.

If you want to really learn and flourish intellectually, stay on 4chan. Read a wide array of books. Listen to indie music. And don't get wrapped up in the idea of a pecking order or externally derived worth.

>> No.18216415

No, it's about having the elite college pedigree attached to your name and meeting the right people.

>> No.18216430

You learn the same things sure, but if you want to go on into grad school, what matters is pedigree - you don't really know anything about what the prospective grad student is going to be like or if they have much research ability unless they're truly a prodigy, so only admitting people who got into a small subset of elite colleges is your best bet - though grad school admissions are less bad than actual academic hiring where there's even more emphasis on pedigree.

>> No.18216436

You can find many lectures from elite universities online for free. They’re ok. Listening to some internet autist’s podcast on the same topic is usually better.

>> No.18216549

>so only admitting people who got into a small subset of elite colleges is your best bet
The graph in my previous post shows that it isn't how employers see things (and it has only gone further in the last few years).
College brand is a terrible way of filtering people among those that spent time on a subject. You'd get better results by phrenology. IQ tests, as flawed as they might be for actual performance, would certainly be better. They are illegal though (because it's racist and sexist, etc, not entering that discussion).
Academic pedigree is only relevant if you intend on staying in academia. The professorial mafia knows better than to squander the benefits of their social enclave.

>> No.18216598

>If you want to really learn and flourish intellectually, stay on 4chan
(from a dude who put "John Galt" on the name field)
>College brand is a terrible way of filtering people among those that spent time on a subject. You'd get better results by phrenology

OP, I hope you take posts like these as warnings to not take anything you hear on 4chan too seriously.

>> No.18216654

IQ tests would be better, it's basically illegal in the US though due to Disparate Impact laws.
>Academic pedigree is only relevant if you intend on staying in academia.
That's all I was saying. If I was hiring I would ideally just give an IQ test and pull names out of a hat after filtering out certain undesirable groups.

>> No.18216861

Is this real?

>> No.18216901

Give me one good philosopher those universities have produced in the last 30 years

>> No.18216935

I was lucky enough to go to Oxford and I’ve got to say the lectures weren’t any better or worse than at other unis. We were actively discouraged from going to lectures actually: our tutors said just reading as many books as possible was a better use of our time. The actual format of the teaching is notably different though. The effect of weekly sessions with a subject expert where they go over your essay and make you defend it against their own criticisms and the criticisms of other students really can’t be understated. The other students were generally very bright but you get your fair share of retards who slip in because the schools they went to coached them on the entrance exam and interview. I’m also a retard but i went to a shit school so I don’t know what happened there. You really aren’t missing out on much anon, going to uni in itself is a massive achievement.

>> No.18216940

>If you want to really learn and flourish intellectually, stay on 4chan.

>> No.18216950

>going to uni in itself is a massive achievement.

>> No.18216952

Fucks sake I meant cannot be overstated. If you wanted more evidence for how little an Oxford education counts for here you have it.

>> No.18216960

It is though. Maybe not from a western centric view but if you consider how many people there are in the world and how many actually get the opportunity to go it’s a real achievement.

>> No.18216964

i know 1 person at yale for medical school. like everything related to college, it depends on your major and the school's rank within that major. and even then, if networking doesn't come easy to you...good luck because you're going to need it.

if you're studying a liberal arts major other than econ, you are 100% betting on that school's name and the people you meet there to launch your career.

that being said, the humanities in universities is dead and has been for years. you will learn more from one reading of Sexual Personae by Camille Paglia than 4 yrs at an ivy league humanities program.

>> No.18216977

I want to kiss her and fondle her tits

>> No.18216994

It truly only matters if you plan on going to graduate studies and get a PhD from Harvard or Yale or Oxford or what have you. No one really cares about where you did your undergrad.

>> No.18216996
File: 26 KB, 788x656, 2458124C-C3F5-4E44-B5A1-D0CCCC401660.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>going to uni in itself is a massive achievement
You can’t be serious

>> No.18217010

Economics is a science

>> No.18217018

just because something is statistically unlikely to happen to a specific individual it doesn't make it an achievement. being born into privileged enough circumstances to enable you to go to university is not an achievement. little over a year ago i exited the education system here in the uk and through out the whole time i contributed little to no real effort to my studies and yet I still could've went to uni if wanted to but instead i'm joining the military.

i see no point in attending university apart from to get a certificate that will potentially enable you to get further up the socio-economic ladder later in life which to me seems like a futile and moronic thing to aspire to. anything you want to learn you can learn for free, there are more than enough educational resources online to teach you about literally anything from brick-laying to micro-biology. if you have a strong desire to learn and are genuinely interested in the subject matter you can educate yourself significantly more than someone who has went through university can and in less time and without the potential debt. as for the humanities well they are so politicised and propagandised in unis that its pointless anyway. my answer to this is just to read deeply and widely in your own time.

>> No.18217024 [DELETED] 


>> No.18217030
File: 61 KB, 500x747, 1405850637586.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Of course it's real. Why does that shock you?

>> No.18217037

They're paying 60k a year for the same info, and you're not.

>> No.18217067

>if you're studying a liberal arts major other than econ, you are 100% betting on that school's name and the people you meet there to launch your career.
>that being said, the humanities in universities is dead and has been for years. you will learn more from one reading of Sexual Personae by Camille Paglia than 4 yrs at an ivy league humanities program.
bugman cope

>> No.18217074

If you don't think that humanities has been dead in universities for decades you're either retarded or delusional.

>> No.18217100
File: 90 KB, 643x960, historywrittenbybourgeoimenlikeme.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

She is famous for pulling stunts like that. She gave a talk at Cambridge naked
(viewer discretion advised)

>> No.18217139

i respectfully disagree. considering the "social sciences" in the same league as biology or chemistry is a bit of a stretch.

why did you come to that conclusion?

>> No.18217142

Nice pubes

>> No.18217144


i wish it wasn't the case. maybe there's some exceptions but it's pretty bleak out there.

>> No.18217188

I think you’re right that going to university primarily to learn more about a subject for which material is readily available online is a waste. Why do you think going so that you can boost your earnings potential is a waste though? A degree typically signifies to employers that a person is capable of some independent study for prolonged periods at a certain level of difficulty in a way that simply passing your A Levels doesn’t. Whether that is actually true or not, especially given the state of most unis in this country, is an entirely different thing. Since you’ve mentioned the military, why do you think Sandhurst is primarily stocked with graduates despite being open to non grads as well?
>as for the humanities well they are so politicised and propagandised in unis that its pointless anyway
Really? Which courses? Which unis? Surely you’re not actually this retarded.

>> No.18217191

I never claimed it was as scientific as chemistry. But it is still a science.

>> No.18217204

Economics uses data-driven empirical methods. Economists construct mathematical models of their theory for how the economy works, then tests it using statistics. That's why it is called the "queen of the social sciences". These methods aren't perfect, of course, and it is difficult to conduct controlled experiments, especially for macroeconomics. But it can still be considered a science. It certainly isn't an humanities or arts subject.

>> No.18217224

>queen of the social sciences
Only economists say this. Having "models" is irrelevant if your models do not reflect reality in some useful way, and it took decades for the idea that "models" should be adjusted to account for actual human behavior to reach the economics mainstream. This phenomenon is more widely known as "physics envy"

>> No.18217250

I literally just said they test the models against data using empirical statistical methods. If a model doesn't stand up against the data, it is discarded. Of course, you can interpret the data in different ways, and there are all sorts of measurement error issues and methodological issues. But the fact is that economic models are useful tools to explain reality, and they provide a framework for thinking about the economy. It's not like the economy is completely random and we have no understanding of how it works. A lot of economics is built off microeconomics which is very scientific. People who don't know the models don't know how to think about the economy or even what variables we would consider of importance in trying to make predictions.

Ultimately, the reason economics exists is because of the limitations of our knowledge of physics

>> No.18217278

Also, it's not that human behaviour wasn't considered important. There is a big debate in economics about the extent to which people have "rational expectations", and how far they plan into the future. The two different schools of thought (broadly, Keynesian and New Classical) have different views on this and this reflects in the predictions their models make.

>> No.18217314
File: 211 KB, 1200x801, oxforduni.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

People like this are the intellectual pinnacle of our nation

>> No.18217336

Can we just drop the phrase 'social sciences'? They're not fucking sciences and science is highly overrated in the first place. Economics is not a science nor should it strive to be. Fucking sperg faggots.

>> No.18217401

>science is highly overrated in the first place
Found the retarded artsfag who cant do maths

>> No.18217418

I didn't attend one, but I know a lot of people who have, and are now teaching at various unis. It's more depressing than anything. Universities seem to have devised ingenious ways of wasting talent. These people are clearly gifted to an extent but it means nothing since they're wasting their time on subjects like whether or not Ophelia had homosexual hangups.

>> No.18217426

>Ultimately, the reason economics exists is because of the limitations of our knowledge of physics
Ultimately the reason physics exist sis because of the limitations of our knowledge of metaphysics.

>> No.18217446
File: 36 KB, 500x492, hrtuws.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Things like this make me feel better about dropping out of society to sell drugs and work manually.

>> No.18217457

Neo-Marxists did this on purpose to confuse people. Now millions think gender theory is science.

>> No.18217469

>classmates who will go on to join the elite and help you advance your career later in life.
This never happens unless they were rich yuppies who were groomed for the academic life in the first place.

>> No.18217490

it's funny to me I know girls from oxford but they still struggle to hold their own in any sort of intellectual debate, as if they weren't prepared to handle to stand on their own two feet rather than turning to the preformed answers instilled into them when one of many potential scenarios occur.

>> No.18217496

American uni’s are a sphere of their own. Shouldn’t be talked about at all.

>> No.18217507

>There is a popular myth that debauchery and poor moral conduct is common among students at liberal arts colleges in the United States of America.
>just America

>> No.18217518

>It might be worthwhile if you're studying humanities, since you can't just learn that from a textbook
Yes you can wtf
>muh second hand sources to """"elaborate"""" on this very specific inconsequential point this philosopher made

>> No.18217541

going to a university has everything to do with how your parents socialize you and plan for your future, nothing to do with personal skills.

>> No.18217567

>Economics is not a science nor should it strive to be.
t. econ phd

>> No.18217572

Holy shit Kek, there is so much cope is this thread from people who have never come within a mile of an ivy or Oxbridge. I go to one of these schools, and I’ve attended other uni’s for short summer programs and stuff. In my experience the quality of teaching is much better at my school. The professors at top schools actually want to teach undergraduates, especially if the uni is undergraduate focused, so you’re able to have a much closer relationship with professors. Also, your professors are the best in the world in their field, so not only are they incredible teachers but they can also give you priceless practical advice and experience if you decide to work on a project with them or something. Teachers here care a lot more about their students because they’re classes are not overpacked. The learning experience for me has been infinitely better here than any other school. Of course, it’s not perfect, but you can just tell that a lot of people here are just desperately trying to come up with stupid reasons to shit on top schools, probably due to insecurity or something

>> No.18217612

Seems like you're the one coping. Enjoy your debt I guess

>> No.18217661

>The professors at top schools actually want to teach undergraduates
Do you really think this is something exclusive to top universities? Anon...
>but they can also give you priceless practical advice
In almost every university in the world there are professors that can give you priceless practical advice for you to perform well in your environment.
>Teachers here care a lot more about their students because they’re classes are not overpacked.
Again linking generic feats to top universities.
I'm not saying that top universities are literally the same that every other university but academically there's not much difference. Like >>18217612 said, it seems like you're the one coping here. Also, taking in account that we are in a literature board humanities are dead in every university regardless of their prestige so...

>> No.18217686

I’m not saying it’s exclusive, but I’ve never experienced anything like what I experience at a top school in any other school. I know any school can have professors that give you good advice, but the difference is that the professors at top schools are the best in the world. Top uni’s have more funding, they care more about their students, and they attract better faculty. I’m not saying that you can’t have a good education at another school, but the idea that there is no meanful difference between a top school and other schools is laughable

>> No.18217690

So if I major in liberal arts I get to see naked chicks IRL on the regular? Sign me up pham

>> No.18217759

The word science, scienza, had a broad application before stem-autism tried to monopolise it

>> No.18217833


>> No.18217847

If you look at them, you’ll get expelled for sexual harassment

>> No.18217884
File: 2.04 MB, 363x221, 1620632255512.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>just reading as many books as possible was a better use of our time
>going to uni in itself is a massive achievement

>> No.18217971

This is why I like 4chan so much and why I think it serves as a university in itself.
>The effect of weekly sessions with a subject expert where they go over your essay and make you defend it against their own criticisms and the criticisms of other students really can’t be understated
This is all we do all day here.
We read, formulate ideas, share them, get shit on, then defend our ideas.
This place hardens you into fucking diamond.

>> No.18218015

No it doesn't. It's funny, but it certainly doesn't make you smart.

>> No.18218021

You're using the site wrong if that's what you think.

>> No.18218034

No. If you're a university student, try actively seeking out engagement with your professors, and that includes people with whom you are not taking classes. You will quickly see what I mean.

>> No.18218069

I might check it out one day, but for now it's not worth the money for me. I can engage with source material then debate it on here.
I can debate the source material in my head, read counter-points, synthesize an idea based on what I read in both and what I personally think through my own experience and thoughts. Share that here with other anons who have done the same and defend my idea in a completely free and open environment where you can not only point out flaws in others' logic, but call them a stupid fucking nigger at the same time.
Yes, there are trolls, and shitposters, but you've gotta pay the troll toll if you want to get into that boy's hole.
In this thread (these people could be lying of course) people have claimed to be students at ivy league universities. Not everyone here is a dip-shit, and they can say what they truly think separate and free from any thought-policing.
Perhaps I underestimate the value of university, but don't underestimate the power of platforms for free discussion. When used correctly the information gathered here is invaluable. It's a glimpse into the soul of man when he is free.
Anonymity is power, power is freedom, how you use this site can tell you who you really are.

>> No.18218099

You can study independently all you want. If you want to get a job based on your knowledge, you won't be able to. You need that shiny degree certificate to get your foot in the door and get to the interview stage. That's why university is important. Not because of the teaching. That is the reason people go to university, not to learn, but to get a certificate so they can earn a higher salary

>> No.18218107

I'm telling you, dude. Very few people here are good. The only people here who are good are keeping it to themselves.

>> No.18218121

Dunno, maybe the graduate level stuff, but undergrad from what I've seen is basically the same.

>> No.18218133
File: 50 KB, 850x400, quote-love-your-enemies-because-they-bring-out-the-best-in-you-friedrich-nietzsche-81-3-0375.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Exactly my point.
It's a carrot on a stick, and that's why I don't recognize universities as an authority.
I don't want to be a drone chasing a piece of paper. I want to learn and be free.
>you've gotta pay the troll toll if you want to get into that boy's hole
The good is worth the bad.
Even if people are shitting on what you say for the sake of shitting on you they may point out flaws you have yet to consider. This is to your benefit. Even if their criticisms are filled with faulty logic and fallacies you learn the ways of those who use trickery and deception to win an argument. Arguing with people here has been invaluable to me since I've learned the tactics of those who use trickery to win. Know thy enemy, lest he have power over you.

>> No.18218163

Why the fuck does the left have to sexualize everything? It’s disturbing.

>> No.18218175

No, I mean that the kind of criticism that you need is one that only someone who has read several hundred books in their field and spent more time than you've been alive studying it can give you. No one here has that level of ability.

>> No.18218188

>Jesus said, "The person old in days won't hesitate to ask a little child seven days old about the place of life, and that person will live.
>For many of the first will be last, and will become a single one."
I've seen the lectures and read the books of many people who are lost in a labyrinth of bullshit. Sometimes it takes a simple mind to cut through the self-imposed fog of academia.
An appeal to authority is a fallacy. Judge the words on their own merit.

>> No.18218212

There are people who are not good, and there are people who are good, as in people who have read certain authors repeatedly and can tell you off the top of their head while reading your work that they make a certain specific statement that contradicts what you are writing in a certain specific place. If you are good, these people will literally carve extra time out of their day to speak with you and critique your work. If you are not good, you will not only not notice how good they are, but you will be unable to notice their flaws. You will also not be able to read and properly understand any of the texts in your discipline. They will also notice and not be interested in sharing their time with you.
Basically, if you aren't getting any time or effort out of your professors, then you should at least consider the possibility that you are to some degree at fault.

>> No.18218236

Hiring uni grads is just class consciousness of the middle class strivers. People can and should lie about education on their resume just to get past these arrogant gatekeepers.

>> No.18218242

I already said I don't attend university.
>Basically, if you aren't getting any time or effort out of your professors, then you should at least consider the possibility that you are to some degree at fault
Here you are, like many others in the past, engaging with me.
I do not recognize the authority of university as the end all be all. I can engage with the source material on my own and in my own way. I would rather follow in the footsteps of giants than follow in the footsteps of those who teach about those giants.
There is knowledge to be gained from everyone. I do not entirely discount the value of engaging with a professor, but it is far from the only way, or even the best way. Only you can decide what's best for you.

>> No.18218251

You're a pretentious retard. I've been to top uni's and the discussion quality is exactly the same or better on 4chan. Yeah, sometimes it's more edgy, and maybe the comments are more informal and generational, but it's quite literally the exact same people. You go to any elite university in America and I guarantee that some of the smartest kids there browse /lit/.

You can also find eccentric retired professors scattered in trailer parks across America and have wonderful conversations with them, yet you act like unless this is costing you 40k/year it somehow doesn't count.

University is a pointless prestige game these days.

>> No.18218263

I've been scouted for a literary department from a professor who was top of his field, educated in Cambridge and Harvard, etc. etc. because he loved my work.
All my writing has been honed by 4chan and I barely ever attended class in highschool.
Most professors are just careerists and not particularly brilliant outside of their hyper-focused area of study. Stop lying to yourself kid.

>> No.18218272


>> No.18218281

>The learning experience for me has been infinitely better here than any other school.
0 times 0 is still 0

>> No.18218291

The reason you like Oxford so much is because you're allowed to "go to schools" like it's all just a temporary relocation in your big journey of life.

>> No.18218319

I've been talking about professors not the students. The students don't matter. Talk to the professors.
The problem is that you seem to think that the source material is written for you. It's not. The author wrote it for his own very specific purposes in his own time period. If you do not possess the requisite knowledge, you will not understand what you are reading. The professors typically possess this knowledge, or can tell you where to go to get it. That is the point of university.

>> No.18218341

>Most professors are just careerists and not particularly brilliant outside of their hyper-focused area of study. Stop lying to yourself kid.
My whole point is that they possess specialized knowledge that no one here possesses. Without it, you are lost.
>All my writing has been honed by 4chan and I barely ever attended class in highschool.
Are you an undergraduate? In any case, literature as a discipline is not the same as the other disciplines. Much of this board is dedicated to philosophy, and I can tell you that specialized knowledge is required there.

>> No.18218389

So if I'm reading Nietzsche and he references Plato, I need a professor to tell me to read Plato?
You're failing to understand two key things:
1. Your professors are human and they don't possess any magical abilities, nor do they have a monopoly on knowledge where you have to pay them a fee to access this knowledge. It's all already there waiting for you.
2. If an author only has academics in mind, you'd be wise to see their labyrinth of bullshit for what it is.
If you really think this:
>The problem is that you seem to think that the source material is written for you. It's not.
You've fallen for their elitist con.
They've created a fire that they claim only they can put out. That's the trademark of a con man. That's how they sink their claws into you.

>> No.18218442

Here's a question that you should be able to answer if you are as good as you think you are.
What is the significance of Nietzsche for modern moral philosophy? That is, what is his place in the history of moral philosophy? (The answer can be found in MacIntyre's After Virtue).
What is Nietzsche's role and place in the development of modern political philosophy? (The answer can be found in Leo Strauss's "Three Waves of Modernity").
If you can't answer these questions by yourself in a manner that approximates in content or is equal in insight to those provided by these two, then you must admit that you require the assistance of specialists.

>> No.18218449

>no point in attending university apart from to get a certificate that will potentially enable you to get further up the socio-economic ladder later in life

That's because you've been supported by your parents your entire life.

>> No.18218467
File: 51 KB, 797x443, What-is-Platos-Allegory-of-the-Cave.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Your assumptions about the fundamentals are faulty. You prefer the shadows to the real deal.
Plato warned us of this thousands of years ago.
What you are talking about is pure simulacra. It's the academic labyrinth of bullshit.
What is relevant is what Nietzsche said, not what some academic thinks of his work. You don't need someone else to tell you how to interpret something you can look at on your own.
Your view of philosophy is purely academic and un-philosophical.

>> No.18218479


>> No.18218553

Average quality of student doesn't seem to really change, the upper echelons you can really see a difference in though. Culture is very different, but in a bad way. I go to a research uni so I can't speak on professor quality, it's mostly a sidegig to them while they focus on actual academia, although some of them still make excellent tutors.

>a lot of people going to Oxbridge and Ivy League on this board
There are a handful and a bunch of LARPers.

>> No.18218575

>implying i am not a dean at Stanford

>> No.18218577

academics BTFO

>> No.18218617

>I've been to top uni's and the discussion quality is exactly the same or better on 4chan
Maybe among undergrads. Trust me, 4chan doesn't hold a candle to a real education from a good department and I don't care how many people on this site like to imagine otherwise.

>> No.18218625
File: 33 KB, 640x353, 1620632674830.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>“All modern philosophizing is political, policed by governments, churches, academics, custom, fashion, and human cowardice, all of which limit it to a fake learnedness.”
- Nietzsche
>If you are not good, you will not only not notice how good they are >>18218188

>> No.18218627

in the higher level courses, yes more likely, as you are part of a few integrating with a professor whose idiosyncrasies are made into the lectures. In these you are at the will of you professors knowledge and the most qualified would likely go to the top unis.

In common course less so, if you are going to one of the best schools in your country it is likely already populated by the ivy sort professor-wise so if you are speaking with them regularly there shouldn't much of a gap.
not all in the room digest the messages, some are just performative along the ride

>> No.18218631

>>If you are not good, you will not only not notice how good they are
meant to be a reference to this >>18218212

>> No.18218856

You aren't missing out on undergrad level, but graduate? Yeah I'd say so, that's when it matters. Most people do not take a graduate degree though.

>> No.18218882

>quality goes down at more prestigious universities
>reason is more focus on research, less on teaching & learning
Not true. This is more for large state schools. This doesn't apply to any highly ranked liberal arts college and many t20s.

>> No.18218943

This is actually pretty based

>> No.18218949

literally how

>> No.18218987

>If you can't answer these questions by yourself in a manner that approximates in content or is equal in insight to those provided by these two, then you must admit that you require the assistance of specialists.

What an idiot take especially in a field like philosophy.

>> No.18218997
File: 765 KB, 2155x1502, 20210510_234929.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Rising sophomore in MIT here.
Can't really say about my experience with humanities, but STEM is a huge mixed bag, especially considering how much we rely on recitation TAs.

>> No.18219011

Tell us about your experiences. I wouldn't go to MIT for humanities anyway, given what the university focuses on.

>> No.18219046

From what I know, you're just a number in those schools because the classes are HUGE and the professors are there because they have to teach, not because they want to. What kind of major are you doing where this is not the case? If anything the state schools here are known to have smaller classes than in the prestigious universities.

>> No.18219144

That's outright false unless there are some differences in the various fields at American uni's.

>> No.18219147

literally nothing she wrote makes sense and she looks ridiculous to everyone

>> No.18219180

You seriously missed out big time, OP. Especially if your end goal is working in academia. 100 is OK on the world stage, but 200? Jeez.

>> No.18219203

Went to a top US university. I'll say it depends. What are you looking for in a lecture? In reality, pretty much anyone can give a good lecture, and many of the smartest experts in the field can just as easily give a shitty lecture. And if you're taking a 101 level course, or even a high level undergraduate course, your lectures will only have given you a base-level understanding of material. Id bet the Harvard intro to political theory kids are reading Rawls just like everyone else. So the lectures at a top universty aren't too special.

However, one advantage is that really cool professors doing interesting shit can come up with obscure, interesting courses tailored to their individual research. This is where you might start to see an advantage. Not in a lecture, but the opportunity to take a very focused course and talk to someone who is respected and knowledgable and driven. And outside of the class, being able to talk to interesting professors to guide your life. Some people cite your fellow students' intelligence as a benefit, to be honest I was by and large disappointed in my first 2 years by how stupid and uninterested in general knowledge most of my classmates were, a huge percentage of them were rich legacies who just went to restaurants and parties. But once youve had enough time, you can find a friend group of people who really know their shit and they'll be unbelievably brilliant.

A longwinded answer, but basically, you arent missing out on great lectures. The main benefit is some amorphous sense of being able to find meaningful relationships which you may not find elsewhere.

>> No.18219215

how top are we talking?

>> No.18219224


In the original meaning of the word, not the woke one.

>> No.18219236


Networking opportunities and potential better access to funding and training opportunities. That's all. If you are really driven you may be able to work under some high flying professor who leads in whatever field it is they teach - it's so much easier when you have literal face-time and can approach them after a lecture. These prestigious universities also have better financial turnover which means more money for research opportunities and collaborations and if you are intelligent and aggressive enough you can really take advantage of all these opportunities. Being a shut-in, loner despite going to a great uni only means you get bragging rights of having attended - a boon itself for employers and people who value pedigree but a waste in terms of what you really had access to.

>> No.18219237

she's high on crack cocaine? A drug addict?

>> No.18219243


I did not attend an ivy but my school is ranked above several of the ivies, I see no difference why it would make any difference. I didnt go to cornell or some bullshit

>> No.18219262

>The professors at top schools actually want to teach undergraduates,

They want to teach post-graduates and get on with their own research. Undergraduates are nothing to them and a time-sink. In fact, at post grad level you'd be surprised how much of the talent comes from other universities or countries - it's how driven and intelligent someone is that matters when hiring/recruiting for post grad research/programs.

>> No.18219263


I should also point out I was admitted to Columbia for grad school and didn't go so it's not like I'm salty about not going to the ivy league

>> No.18219265

Nope there's no difference (at least for stem). The books, the amount of homework, hell even the undergrad resources (if we're comparing similar sized universities) are the same.

I honestly can't think of a single thing that would have been different if I got my degrees at a smaller school or at an ivy league (I went to a large state university). In fact, grad programs for my fields (physics and mathematics) don't even give a shit about your undergrad. All they care about are grades, research/work experience, recommendation letters, and genuine reasons for going there. Even GRE scores are being phased (t. go to a top 10 American uni for Applied Math)

>> No.18219276

This is something that will happen at any large university though. Basically every large university is one of the top universities in some field or has the top XYZ in ZZZ field as a professor.

Shit is so autistically specialized nowadays, almost every professor is a one of kind expert.

>> No.18219297

Probably would not be able to give an accurate answer, as my whole experience has been online so far (sucks to be a freshman right now). It also means that I have only taken GIRs (basic requirements) and some intro classes so it's not like I can talk a lot about the benefits of, say, Mechanical Engineering as a major.

I did notice a few things though. If the class didn't rely on recorded lectures from OCW or edX (like 8.01 and 8.02 did this year) most of my lectures were not-as-useful or straight up useless, especially if it's about math or physics (can't quite do the same with bio or chem because MIT curriculum is weird and adds certain topics outside of textbooks). While lectures are not obligatory, most of the time recitations are, and those recitations tend to be awful (because it's mostly TAs going over problems).

Now, I'm probably being too cynical here. I know lots of people who go to lectures, and lots who attend recitations and say it helps. However, for me it's generally been reading through books and recitation notes/solutions.

Probably the most characteristic part is that problem sets are time consuming in all the classes. So far I haven't had a class where the problem sets didn't take at least 5 hours to do, which us probably why this place is so fucking hard as barely anyone has time to go to lectures and dedicate 5-8 hours to each problem set and on top of that, study.

>> No.18219327

I feel American unis offer much of the same.

>> No.18219369

Stem education is pure fuckery, i took bio for several years and the courses were essentially just relearning high school science (admittedly i went to a very advanced high school) but this time they forced you to memorize the name of every protein and chemical involved in each process. Which in some ways made you even dumber, because you now just memorized protein names instead of learning what the actual significance of each process was. And they forced you to take chem and physics to learn bio but the chem professors only cared about chemistry from a chemists perspective so here were 100 bio majors learning about schrodinger wave equations and electron energy levels for no reason

>> No.18219403

Sounds hilarious

>> No.18219673

That's just not true lol
That isn't true either, you've clearly not spent any significant amount of time at these schools. Undergraduate education is very important for these schools and they hire top professors who are leaders in their field and incredible teachers. All of the professors i've met are really engaging, passionate teachers that genuinely care about the success of their undergrads

>> No.18219822

yes i have and I know full well that i'll inherit a house or two so i dont see much point in working hard at the rat race like you wage cucks

>> No.18219858

>Do the qualities of lectures, professors and your fellow students really stand out from the rest of universities in the world?
>Do you get to blow future bourgeoisie

Generally scholastic excellence is 100-200 by any international discipline specific ranking you choose. UK Red brick.

And here's the tip:

>> No.18219895
File: 62 KB, 600x600, 8c3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

woah easy there, youngster

>> No.18219945
File: 36 KB, 460x306, shouting into my own void, a mestruating cunt, made up of genocides of Evil and Bad.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


If you don't comprehend, read the image name.

>> No.18220438

Reddit mindset

>> No.18220463

I went to a top 100 university, to a top 10 university, and to a top 3 university.

Didn't notice a difference in the quality of lectures, professors, or students. I did notice a difference in the funding though, so it is worth going to the best university you can.

>> No.18220465

Going to a top university doesn't guarantee you anymore more than a top 200th necessarily. You'll still be teaching yourself 80% of the course material and still need external things such as internships and extracurricular projects/activities to truly stand out from being another graduate. Experience talking from doing a bachelors from a top 40 uk uni to currently doing a masters in a top 10 uk uni.

>> No.18220482

Ivy leagues are Jewed beyond recognition and hardly function has a university anymore. In the old days you can read about relationships with professors and students and all that. Now it’s just high school with big classes. Professors don’t want to waste time with dumb undergrads and have 500 students a class anyway if they even wanted too.

The Ivy League you are dreaming up died during the Cold War

>> No.18220511

I've found that the discussions you have with peers and actually sitting down and writing a paper (something which you could do by yourself) are significant parts of the learning process in humanities subjects.

>> No.18220523

That feeling when the best uni in your country (Poland) isn't even in TOP300.

>> No.18220535

> caring what the anglokikes concoct for their ridiculous ""ratings""
This is why Poland is the perpetual loser country.

>> No.18220536

The real blackpill about universities is that you don't go there to learn. You just go there to get an accreditation that is less valued year after year and people stop caring about after you get 1 YOE. Baring a few courses where you need specific hardware etc, you can learn everything for free online and at a better standard. Nobody will give a single shit if you got an 86% on your Data Structures and Algorithms module. Why do you think people still have to go above and beyond the with extensive projects just to get an entry level job. The only real measure where universities, especially the top ones will help is if you want to pursue a life in academia. If you're just going to become a wagie, then a top 200 uni that is one of the best in your country is more than good enough. Any deficiencies or insecurities you have would not be eliminated if you went back in time and got into Oxford

>> No.18220595

this anon has the main point - lectures are just lectures, they aren't going to be anything life-changing, you are just consuming some information for an hour. oxbridge universities are different in how they teach, as you write a weekly essay, then you are supervised on the topic you discussed by someone who is usually one of the most important people in that field.

>> No.18220601

I've been reading all these recent Oxbridge topics, along with that Oxford copypasta, with some bemusement. I went to Oxford and did a PPE degree. I have also read a lot of bitter posts about poshness but I did see a grain of truth: that the public school upbringing shielded you from feeling offence. It's true. It's always jarring when I come across a /lit/ type in real life, one of those fiercely attempting to climb the class ladder through erudition and intellect alone. It is embarrassing on both sides.

On the one hand, this person, so used to being the towering intellect in their Durham-LSE-UCL (oh spare me about English Literature rankings!)-Warwick social circle (Bristol, Edinburgh, and St. Andrews seem to produce only jolly clowns, not these types), is visibly mortified while realising how much the Oxbridge natural brilliance shines through. What's funny is that they are invariably better read than me. Tolstoy's lesser known works and so on. But they are still visibly insecure, in many cases shaking. Sometimes I use my 3-to-1 tutorial hewn bullshitting technique to pretend that I have read as much as them but I always reveal that I am joking and this terrifies them, as if realising I have been boxing with both hands behind my back. Please, you guys, DON'T come across so try hard.

I now float in and out of fashionable South Kensington, Russel Square, and, when I feel like knobbing that hipsterish girl you cooed over in your 30 person English tutorials as a Chinese teaching assistant failed to draw ANY original thoughts from the class, Camden mileus on these autumnal and winter Friday and Saturday nights. It's quite funny really, my friends and I were academically brilliant, on many occasions being invited for individual wine sessions with multiple tutors from Economics, Law, and English Literature, and being begged to continue on with further study- on one occasion my tutor postponed his meeting with the Presidents of the World Bank and IMF where he would advise them of the Venezuela situation, in order to plead with me to develop a Hegelian line of attack on the similarities of English common law and Constantinople law that I had mentioned in a throwaway comment- and yet, in these fashionable parties, the most easily brilliant and witty people were the Oxbridge colleagues among us who had done so academically badly. Lowly Atillas, lazy Desmonds, narcoleptic Douglases: who knew they were so brilliant? But I guess that's Oxbridge for you!

>> No.18220610

Might be a part of it, sure. But I was half-joking anyway. Generally I think it's ridiculous how many resources are waisted globally to constantly reiterate through the same material. People can read and, if in need, they can look for help online. How our civilization hasn't yet got rid of formal education is beyond me.

Yes, I'm autistic. How can you tell?

>> No.18220626

I went to a very midtier(if that) university that just happened to be close to both UC Berkley and Stanford. A couple of my professors have been teachers at Berkley. Who also teach at other schools to make more money. Or they left there job there to get a better one where I went to school. They are on average better lecturers. But they are not the best. On my best teachers was just some post grad student. More prestigious schools tend to attract better minds. That's just how it works. Rate my professor helps me avoid some of the shit teachers. But our school seems to have quite a few of them.

>> No.18220730

What exactly is she protesting? Clothes?

>> No.18220734

Did they even exist outside of Europe for a few hundred years?

>> No.18220757

Upper middle class people? Yeah they do. The left is trying to get rid of them though

>> No.18220773

lmao yea thats the whole point, oxbridge and ivy league universities are essentially 5 year socializing events for rich yuppie kids.

>> No.18220779

Wallahi the West is finished. How did the greatest institution of higher learning in the world fall prey to this rubbish? Also the writing in black marker on naked bodies thing was shocking the first 100 times it was done.

>> No.18220957

I got into Oxford for an mst in humanities and was curious about how it differs since I come from a 150 world ranked university.

>> No.18221011

Generally which uni you go to won’t matter. Oxbridge looks more impressive on the CV but a lot of other things count too. However, if your end goal is academic work in humanities it is a different story. Whichever undergraduate University you attended does not matter much, but when you pursue a graduate degree including PhDs you will definitely want to aim for a top 25 school on the world rankings. This has both to do with specialization but also academic gatekeeping, as the higher ranked the University, the more other universities want you, especially when you have published some papers. You are thus definitely prioritized when seeking a job, etc.

>> No.18221083
File: 10 KB, 251x242, 32f.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>If you want to really learn and flourish intellectually, stay on 4chan

>> No.18221116

Quite the embarrassing post

>> No.18221122

Anyone who thinks that Oxbridge is comparable to other unis is deluding themselves. Sure, the course content (the classics) might be the same, but do students at other unis experience the grandeur of the old academic heritage the way Oxbridge students do? I can say that surely not. Imagine having term after term of waking up in central Cambidge in your porter-defended stronghold and academic community, go and have some breakfast in the ancient, musty hall with your friends and talk about the night before. Afterwards you do some work in the library, have a chat with your professor supervisors about current events and finish the day off with a formal, all while knowing that where you sit right now, hundreds of brilliant academics have sat before you? And imagine having that experience from the time you are 18, at the apex of your development into adulthood.

>> No.18221148

i watched yale courses online and dare i say it is dangerously cringe and bluepilled

>> No.18221168
File: 1009 KB, 195x197, Midnight snack.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

The problem is more that people severely overestimate what science can tell us about how we should act, rather than how the world works, and even there people are attributing more to it than what is epistemologically sound.
Also people think "it's peer reviewed science, so it must be true" without knowing the absolutely shady bullshit that goes on behind closed doors. Borderline fraudulent p-hacking, reproductivity crises all over the board (In STEM too, not just psychology), nepotism, people married to their hypotheses rather than doing actual science, etc.
t. mol bio PhD and im going into industry, academia should burn down

>> No.18221169

No, they arent

>> No.18221178

the ratio between your index finger and middle finger indicates you have low testosterone and are most likely a homosexual

>> No.18221222

>but do students at other unis experience the grandeur of the old academic heritage the way Oxbridge students do
Only pseuds think this is important. The age of grand geniuses is over. All scientific advancement today is done by spergs who hyper-specialise in one very specific topic

>> No.18221232
File: 53 KB, 500x747, feminismoxford3.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I am consistently impressed by the sheer level of intellect exuded by these Oxbridge types

>> No.18221237

>because they’re classes
Sure anon, tell us more about the Ivy League schooling

>> No.18221279

Wow a minority of students out of the 20,000+ student body! The uni is ruined!
You aren’t really showing anything with these images.

>> No.18221297
File: 40 KB, 400x600, feminismoxford2.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It demonstrates that there are lots of retards who are let into Oxford and Cambridge. I know a few myself.

>> No.18221309

>Undergraduate education is very important for these schools

Because they bring in money via student loans.

> and they hire top professors who are leaders in their field and incredible teachers.

Those top professors come for the funding and research opportunities as already discussed and mentioned numerous times in this thread. It has already been mentioned already that being top in your field does not necessarily translate into being good at 'teaching' in that field.

>All of the professors i've met are really engaging, passionate teachers that genuinely care about the success of their undergrads

No one gives a shit about your anecdotes when so many others can bring out anecdotes contrary to your own. You're just defending what you want to think life is like based off your own tiny and narrow experiences.

>> No.18221310
File: 111 KB, 1200x1200, 1575467272985.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Oh im perturbed alright

>> No.18221320


Nice daydream LARPer.

>> No.18221327

Would lick

>> No.18221334

Of course, that’s how it is when uni’s offer gender studies. The quality of the University overall is not diminished however as you seldom interact cross-faculty. Oxbridge is still top 5 in the world and its not because they let in retards. Political retards? Yeah, some, but you can’t avoid them unless you literally go to the American colleges only admitting Orthodox Jews and zero women. Overall the quality stays consistent.
The same goes for Ivy Leagues which I’d argue are in a worse environment politically, but all the videoes you see of «student riot X» «Black students confront teacher» are not everyday events. People get their cameras out for a reason. Day to day things are normal, people keep their head down, do what they like to do.

>> No.18221347

I'm not saying Oxbridge isn't a good university. I'm just pointing out that it isn't that special and the romance associated with it on /lit/ is unjustified. There are plenty of extremely smart people at lots of universities, and academics at the top of their sub-field can be found at every institution, because all academia is about these days is hyper-specialisation because that is the only way to advance knowledge.

>> No.18221352

>t. mol bio PhD and im going into industry, academia should burn down
t. Computer Science PhD with a good track record.

>> No.18221355

>the ghosts of previous inhabitants of college towns infuse us with wisdom
Based necromancer. I'm from Paris so I can't say whether it's only French ghosts that are silent or we might just suck at divination. Listening to something banal or even stupid in the Grand Amphithéâtre or the main rooms of the Collège de France just means you are listening to banality or stupidity in a more esthetic room.
Besides, those prestigious ancestors are hecking problematic.
You will rename things after American negroes.
You will live in the pod (we already did that one).
You will be happy.

>> No.18221363

How's CompSci academia? Life sciences fucking sucks.

>> No.18221396

Fairly comfy actually since students know they could easily find a job if they left. So there are actual incentives for them to stay. Not in terms of pay. That is shit. But department-wise. This does not apply to foreign students though, they are abused as usual because their visa is tied to the university.
Other than that all the usual problems of academia - nepotism, bullshitting, power politics, shit wlb are exactly the same as in other disciplines. I have lost all trust in scientific institutions since I now know how the review process works and what kind of dumbass, reality-divorced people write these papers.
And now with machine learning there is also social justice coming into play, which is fairly bothersome. No one wants to deal with that topic but you have to quietly acknowledge the proselytizers otherwise you will be ostracized.

>> No.18221417


- Top unis let you network with people who in the future will run the country. This is a huge deal.
- Transfer of status. You get a brand. Wows other people. People will immediately think you are really smart when you tell them for the rest of your life.

Imo in better unis you are also surrounded by generally smarter people who push you. My average uni (ranking around 100) is dead. Too easy to pass, tutorial teachers dont give a fuck, kids don't care about networking, they just want a degree and a monkey 9-5 job.

Also uni holds you accountable for learning and gives you objective feedback that is harder to get if you self-study.

If you want to be a doctor, lawyer you have to go since they have a monopoly on who can become them via certificates.

>> No.18221434
File: 537 KB, 408x720, Scientific.webm [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Oh thats nice. Bio isnt as in vogue as compsci, but we got a massive boost with the pandemic, especially biotech. It does feel like a scam though, and a PhD isnt even that much of a boost if you wanna work outside academia (its actually worse in a lot of ways).
We dont have that much wokeness here (yet), but sometimes it comes across a bit when you have to deal with innate biological differences in races or the inheritability of IQ, or consanguinity amongst certain groups. Not /pol/ level shit, but these things are more salient than some people would like to admit.
What kind of wokeness do you have in machine learning? People turning AI's into nazis?

>> No.18221448

she surely showed those fascist cambridge professors

>> No.18221502
File: 613 KB, 617x544, Class.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

> You're a bourgeois, status anxious, middle class try-hard.

>> No.18221518

Your comment of average schools may be true. I see people always complaining about their professors here. In my experience, at a slightly above average college, I have yet to have a bad professor. In fact, I've had professors who were astounding in both their knowledge and rhetoric. The first professor I had was a theologian who is some sort of savant that has the Bible memorized. His lectures were hypnotically engaging, and the hall had a 100 people in it. It was a very encouraging way to begin my education.

>> No.18221557

>What kind of wokeness do you have in machine learning? People turning AI's into nazis?
Because machine learning is so popular a lot of freeloaders have attached themselves to the discipline and you get a lot of meta drama.
Many silly issues. One of the largest machine learning conferences (NIPS) was renamed to NeurIPS because people complained that the acronym NIPS is sexist. Then you have Twitter drama making waves through the community. For example, Google fired an ethics researcher for being generally obstinate but the researcher made it into a huge race issue. Some context:
This ultimately led to certain professors making lists of graduate students who aligned themselves on the wrong side of the debate and they published it on Twitter. In general, the new crowd is trying to cancel the old guard who is not fully on board with "ethical" machine learning because it often distorts the data.
Thankfully, my discipline (systems) is removed from this but we still get the waves from these controversies. In general, Computer Science has lots of woke Twitter debate. Many profs have their circle on Twitter and jerk themselves off. I find it embarrassing but that is the style here. You have to network like this to make in the US universities.

Yeah, I always wonder, what can you do with a Biology PhD after graduation? I am aware of the Flatiron Institute here in NYC that has many life sciences positions, but those are also bio tech related.

>> No.18221588

My parents are paying for Yale faggot. Cope more.

>> No.18221677

I'm not the postgraduate, but the CompSci postgrads I know actually work on useful things. A lot of medical applications and computer vision, specifically, and a lot of it gets implemented in industry too. It's not as hellish as other hyper-specialised sciences, and even when it is, postgrads still have their own portfolios they work on. I am >>18218553 though so it might be different in unis with different philosophies towards the academic world, mine notoriously does treat the postgrads like they're royalty, and I can't be mad, it gets real results.

>> No.18221726
File: 839 KB, 450x402, 1367258246351.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Wasnt that the biracial sociology girl who got the axe from Google? I heard about that iirc.

As far as biology goes, doing a PhD mostly means youre gonna do academic work. As weird as it sounds, being too academic just makes you unattractive for any business jobs.
But life sciences PhD's are horrible; theyre long (bout 5 years), pay is shit, usually involve long hours, and worst of all, youre dependent on biological systems to do what you want to do, which is a huge risk. Ive known people that spent years on making an antibody that wont work. Ive had zebrafish that mysteriously refuse to breed for months (turns out a related institute changed some tubes to copper tubes which interfered with zebrafish reproduction). Ive had cell lines do one thing in one experiment only to never work again, etc.
In academia, this can completely fuck you over as lack of publishing is a death sentence, while in industry, its possible to have a great career in (for example) pharmacology without ever producing a working drug.

>> No.18221731

my sisters at an elite uni and i'm at a very okay uni. I don't think it really makes any difference to the quality of lectures it's more about the attitudes of the people who teach and go there.

All her friends there are absolutely loaded and practically everyone she knows has some kind of big-money job lined up post uni. whereas i'm just mixing with loads of exceedingly normal people. I'm not sure i would like the pretentiousness but it's not like i'd get in anyway. my lecturers have been fantastic though

>> No.18221782

Nah I think she is actually from Ethiopia and has an engineering degree. But Google had a couple of these cases recently, so it is entirely possible that someone else also got axed in this purge. Rumor has it that these ethics researchers did little of use for the company other than branding.

Oh god, all of this sounds terrifying. Friend of mine is a psychology PhD and the study they conducted over several years had some flaws. Now she has to write her entire PhD on bad data. Absolutely miserable. The nice part about Computer Science is that you have everything under control for the most part. So when you fuck up, you are mostly too blame. I hope your work is panning out now, Anon.

>> No.18221831

I honestly dont feel like the current PhD system works for the sciences. Far too much depends on chance. I actually think that industry is a far less toxic place to work, and scientific integrity is better as well.

>> No.18221869

>I honestly dont feel like the current PhD system works for the sciences
Agreed, it does not allow for experimentation and is much too results driven. Papers as metrics is just the worst idea...

>> No.18221926

Came to the thread to say basically this, I studied English lit at Oxford and the 1:1 tuition is justifiably emphasised far more than the lectures. Being able to sit and discuss your essay and develop your ideas for an hour with a proper expert is great and improves your understanding really quickly

>> No.18221945

Lol you have no idea what you're talking about bro. Having a PhD is an absolute must in the life science industry if you want to to advance past the lowest rungs of the ladder and not be cleaning beakers for someone else the rest of your life.

>> No.18221959
File: 43 KB, 495x500, 59B3B1E7-39F4-4386-90B3-F3C2660BDC43.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Correct, like at Ivy Leagues and Oxbridge.

>> No.18221976

IMO the Austrian school branch of economics is the most similar to the humanities and is more “philosophical”, than the Keynesian or classical branches which are more focused on the math models etc

>> No.18221982
File: 83 KB, 1200x1140, A5A5113E-F117-4881-B84E-07E66BCCC9AC.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Modern science stems from the empiricism grounded in the scientific method. Anything that utilizes the scientific method can be considered a science, hence the concept of social sciences. An anthropologist or psychologist studying primate cognition isn't all too different from a zoologist examining avian problem solving abilities, and all utilize the same core method.

>> No.18222002
File: 102 KB, 702x564, 04F9522B-C7A5-44E9-B5DE-389E0BCE66B4.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

> The effect of weekly sessions with a subject expert where they go over your essay and make you defend it against their own criticisms and the criticisms of other students really can’t be (over)stated
Shit, sounds like this place.

>> No.18222019

In academia yeah, but outside of it that's certainly not the case.

>> No.18222055

Also from what ive heard from people I know, extracurriculars at ivies can be needlessly competitive. Someone I know at brown, for example, had to basically apply to join undergrad clubs and publications, and there were interviews and everything. Idk if that's Brown specific or just an east coast elitism thing, because at the schools I'm more familiar with, if you wanted to be part of a club you could just show up and they'd welcome you.

>> No.18222089

So you're telling me that pharmaceutical companies skip over PhD's and entrust research labs and millions of dollars to BS holders, because PhD's are "too academic"? What a joke lol

>> No.18222114

It isn't just the lectures. Generally, more is expected of you (i.e. courses cover more material and assigned readings are denser plus there's a lot more of them). You also have special events (e.g. current/former political leaders, prominent specialists in a given field, etc.) and access to research projects that other schools don't. On top of that, there's specializations and programmes that don't exist at other schools.

I went to a top 20 (global) university and the difference between what I was doing and what friends from high school were doing was night and day. I had a friend who couldn't cut it at my school and transferred out; he told me that one week at (former school) was basically an entire semester at his new one. He went from working his ass off to get a C average to slacking and getting high Bs. The school he transferred to wasn't even bad, it was mid-tier within the country. I wrote one of his term papers for him; it took me less than 3 hours from research to final draft and it got an 87% (it probably wouldn't have even mustered a C at my/his former school).

(FYI: I started in Arts/Humanities and transferred into STEM).

>> No.18222149

Not that common, but yeah, it does happen (The founder of Galapagos, for example).
What im really talking about is people who got a Master and chose not to go for a PhD. I know people who did that who now work at Johnson & Johnson or antibody manufacturers and they basically do the same stuff that i do as a PhD student, except their pay is much better as are the terms of employment. I sort of regret going for a PhD because i just like doing pure labwork, and i dont give a shit about supervising my own lab or becoming a PI. If you wanna do that (in academia) then yeah, you gotta get a doctorate, but for me it's just not worth it.

>> No.18222201

God I hate this guy. He is the embodiment of a /lit/ zoomer pseud, his whole life revolving around being "smart".
Going to Harvard means Jack shit, congratulations, some faceless entity let you enroll in their courses. What do you use that knowledge for? Oh that's right, your retarded youtube channel, where you upload pretentious, self idolizing content, to brag about how smart you are.
The guy chose religious studies, just so he can make a living from arguing with religious people on the internet. Hes a living, breathing meme, and his vocation in life is to win internet arguments.

>> No.18222209

Oh nvm, I mistook him for another bloke. Just goes to show how these thin white boys all look the same.

>> No.18222216

based zoomer. "based" does not refer to freebasing

>> No.18222247

Classic /lit/ poster, who upon making a mistake insists that the mistake actually further proves his point

>> No.18222249

>some of them stream or upload their classes
I'm almost certain this is a violation of copyright, all of my university's lectures are copyrighted.

>> No.18222431

cope, you're just angry you didn't get into Harvard and will never have the Harvard undergraduate pedigree.

>> No.18222485

Yeah and Austrian economics is a joke in academia

>> No.18222494

Are you in Europe?

>> No.18222551

Undergraduate pedigree lmao. Graduate is where its at.

>> No.18222593

I didn't specify because it detracts from the conversation (i.e. oh, my school is better...etc). I get the bragging rights, one feels like they kind of deserve it for doing something on a higher difficulty level, but it's just gaudy.

You get what you put in anywhere you go (but at elite institutions, you're expected to put in a lot more). There are opportunities present that are unavailable at other schools...but if you don't take advantage of them you might as well get a degree at a mid-tier school.

>> No.18222620

Entirely depends on what you want to work with

>> No.18222622

What >>18222149 says is the norm in my industry (semiconductors). PhD are not much different from what you'd do working in a r&d department, except you're paid less.
You will start at a junior position no matter the diplomas. By the time you become senior a few years down the line few care about your academic credentials anymore, it's all about what you did in a junior position. The very rare exceptions would be the odd professors switching out of academia. Even they are, I imagine, judged on their research as a whole, not the fact they have a PhD.
I am occasionally involved in recruitment as a technical interviewer. Unless it's your first job, broadcasting PhDs as anything more than another work project is a red flag.
I have admittedly no idea about the culture in pharmaceutical companies (a remnant from the retarded esprit de corps of medical professions?)

>> No.18222623

I am asking because your second paragraph has not been my experience with universities in the US. I am originally from Europe, where top universities typically "filter" students in the first years.

>> No.18222723

US uni’s are very different compared to European ones. They are much more lenient from my experience, and although the workload can be high, European universities tend to give more, while demanding class participation.

>> No.18222725

Yeah she showed them her tits, and she got to virtue signal. Win-win.

>> No.18222757

I think that's a commonality. Courses that act as prereqs for certain majors/specializations are intense compared to courses you take once you've qualified for the major. For example, stats and organic chem filtered a lot of "pre-med" students.

I ended up switching to math(s) (not going to catch me that way, haha). There were 5 different first-year calculus courses one could take depending on where you wanted to go with your degree (ranging from joke level commerce/life science, which were basically glorified high school courses, to one using Calculus by Spivak)...all of them filtered to a certain degree.

>> No.18222773


When I was in Arts/Humanities I never really noticed that though. I had a friend in Linguistics/Poli Sci who insisted that was the case but I just thought things became more specialized (survey courses give way to smaller seminars...those are when you notice how much personal effort accounts for what you're getting out of your education).

>> No.18222815

Of course. But if you get a basic undergrad from a reputable school, especially if it has an international reputation, you're in a better position in general.

My ex got into medical school in her native Korea and didn't have a show-stopping GPA. But the fact she went to ----- carried over and she got in above people who stayed in Korea and went to meh universities.

Certain degrees are better to have from certain universities. Even in grad school. If you go to an ok Law School and rank at the top of your class you're set...but if you go to a top-ranking school and rank in the middle you're in a safe position (whereas that might not be true otherwise).

>> No.18222862

God I could never imagine studying medicine or Law.

>> No.18222960

If anything, the danger makes it more exciting

>> No.18222964
File: 2.86 MB, 4032x3024, 20210511_161730.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

I cant imagine you studying law either anon

>> No.18222974

is NYU decent or not? specially for humanities

>> No.18222978

Neither could I. My ex was actually kind of dumb and she made it into and through med school. Another girl I messed around with, who was a total ditz, ended up becoming a corporate lawyer.

I know that's anecdotal...but it gave me enough reason not to glorify doctors or think there's anything special about lawyers. The smartest girl I dated ended up just getting a government job and settling down.

Circling back around...you can't judge everyone based on their career just as you can't judge everyone based on the university they went to.

>> No.18222982

this may the best (worst) recruitment ad for /pol/ that I have ever witnessed, well done

>> No.18222994

NYU is extremely good for humanities, not just decent.

>> No.18223026

Anyone know any good classes or profs? I am an NYU student, but not in the humanities. Feel like checking out some stuff.

>> No.18223030

My med school ex actually believed in that "Fan Death" myth (in Korea there were stories about how sleeping with a fan in the room could somehow kill you...she believed them and wouldn't let me have one on while we were in bed). The lawyer chick just had the most basic opinions about things you could imagine (her favorite book was "A Prayer for the City"...and I think she just knew of it because she read it in a poli sci class)

>> No.18223031


>> No.18223033

>you can't judge everyone based on their career just as you can't judge everyone based on the university they went to.
Well, that's kinda obvious, isn't it? There're geniuses and dumb people everywhere, you can go to a random university in, I don't know... Colombia and you will still find many geniuses who could very well get top grades in Oxford but instead are studying in a top 300 university.

>> No.18223035

He is right though.

>> No.18223041

Sounds great, who is teaching it?

>> No.18223051


>> No.18223332

If they had the gumption they would at least try to apply for graduate studies at either Oxbridge or Ivy League.

>> No.18223458

Look at this eggman.

>> No.18223464

The GRE and GMAT are a pain in the ass and those applications cost a lot of money.

>> No.18223482

You are a woman or Asian

>> No.18223486

Doesn’t strike me as a good argument if your grades are excellent.

>> No.18223521

Walk round central Oxford if you want ultimate comfy. Very nice city, the uni Is very nice too. The uni college parks are excellent.

It seems very strange to say but you can tell in the layout of even some of the suburbs closer to the city that it has more going for itself than other cities.

>> No.18223539

The Oxbridge fetishization is almost as bad and pretentious as that "Dark Academia" craze

>> No.18223547

You don't know how hard is to go to Oxford or Harvard from South America. I've met people that passed every year with perfect or almost perfect score in everything and not even them have a chance; I'm from Chile if that matters. Plus, there are a lot of people that don't have any interest in being at the top of the top, they just want to work in what they're passionate about and have a good salary .

>> No.18223553

>is almost as bad and pretentious as that "Dark Academia" craze
Perfect comparison kek.

>> No.18223585

How big is the difference between Oxford and Cambridge?

>> No.18223594

Oh no, a lame craze that gets young people to read! Fuuuuck!!

>> No.18223612

Cambridge is a much smaller city than Oxford and consequently has a more rustic atmosphere

>> No.18223629

Looks-wise Oxford seems more aesthetic than Cambridge, but that just might be image focus.

>> No.18223645
File: 656 KB, 2000x1970, dark academia.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

It's not about reading, it's about giving off the appearance of being well-read so you can signal to everyone else how deep and profound you are for social status points

>> No.18223657

Seems based as fuck

>> No.18223865

The fact that the only book "dark academia" girls seem to read is Harry Potter makes me laugh so hard

>> No.18223913

But Harry Potter is a very dark book, haven't you read the last two books?!?! There are people dying and some guy loses his ear or something.

>> No.18223928

People easily spend thousands on college applications. That is a risk and some are not willing to take it or can't be arsed.

>> No.18223933

What the fuck is dark academia. I keep hearing about it on this board.

>> No.18223939
File: 166 KB, 750x747, 1t5v5enz0p621.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.18223958

Not really. I took courses at a state university in high school and went to an ivy league school for college. The ivy league material often had more directly ideological content, but the lectures weren't better or anything like that. For me it had some value as a prestigeomat (people are impressed, even after you tell them not to be), but the networking benefits were lost on an autismo like me. If you're a schmoozer it could pay dividends.

>> No.18223972

I think I might be too old for this. I do not get it.

>> No.18223975

The modern renaissance dude.

>> No.18224002

It's basically just fashion for people who are too pretentious to admit it's about the fashion.

>> No.18224029

Seems like it. But how is any of this dark? And how is it academic? Thought at first it was related to some controversial academic topics but it is just zoomers imagining themselves reading books in a manor next to a fireplace?

>> No.18224088

No idea.
Pretty sure these are the same types of people who get offended by stairs, so who the fuck knows what goes on in their heads.

>> No.18224106

Its because of the use of tweed etc. looked upon as scholarly.

>> No.18224873

Imagine misunderstanding Nietzsche this much.

>> No.18225821

It's obvious but needed to be stated nevertheless. It was a counterpoint to what I said about having an advantage in grad/professional school admissions; if you go to a well-known school you're going to be in a better position than having gone to a standard mid-tier university. (However, if you're in a country that has only public institutions and don't intend to leave for further studies...it can actually be advantageous to study at an easier school--your GPA will be higher).

>> No.18225899


For example, I was acquainted with an international student from China (he befriended a friend). He was a total arrogant cunt; he would bring up the fact he got into MIT constantly and complain that his parents were being cheap assholes by sending him to our school (which, yeah, it wasn't MIT but it's still a top 20 school; not to mention his parents were paying for him and I was personally working a night shift job to put myself through university). The guy looked down on anyone who wasn't majoring in engineering (even though he was a total bug man obsessed with Chinese nationalism and constantly insulting everything and everyone around him)...he ended up getting a decent tech job and marrying some ugly broad his parents set him up with.

The moral of the story is the type of person who obsesses over the prestige of their institution, instead of the opportunities they have, isn't worth listening to. And yeah, there's a lot of stupid bullshit majors out there (and they're becoming more and more prominent) but just because someone is in STEM doesn't make them a genius (quite the contrary, they can be pretty uninteresting). The guy had no unique individual qualities that set him out from the average tech, but still figured he was a God among men. There's A LOT of people like that.

>> No.18226149

Im enrolled at grad nyu, currently not sure what to think of it. Profs are cool, courses are pretty easy but still interesting.

The other students kinda annoy me, they are what you would expect from current liberal arts studies

Its my first semester and I dont know anyone aside from clasess so my opinion may change

>> No.18226224

>they’re classes are not overpacked.
You’re LARPing and you’re illiterate.

>> No.18226229

What did he mean by this?

>> No.18226236

It says Economics on her Twitter, dingus.

>> No.18226248

Did she only get into Oxford because she fucked the professors? Genuinely curious.

>> No.18226292 [DELETED] 
File: 410 KB, 1125x1457, 6AB77D94-7D1F-448A-BB3B-093C3245F61F.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

Why does she have to be so fucking thick though?

>> No.18226341

>.. ... history and feminism, incel.
pack it up boys.

>> No.18226361

Oh so now you're going to be the first white cis hetero rapist to pose smiling with a placard stating the oppressive history of white men topped with the smug acknowledgement? Nice glasses - made by men no doubt so you can get a better look at girls breasts which they cover in layers to hide their stiff nipples which men cause against their will with demonic energy waves. When can women actually start winning bros?

>> No.18226386

This is my fetish

>> No.18226390

>Face: 6/10
Isn't pretty, far from hot, but she has a certain cuteness to her
>Neckline: 6/10
She has an ok curve through her neck and shoulders. A little bit broad but her overall proportions fit well together.
>Tits: 6/10
Poor symmetry and saggy, probably look ok when she's on her back
>Hips: 4/10
She's shaped like a pear. Thickness might be ok for novelty but with such a high waist her attractiveness is below average. The score should probably be lower but I'd have to see her ass (gave her the benefit of the doubt)
>Legs: 3/10
Short and stubby. Old lady knees.

Conclusion: wouldn't consider fucking her. Maybe if I was drunk/depressed (break up or something) and came to the bar late...but she'd be a low water mark for sure.

>> No.18226399

Average that and it comes out to 5/10. Seems like a fair score.

>> No.18226404

What the fuck? Why? Why is she naked in a classroom? How exactly did it become a feminist idea to walk around nude?

>> No.18226411

6/10 would rape impregnate just to piss her off

>> No.18226422

Her argument is completely made up. She strawmans a strawman argument. Her existence only furthers the idea that letting women out of the house was a very bad idea for Western civilization.

>> No.18226455

Homosexuals have higher average testosterone though

>> No.18226475

>we have the whole political spectrum, from former Marxists to current Marxists

>> No.18226696

It almost makes sense. We celebrate nudes even in places like the Vatican which, I'm sure in her mind, is a staunch bastion of patriarchal conservatism (never mind the idea that, perhaps, it's more likely indicative of perspectives on the beauty of the body outside of her ideological framework). However, context is important so it doesn't make sense that a fellows dinner is a good place to have her tits out (i.e. if she were doing it at an art exhibit of items on loan from the Vatican it would be a reasonable statement--still midwit but at least it would make more sense).

Most likely, she has an exhibitionist kink that she has intellectualized but isn't mature enough as a person to recognize it as such (low-level shit, like having a quickie with your high school girlfriend while her parents are setting the table in the other room; relatively innocent taboo mixing with an immature concept/affirmation of personal autonomy).
She'd probably be pretty happy knowing that strangers on the internet are talking about her body; even though her ideological subroutines would tell her to be offended. (I ranked her /10 to poke fun at that sexual/ideological disconnect).

>> No.18226719

Thanks, I came

>> No.18226751

Opps, I hadn't noticed >>18217100

The ideological/exhibitionist shit is still probably true--but she's also crazy. It's not an underdeveloped understanding of her personal fetishes masquerading within an intellectualized justification; she's just an ideologue who likes to be naked in front of people (and thinks seeing a naked woman is shocking because she's from cold Europe instead of warm Europe).

>> No.18226814

I couldn't say, never been to Cambridge sorry

>> No.18226854


>> No.18226870
File: 1.02 MB, 1422x1388, Todden Gabodd.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]

>neckline as one of only five elements to rate a girl
Based and neckpilled.

>> No.18226880
File: 64 KB, 637x358, woody laughing fire.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google] [report]


>> No.18226923


>> No.18227178

I'm a final year student in Cambridge University, gonna graduate in a few weeks. AMA

>> No.18227197

Marry Brooke, Kill Vivian, Fuck Sylvia

>> No.18227204

You have zero life experience or real world expertise. What the actual fuck would I have to ask you? Go back.

>> No.18227206

You didn't say what you're studying

>> No.18227209

Would you fuck >>18226292

>> No.18227214

i would

>> No.18227238


>> No.18227247

>I’m having a huge inferiority complex and an envy against those who have the opportunity to study at those “prestigious” universities.
What? The only difference between "elite" universities and your average public university is that most public universities teach you more.

All ivy league universities are only concerned about hiring the right names. In fact the quality of the "ivy league education" is below the average university.

The only reason people are trying to get to them is because of the people who "study" there. No one gives a fuck about the poor people who got there because of their grades. In fact if you want to learn, normal universities are much better.
Ivy league universities are there to meet all the rich kids. That's why the average IQ of those "elite" students is below the average IQ of normal universities. Those few "gifted" people who study there are nothing compared to the insane amount of rich kids who are stupid as hell, but daddy is a billionaire and those people are passing all tests because they have great "private teacher" who "help" them with all homework. Also to get your Bachelor, Master, or whatever, 99 % of the work is done outside of the eyes of the university, so a billionaire who invest in the right "private teacher" can even get a literal retard to an MBA on an "ivy league" university.

There is also a huge reason why so many people drop out of university, like Bill Gates. On the one hand they are not that smart, but on the other they also see how useless those "elite" universities are.
You learn by sitting at home and working through your stuff. No university can help you with that. That's why you see pretty much no "elite" student in any meaningful science revolution.
The best professors from the Ivy league universities are normally all outsider who got hired after their name became famous. In fact it's more likely that you get worse on an ivy league university than on a normal university because on an ivy league university everyone expects you to have a good "private teacher" and the things you learn which you can't get on any other university are literally ZERO.

>> No.18227288

no hope in cope, kids

>> No.18227353

I can agree that Ivy Leagues seem to fondle, but what you wrote is simply not true at all.

>> No.18227382

I'm a biased autodidact but I've never really seen the point in college unless you're trying to go postgrad. It's not like the information isn't out there. There are no jealously guarded secret teachings that you'll find only in the basement of Harvard or Yale. We live in an age where information is cheap and available to pretty much everyone. This is, in my opinion, why so much emphasis has been placed on getting the old sheepskin – in an age where we all have access to the same information, how do you distinguish one information-accesser from another one? I'm speaking strictly to undergrad here, of course. Given how gamified-bordering-solved academia has become, I don't think you can even connect academic success at any level to things like knowledge, comprehension, analytical thinking, etc. Many, many people seem to graduate college having done nothing but interact with the academic system itself via metastrategy rather than interacting with what's actually being taught; and we all seem to have collectively agreed to their grand conflation.

It just seems like a dumb system. It's a dumb system trying to create smart people.

>> No.18227401

>It just seems like a dumb system. It's a dumb system trying to create smart people.
Just to clarify, I realize that pedagogy is a serious field with effective methodologies on a micro scale. I'm talking more about the larger system of which individual professors are just subservient components. What I'm concerned with is what gets rewarded within the system and how that success (or lack thereof) is extrapolated into greater society. If there's one thing I've learned on 4chan, it's that there's an enormous amount of smart eccentrics who are being underutilized by society. I blame academia primarily in these posts, but there are of course a number of other factors.

>> No.18227428

every one of my classes is at least 65% female and they do not behave even close to that.

>> No.18227497

65% female! What do you even study.

>> No.18227501

Its not society’s fault for not using these ‘smart eccentrics’, they need to seek out their own opportunities. No one gives a free hand.

>> No.18227508

Former Sorbonne student here. Yet teachers are better than in average universities. They are more interesting. In average universities, they are sometime dead boring. Lack conviction.
The counterpart is that in "prestigious" universities, the exams are really harder. Students in average universties are mostly lazy retards who only think about partying, enjoying life, going out with the boyfriend. Students in "prestigious" universities are smart sociopaths, but still very mainstream.

>> No.18227527

Sounds pretty great desu

>> No.18227539

I wish I could transpose the way my eyes glazed over the instant I read "fault." Nigger, my point is not to engage in some petty blame game. It's that society as a whole could be bettered by giving exceptional people a more nurturing environment. It is a social inefficiency that some of the best and brightest wither away playing video games their whole lives while normies, incapable of anything except the reinforcement of their own normative standards, drive the boat in whatever thoughtless direction the wind takes them.

>> No.18227550

>I can say that surely not.
these oxbridge flexes would do a better job of making me feel inferior if they with written with a prose style that was in any way acceptable
t. midwit exeter grad

>> No.18227560

Its an ancient pasta

>> No.18227566

What subject? Also a grad student so I can check out any course.

>The other students kinda annoy me
Naturally. Coastal elite students can be pretty annoying.

>> No.18227567

I didn't recognise that one but there are some other oxbridge pastas floating around and they all always make me think the same thing

>> No.18227573

double degree in law and arts (int. pol). i like it.

>> No.18227581

Never would have reckoned so many females were in law. However, now that you mention it, I know zero men in law but two females. Guess there’s something to it.

>> No.18227599

>so many females were in law
some of my classes its about 80%

>> No.18227900

I got at least 1 girl in every class I was in to show me her tits.

>> No.18228698

The lectures are no different, but the students are smarter at the top universities.

>> No.18228987

Neither Cambridge nor Oxford were planned to be knowledge producers or centres of excellence, both were the elite boys' clubs. When Scotland and England merged into Great Britain, the Scottish universities, due to their Calvinist ethics of excellence through hard work and a more practical bent, absolutely mogged Oxbidge. The Scots basically hijacked the British overseas empire with the quality of Scottish administrators, because their universities never centered on fostering communities but on delivering knowledge, and Oxbridge, while immensely more pleasant places to live and study than anything in Scotland, had to long drag themselves up to standard.
It seems the elite universities in the West degrade back into the elite transkids' clubs, you ain't missing much in this day and age.

>> No.18229038

I mean, a lot of them are not american nor elite, they are studying arts with loans so I dont know how they plan to pay for that later. from time to time classes become lectures given by them about gender, race or poverty

Name (leave empty)
Comment (leave empty)
Password [?]Password used for file deletion.