Are people from Ivy League education actually smarter?

originally posted by: NarcolepticBuddha
a reply to: Fools

They're better at convincing others of how smartified they are, and nothing more.

Intelligence is an abstraction that expresses itself in numerous ways. It's not really something concrete though we continue to measure it (haphazardly) and place value on it (foolishly.)

It's simply another case of "My dog's better than your dog."

I know that there have been jerks and elitists from these schools. At the same time, it's a bit silly to pretend they aren't good schools on average.

They actually are really hard to get into. It's this filter that really creates the student body, which is composed on average of pretty smart or hard working people. It's how they got in.

From an analytics perspective, however, this doesn't show that the coursework or teaching is inherently better, just the criteria for admission.

originally posted by: LABTECH767
a reply to: Fools

I have to whole heartedly agree with Norhoc though I am not stateside, for we the question would be Cambridge and Oxford and the answer is the same NO.

Smartest kid I ever knew was a dyslexia sufferer with no qualification's at all but whom had the sharpest mind I have ever encountered.
I am not the sharpest tool in the box either despite having a couple of qualification's.

Qualification's do not equate common sense, they do not equate real world intelligence either.

Now here is the problem with elite establishment's, it is also a boon depending on what angle you come at this point from.

They create an elite mind set, those that go to these institution's then travel in these social circles and this in turn creates an elitism among there members which can be and usually is good for them but not that good for those that went to less prestigious educational institutions and whom in many cases are just as bright in not even brighter.

These points are true about brilliant people being everywhere, without a doubt.

However, you guys need to look at this not as outliers but as averages and bell curves, as any good analyst should.

It is true, however, that on average you have to work a lot harder to get into these schools than a lower tier school. That doesn't mean inherent intelligence is higher necessarily. People can't deny that the admissions criteria are stricter.

originally posted by: Fools
My thinking is that Ivy League schools are all hype and more about connections and money than they would ever admit.

In some cases but there are many who benefit from hard work. Both my uncle and cousin graduated from Columbia, one managed a hedge fund and the other is a trauma surgeon, no one handed them a job.

I cant speak for all ivy league schools but i have lots of experience with harvard kids.

Basically if you were an undergrad there it was well known in boston and cambridge that you were most likely attending due to nepotism or rich parents. Some were there legitimately but most undergrads were just spoiled rich kids and most of them not so bright.

The post grads were the smart ones. They went to other schools first worked hard and were passionate and intelligent about what they wanted to study. But they themselves didnt really look at themselves as harvard kids. Just folks going to harvard for post grad stuff.

The MIT kids were a different matter. They were actually very smart and surprisingly,when they did party, partied harder than all the other collages nearby.

I went to Notre Dame high school in los angeles. The high school valedictorian was a nice person. Had straight As but was literally so dumb and airheaded that she couldnt work a doorknob with out help. Theres a difference between intelligent and wrote memory skills. She had the ability to temporarily memorize stuff but not actually comprehend it. She wasnt actually smart. Same goes for people who think that being good at just math or in school prepares you for life or actually is indicative of true intelligence when the creativity, dynamic non linear thinking and other skills are missing. Theyre smart the same way a robot is.

Intelligence isnt really correlated with your station in life, nor your financial success. Some extremely smart people are happy being farmers. Others are stuck living in ghettos with no way out. Others have menial jobs their thoughts and energy elsewhere. Some mired in depression. If anything ive discovered with the acutely financially successful is, althoygh there are sone exceptions, most of them all share profound pathology. Ie to get really rich, most times, its because what drives you to that degree is sociopathy and other various pathology. Its not normal for everyday people to be so insecure that they need to make superfluous amounts of money. Its a form of insecurity and pathology. 99 percent of the human species doesnt need it nor actually want it. Do i know people who got filthy rich by their artistic talent sure. My cousin is one of the top music producers in the industry right now. Hes produced and written current top 40 songs i guarantee most people in this thread have heard on the radio. He got there by not even graduating high school and hes not exceptionally (or even moderatly) intelligent. But hes talented and a genuine human being who got lucky record labels and artists pick to buy his songs.

a reply to: BASSPLYR

Hey, how can you find out if someone went to Harvard?

Don't worry, they'll let you know.

originally posted by: Aazadan
a reply to: silo13

But hunting a deer is a really low impact activity. It's not multinational negotiations, managing a hedge fund, engineering the vehicles that will get us to Mars, or anything that's actually important for us as a species.

Tell yourself that after an EMP, a natural/unnatural disaster, or when you're stuck out of cell phone range with a flat tire.

originally posted by: silo13
...or when you're stuck out of cell phone range with a flat tire.

Is deer hunting the first thing you think of when this occurs? Mine would be to actually change the tire.

originally posted by: Metallicus
a reply to: Fools

I don't assume Ivy League graduates are smarter, but I do assume they are privileged and corrupt. Just look at your average politician, CEO or lobbyist for proof.

They aren't smarter necessarily.

Why do you assume they are corrupt? Isn't that a sweeping generalization? I'm not corrupt, and actively fight corruption when and where I can.

originally posted by: norhoc
a reply to: Quetzalcoatl14
You want a cookie for that? Are you reduced to name dropping now?

Do you want a real discussion and examples or not?

Something that is a bit silly sometimes is that people will post about a topic online like this, and then be surprised or even hateful when someone that is directly involved with the organizations in question pops into the discussion.

It depends on your definition of 'smart', but in my experience the school does not matter. Their motivation/dedication, memory and mental flexibility are what combine for intelligence in my opinion. You don't learn that at school.

School provides a goal for their motivation, a starting information source for their memory, and different ways for their flexibility to be exercised.

a reply to: AugustusMasonicus

LOL - or course not - just another example having nothing to do with the first.

Back on topic - If they're 'learned' something it doesn't necessarily make them 'smarter' - just more knowledgeable.

originally posted by: silo13
LOL - or course not - just another example having nothing to do with the first.

Gotcha.

As for the topic, as was said earlier, I think this level of school tends to attract the most ambitious people which typically correlates into them finding career success.