Hacker News Reader

Comment by mav3rick | Hacker News Reader

This is an immensely parochial view. You're essentially saying, "poor people will have limits to their growth and that is okay as long as the rich are the vanguard of sciences". Views like this are the starting of a generation of oppression and hate. There are enough examples of universities admitting geniuses as well as students who almost met the bar but were constantly let down by their environment. Given the right resources the latter can match and even outperform the former. It's funny how you mention nothing about finding and nourishing talent in the poor communities yet you stand up for the rich. Get outside your bubble, dismissing uplifting policies as being "PC" has become some sort of popular stance without any nuance or understanding of the other side.

View on HN

I fully agree with providing opportunities for education among the poor-- they have the most to benefit from it. I mentioned that "they should receive as much education as possible", and I support finding the best ways to do that.

What I disagree with is what is already happening in California colleges where "Student Success" classes promote writing about what "makes you angry" with your position in society or your gender. I believe _that_ is promoting anger, hatred, lack of co-operation, and oppression. It is difficult to think clearly when you are always being told to be angry about something, and it is difficult to have a co-operative society with that kind of division.

That is not what your original comment was about. I do agree that asking students to manufacture hardships or points of views to fit narratives is not healthy. There could be better ways for the students to showcase their strengths and originality.

> finding and nourishing talent in the poor

> students who ... were constantly let down by their environment

The problem is that the effects of talent are usually masked to obscurity by more powerful effects of environment.

We ought to focus on not causing these students to fall behind at the start, rather than thinking we're doing something virtuous by graciously uplifting them alongside those who weren't artificially held back.

It is impossible to be prescient about every broken home or toxic environment. Meanwhile a leg up to one student means his next generation and his grand-generation are educated and have now transcended classes. I wouldn't advocate the same benefits to a recipients following generations (if they indeed made it to the middle class and above). The problem comes when this benefit keeps on going for generations and generations in the same family. This is the case in India right now and is a very big reason for disillusionment with the education system.

Edit:s/his/their

Just edit the post with the edit button. It's 17 minutes old.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com