Your conclusions about Coreas’ moral flaws go FAR beyond anything the snippet of his remarks would support.

Your own figures demonstrate clearly that your selected Coreas quote is 100% correct: whites earn a lot more than Latinos.

So what’s your real beef? His “elementary logical flaws” certianly don’t merit being labeled a bigot. So is it Coreas’ “inconsistency” in not condemning scholarships for Asian-Americans that earns him your scorn?

But why should he do so? His goals are much more modest: explaining to College Republicans that the existence of “culturally based scholarships” is not a sign of “the worst form of bigotry confronting America today,” but a sign of very real income inequality, as your figures make clear.

Unfortunately for you and your diatribe, DKL, Coreas isn’t making the argument you so want to lambast him for. Coreas does not find race based scholarships objectionable, he defends them. What he criticizes are the polemical antics of the College Republicans, not the existence of programs that target disadvantaged individuals. Since Coreas is not arguing against scholarships based on ethnicity, you can hardly fault him for not launching a campaign against Asian-Americans.

But as you are keen on proper reasoning, I hope you will appreciate me pointing out a few of your own fallacies:

ad hominem tu quoque
argumentum ad logicam
package deal
hasty generalization

In anticipation of the call to throw the first stone, I have to admit, I sometiems resort to fallacies myself, especially when I don’t feel a “modicum of the defensiveness that I’m supposed to feel” in attacking others.

For example, when a blogger admits that “It is, of course, bad form for a white guy to point out the bigotry of those belonging to other ethnicities” and does it anyway where none exists, it sure is tempting to holler “a**hole!”*

*Based on “the evidence presented here and based on my own generalization from personal experience with people who make similar arguments,” of course, so it’s not like my reasoning for doing so would be completely unfounded.

Peter, everything in your comment is either incorrect or beside the point. Did you actually read my article? or are you just being sophistical? Specifically, my argument relies on applying Coreas’s logic to ethnicities across the board, rather than restricting it to a hispanics vs. whites. Coreas does find race-based scholarships to be objectionable, when they or for people of a white ethnicity. You’re wrong about your list of fallacies. For example, ad hominem involves using negative names in the premises of an argument; you’ll notice that I derive a negative name as the conclusion, and thus the argument that uses it does not run afoul of the ad hominem fallacy.

Stephen, I agree with you that race-based preferences have done a lot of good. One argument for them agrees that they’re not fair, but that they accomplish enough good to compensate for that. I don’t have a problem with this, but I know a professor who lost 3 tenure track positions to women because of gender based hiring policies who hates this argument.

Herodotus, I need to read the NYT article. I agree that it’s a bit silly to give scholarships to super-rich students who can fund their own college education with family wealth. On the other hand, in the large metro areas like Boston you can be statistically rich, but really earn a very modest living. I know a guy who makes a good living — statistically he’s rich — who put his 2 children through expensive, flagship institutions that cost in excess of 20k per semester. Unless you’re really rich, like an income in excess of 300k per year, this kind of cash isn’t something that you can just pull out of your budget. He would not have been able to afford to put his children through college without their merit-based scholarships.

In my opinion, government funding of tuition causes tuition inflation by making demand inelastic, and this has made education off-the-charts expensive. This has made it increasingly difficult for students to pay their own way through college. (It’s still possible, btw. I have a brother in law who just started medical school who has zero debt and has received neither government grants nor help from his parents.) But I believe that the harm of policies that have priced college tuition outside the reach of self-funding students far outweighs the good brought about by the endless government funding.

That said, the importance of obtaining an education at a “flagship” institution is vastly exaggerated. George W. Bush got degrees at both Harvard and Yale, and nobody thinks that he’s especially smart. In fact, I think that the value of any non-trade-related college education is grossly exaggerated. Seriously, I only went to college because after a few years I got tired of running the business that I’d started after I failed out of high school (I was working 100+ hours a week) and college life was really easy–like an extended vacation. Alas, the vacation ended upon graduation.

DKL, it is your post that is beside Coreas’ point.

Coreas says, “If they want to have a scholarship, then let them have a scholarship, but they’re stirring up controversy in the wrong way.”

But you say, “Coreas does find race-based scholarships to be objectionable, when they or for people of a white ethnicity.” You even go to the trouble to extend Coreas’ “argument” and conclude that “According to Mr. Coreas’s reasoning, Asian-American scholarships should be about as objectionable as a white-only scholarship.”

Amazing! (whoops, looks like I’m arguing from personal incredulity again!)

Speaking of fallacies, the “tu quoque” bit of the “ad hominem tu quoque” distinguishes it from the more run-of-the-mill “ad hominem” fallacy. The former relies on you pointing out the inconsistencies in Coreas’ statements, behavior, etc. regarding a particular claim he might have made as grounds for falsifying that claim. When you say things like “his own behavior is not consistent with the basis for his objection,” your argument starts walking like a duck. And when you target “the elementary logical flaws in Mr. Coreas’s position,” the quacking reminds me of the evergreen that is argumentum ad logicam.

Those two are up for debate, I suppose, but the last two fallacies stand, or did you forget this masterpiece of reasoning: “It’s my opinion, based on the evidence presented here and based on my own generalization from personal experience with people who make similar arguments, that Mr. Coreas is simply a bigot”?

I’m all for people yanking themselves up by their bootstraps–I paid my own way, debt-free, through school without qualifying for any scholarships based on my, uh, ethnicity and I reckon it would be a Good Thing if every student had to do so. The strength of the moral fiber one develops can not be matched by any other approach.

Still, your claims about Coreas are simply not supported by the evidence and argument you present. And even if they did support your conclusions, aren’t we all married to a sense of our own infallibility? What is gained by the pot calling the kettle black?

Stephen (Ethesis),

What are you basing that MCAT 6 data on? It may be based on a Deseret News article that contained erroneous data. I heard about some very prejudicial “facts” being printed up in the Deseret News about MCAT scores and the acceptance of minority students at the U of U. When the data was demonstrated to be wrong, the Deseret News still refused to retract the article or print a correction.

Anyway, I’m only guessing about your source … but that kind of info about the U of U medical school has been passed all around Utah state and elsewhere (in mostly LDS circles) due to the fact that a lot of (white) LDS people resent their relatives not being accepted there.

Peter, you can’t claim that reductios are ad hominem tu quoque just because arguing is a behavior. Coreas’ argument commits him to a position to which he seems unwilling to assent (a position that you continue to avoid addressing). It’s true that Coreas appears to believe that nobody can prevent or block a whites-only scholarship, but he quite clearly objects to them; hence his comment that “it’s the wrong way.” It’s odd that you’re faulting me for noting that most of the people that I’ve met who say things like Coreas says are bigots; it’s the nature of personal judgments that they draw on previous experience. You still seem to be trading in misrepresentations and irrelevancies, so I’m guessing at this point that you are just being sophistical.

Danithew, I knew both of those people personally. One was a room mate undergraduate. The other had his carrel next to mine in law school (before he transferred to med school).

Obviously the fact that the only two Hispanics I knew who went to the U of U both had MCATs of 6 does not exhaust the universe of those with MCATs of 6 or Hispanics.

But, they are within my personal, direct knowledge. The guy at the law school was LDS, the guy from CSULA was not.

Appreciate your being blinded to the cues in the statements I made, since I was discussing individuals and you are caught up in your own issues on this point. But, as I’ve said before in discussions we were both in, I knew both of the people and talked with them face-to-face about their issues and scores and such.

I guess I should have restated all of the background data I’ve mentioned before, it is easy to forget that some people are talking out of personal knowledge.

Not to mention, I typed “to” when I should have typed “two” which is what you would expect from someone repeating an old canard rather than first hand knowledge.

@DKL

“That said, the importance of obtaining an education at a “flagship” institution is vastly exaggerated.”
“Seriously, I only went to college because after a few years I got tired of running the business that I’d started after I failed out of high school (I was working 100+ hours a week) and college life was really easy–like an extended vacation.”

The value of a “flagship” education depends completely on the field in question. As an entrepreneur you chose a field in which educational credentials are irrelevant when compared with what you can do. The same holds true for many of the arts. However for professional degrees the name on your diploma determines your entry level job, which in many cases determines your career path.

“In my opinion, government funding of tuition causes tuition inflation by making demand inelastic, and this has made education off-the-charts expensive.”

My own opinion is that the problem is rather the degree to which universities have become corporate institutions. A university president’s success is measured by the size of his endowment at the end of his tenure, not by any academic achievements. Sports programs have become financial franchises. I did my education at “flagship” universities back east. While I was there my tuition increased twice as fast as inflation. Every time I get a letter asking for alumni donations I feel like laughing.

Universities have realized that parents will happily mortgage their homes to pay for the right name brand of a diploma. It’s a odd sort of price-gouging that I liken to the diamond market. The amount you pay is a measure of your love. Parents become easy marks.

Yes Stephen, this discussion does feel like it happened before. But I think it’s important to clarify … how many years ago was this, that you knew these two students? I can assure you that nothing like this has happened recently.

In fairness though, BYU actively discourages *everyone* from becoming a doctor. They are pretty egalitarian in their negativity towards the profession. Thank Dr. Bloxham for that — a guy who got rejected from medical school and now has a chip on his shoulder.

herodotus,

“BYU Pre-Med Social 7pm. Wives are invited.”

This is from a flyer posted on campus at BYU in the mid 1990s. If you talk to a female doctor that went to BYU for undergrad you’ll hear even better stuff.

ARJ, my wife would know very well the things you are talking about. I believe the year before she graduated, she was president of Women in Medicine at BYU. She also sat on an admissions committee at the UofU during her final year there.

I couldn’t agree more with you about the audit process that happened at the UofU. It was a complete waste of time and tax-payer money. The politicians who pushed that audit were offended that their sons and relatives had been denied admission at the UofU medical school and were determined to find proof of a bias that wasn’t there.

The interesting thing is that in recent years the president of BYU and the head of admissions at the UofU medical school have been brothers. Wayne Samuelson, the head of the UofU medical school admissions, was actually a former bishop of our ward and is an unbelievably fair-minded guy.

Herodotus:

That is so fascinating. Thanks for the personal experience. It is particularly irritating when a petty, mid-level bureaucrat like this Bloxham character sounds decides to make policy based on his or her own limited exposure and experience and uses that to exercise what is essentially unrighteous dominion in a stewardship. I wish more people knew about Bloxham’s actions (assuming you are right about them, of course).

I don’t know how interested anyone really is in discussing BYU premedical but let me say a few more things.

First of all, I agree with you Tom in the sense that it is important to go into medicine with one’s eyes open. On the other hand, I think that his negative spin is out of proportion. And I do think that a disproportionate negative spin is misinformation. I remember that Dr. Bloxham’s seminar caused me so much angst that I went to my uncle for advice. My uncle is a law professor and has two sons, one a doctor the other a lawyer. The doctor works less and makes far more money than the lawyer. My uncle advised me to do what I enjoy. I think that this was the best advice I got as an undergraduate.

Secondly, I think it is wrong to credit Dr. Bloxham with getting people into medical school. People are accepted or rejected on their own merits. Dr. Bloxham’s role consists of writing what he calls a “composite letter” which summarizes the student’s performance at BYU. This letter is a summary of performance, not his personal opinion of the student. Having now watched the selection process in action, I can tell you that even if he did make some kind of a personal plea to an admissions officer I doubt that it would carry much weight.

Lastly, one reason that I was so surprised to hear BYU premedical called sexist is because I just don’t know anyone who takes Dr. Bloxham seriously outside of BYU. Most of the doctors I know who graduated from BYU (male and female) just shake their heads and smile when his name comes up. But then again who knows, maybe in addition to everything else he is a closet sexist.

Peter, you’ve yet to accurately characterize my argument, and now you’re guilty of oversimplification. When I try to be perfectly forthcoming about the fact that my judgment that he’s a bigot is as much based on generalizing from previous experience as it is on any clues that he’s provided, you claim that I’m guilty of a host of fallacies. I commend you for having read a book on fallacies, but it appears that you’re still struggling with the identification of real-world instances of them.

Life isn’t fair.

I’ve brought this up before, it’s sort of off the subject, so I apologize if I’m thread jacking. Why is Africa the poorest continent? It has the most natural resources. Its people have two arms and legs and eyes and ears just like everyone else.

My friend whose father was a racist made the observation that countries with lighter skinned people are more modern and advanced than countries with darker skinned people and she’s right. Why? That’s what I want to know.

I understand why black people in America USED to be at a disadvantage, but so were the Irish. Why aren’t they now?

Maybe I’m a bigot. But I’m so sick of the victim rhetoric.

Tom, I’m saying that I heard someone express the opinion that the BYU students who apply to the University of Utah’s medical school should be among the best in that applicant pool - but they aren’t.