Weekend at Bernie's

Sure, but what's going to be the metric for "past academic success"? Standardized tests are nonsense, especially when we're talking about SATs (and similar tests). They are very parochial ways of measuring academic potential and talent of individuals.And then there's the problem of creating a kind of genetic social stratification, where some individuals are -- by virtue of DNA sequences in their genomes -- better at standardized tests than others.And, of course, unless you find a good way to counter this, then only granting access to higher education for those who have demonstrated past academic success creates an increasingly wider gap between those with wealthy parents and those with underprivileged parents.Why can't we look at higher education as an investment that society makes in every one of its individuals?

There is a general correlation between SAT scores and IQ scores (though, of course, correlation is not causation).Genetics plays a role in determining IQ scores.However, note that genetics is only a part of a much bigger picture -- and the biological determinism argument correlating race, genetics, and IQ has been very effectively refuted by Stephen J. Gould in The Mismeasure of Man.SAT tests are nonsense, and so are IQ tests. Edited by Genomicus, : No reason given.

You sound just like those kids on College Confidential who whine about being rejected from Ivy Leagues "because I'm white!"Affirmative Action has nothing to do with white guilt. It's meant to compensate for -- to a limited degree -- the decades of institutionalized racism that had (and still has) a propensity for channeling white kids towards top-tier colleges and black and other kids towards the prison complex.

Genetic social stratification because some are more "able" to get access to higher education by virtue of their genome sequences. Standardized testing is an enabler of that stratification, particularly when combined with a wealthy background. Why should we view "higher education" as a kind of "reward" in the first place? Why don't we view higher education as a social investment in the individual? It's society that will reap enormous rewards from a well-educated populace. I'm sure these methods would not contribute to a wide gap between the wealthy and the underprivileged, right? That's a singularly reductionist perspective of white views concerning Affirmative Action. I doubt many, if not all, of those who identify as white on this forum would say that their support for Affirmative Action stems from some weird kind of guilt. Edited by Genomicus, : No reason given.Edited by Genomicus, : Typo. I wrote this with only a couple hours of sleep.

I'm not making an even remotely analogous argument. It's a fact that people are born with the capacity to develop multiple talents. Higher education allows these talents (critical thinking, for example) to be developed. A wise society will nurture all individuals, for all individuals are capable of developing beneficial talents. You're making a very biological determinism-esque argument. Umm, yeah, many people seeking associates or bachelor's degrees aren't people who are doing that just because they have a "few years to burn." It's because they are seeking a means out of a poverty cycle.Oh, and you say that free bachelor's degrees isn't one of "those improvements." What makes you think that? Except that you're wrong. See, e.g., here, here, here, here, and here.Edited by Genomicus, : No reason given.Edited by Genomicus, : No reason given.