Jump to content

MountainMon

Members
  • Content Count

    185
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

139 Good People

About MountainMon

Recent Profile Visitors

510 profile views
  1. This is the UWO subforum. Their stats (3.57 and 167) make them a lock IMO.
  2. I'm not distorting the argument - the original argument made no mention of degree or anything else. It simply took the absolute stance that white people can't understand why POC would feel a certain way. That which I still maintain is an absurd position.
  3. No one is arguing that it isn't an important determinant (not me, at least). The initial point amounted to: white people can't understand why POC would feel a certain way. To some degree this is true and to some degree it is false. There's not much else to it. I can't help that you're not good at empathizing with others who share different backgrounds than you, which is essentially what your final point shows.
  4. This is a pretty good way to put it and probably the closest I would come to agreeing with the overall sentiment that one cannot truly know what it's like to be in another's shoes which is, at the end of the day, what this entire argument is about.
  5. Lived experience is the result of infinitely different possibilities. To say that one trait - skin colour - is the ultimate determinant of being able to understand something is absurd when there are a million different factors involved. I didn't state that my hypothetical took place in North America and would agree with your point.
  6. I actually agree with the OP in that I wouldn't want to be the only white guy in a room full of black/brown/asian people so I'm not sure I fall on a particular "side" of this conversation. In fact, I'm not even sure anyone has argued against the idea that diversity is important (for POC in particular or not) though people seem to have built up that strawman here - a fallacy not atypical of a typical undergraduate Arts class I might add. I'm not really sure I fully understand your second point though as it seems nearly identical to the first. One does not have to experience something to understand it. Perhaps on an individual level I cannot fully comprehend one's psyche, but to suggest that, on the basis of race, one could not possibly understand why something is true is absurd and prejudicial.
  7. Unless you have an access claim and/or some outstanding EC(s) I’d say 170+ to have a shot.
  8. It's also noteworthy that these traits are very important for med school adcoms and interviews from my limited knowledge. The few people I know in med school are truly incredible people not just in terms of their academic achievements, but also in terms of just being all around great, empathetic people. Are you, or are you not a first year student not even done their first semester of university yet?
  9. I mean, plenty of other prominent members from this forum (it feels weird to say that but I can't think of a better descriptor) beyond those two have chimed in on this topic.
  10. Agreed. Surely the 11 pages of conversation preceding this one only involved peasant LS applicants and undergraduates.
  11. Damn, you sure seem to have a rather omniscient POV. The stereotype exists because self-proclaimed pre-meds are paranoid they won't get into med school (and with that attitude, rightfully so) and so perpetuate the myth that everyone else had it easier than them (see immature and and insecure).
  12. You're suggesting that because upper year science students do well in first year arts classes that all arts classes are easier than science classes. Newsflash, the opposite is true as well! Memorizing a bunch of flash cards 3x a year is a hell of a lot easier than writing a 20 page term paper on dialogue theory! As is being able to submit a lab report in non-broken English in comparison to answering nebulous written response questions with no reference material in an exam setting.
×
×
  • Create New...