I may be wrong about this and it really has nothing to do with Ginni Thomas. Do all arguments need to be pedigree vetted in terms of education and career accomplishments? Is there ever a plebe out there that is smart and coherent and says something important and insightful. I only have a crappy BA and an insignificant career by the stand…
I may be wrong about this and it really has nothing to do with Ginni Thomas. Do all arguments need to be pedigree vetted in terms of education and career accomplishments? Is there ever a plebe out there that is smart and coherent and says something important and insightful. I only have a crappy BA and an insignificant career by the standards of anyone with skill or ambition. I know my ideas don't matter mostly because I am not smart or connected. And I usually try to keep my mouth shut and listen. And try to learn and understand. I listen everyday and admire the literacy and thoughtfulness found in this community.
My only blunt dummy dumb point is an abhorrent argument or an idea should be debunked by the facts and a persuasive counter argument not this person only went to Creighton law so she is stupid, or she only had a meaningless low level government job, or gossip has that 'people' think she is crazy. Just laying out what she wrote is more than enough. The personal attacks are kind of gross. But then again maybe I am missing the point of meritocracy? Yet there are plenty of Harvard grads with distinguished careers who are just as if not more deplorable than Ginni.
I would find this criticism persuasive if my entire argument—or even a large part of it—had been, "Person goes to school xyz and is therefore an idiot." But that was not the case.
ok jvl. i admire you. i listen and read everything you say and write. but you are super harsh on people that you feel have inferior educations. it is insulting and tiresome. but i still think you are great
That is kind of you to say. And I did bust my ass. But my undergrad was nowhere near elite and I learned very little—and virtually nothing important. Enormous waste of time and money. If I had it to do all over again, I'd go someplace small and major in either classics, history, or physics.
Agree - insightful comments. I look at it as Ginni was obviously "intelligent" enough to get a BS and JD, which makes her subequent beliefs and behavior that much more egregious. Likewise with anyone who has gotten a top-tier education and then gone deplorable. They (should) know better. Bottom line - there is not and never will be a shortage of educated fools and crooks.
(I'm guessing JVL's Creighton dig was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I trust that getting through any legit law school - even #139 - requires some decent level of intelligence.)
I may be wrong about this and it really has nothing to do with Ginni Thomas. Do all arguments need to be pedigree vetted in terms of education and career accomplishments? Is there ever a plebe out there that is smart and coherent and says something important and insightful. I only have a crappy BA and an insignificant career by the standards of anyone with skill or ambition. I know my ideas don't matter mostly because I am not smart or connected. And I usually try to keep my mouth shut and listen. And try to learn and understand. I listen everyday and admire the literacy and thoughtfulness found in this community.
My only blunt dummy dumb point is an abhorrent argument or an idea should be debunked by the facts and a persuasive counter argument not this person only went to Creighton law so she is stupid, or she only had a meaningless low level government job, or gossip has that 'people' think she is crazy. Just laying out what she wrote is more than enough. The personal attacks are kind of gross. But then again maybe I am missing the point of meritocracy? Yet there are plenty of Harvard grads with distinguished careers who are just as if not more deplorable than Ginni.
I would find this criticism persuasive if my entire argument—or even a large part of it—had been, "Person goes to school xyz and is therefore an idiot." But that was not the case.
ok jvl. i admire you. i listen and read everything you say and write. but you are super harsh on people that you feel have inferior educations. it is insulting and tiresome. but i still think you are great
*I* have an inferior education and couldn't even get into med school!
you do not have an inferior education. you busted your ass at hard elite school.
That is kind of you to say. And I did bust my ass. But my undergrad was nowhere near elite and I learned very little—and virtually nothing important. Enormous waste of time and money. If I had it to do all over again, I'd go someplace small and major in either classics, history, or physics.
i have a worthless degree in philosophy. i wish had stuck with math and or computer science.
Agree - insightful comments. I look at it as Ginni was obviously "intelligent" enough to get a BS and JD, which makes her subequent beliefs and behavior that much more egregious. Likewise with anyone who has gotten a top-tier education and then gone deplorable. They (should) know better. Bottom line - there is not and never will be a shortage of educated fools and crooks.
(I'm guessing JVL's Creighton dig was somewhat tongue-in-cheek. I trust that getting through any legit law school - even #139 - requires some decent level of intelligence.)