How much of an effect does being URM do for an application?

BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
wolfie77 said:
Have you guys ever seen that funny Louis CK stand-up bit where he mentions that there is nothing that you can call a white person that would even hurt his feelings?

^This has to do with the power dynamics at work in our society. There is virtually nothing you can do to a white man, based on his race, that can be hurtful because of the reality of racial power dynamics.
Click to expand...

Oh?
 
wolfie77 said:
It's not. Have you seen (even on SDN) all the white ppl in favor? Furthermore, many of the URMs themselves support the system because they know it works for their communities, not just themselves.
Click to expand...

It's not self-centered to support the system when less qualified applicants are being accepted simply because of the color of their skin? What effect does that have on their communities?
 
"based on his race" < that's in my quote

No one said your feelings were hurt based on your being white. Heck, I didn't even know that for sure until you volunteered that information.

I was talking about hurting your feelings based on your inability to comprehend the information I was giving you + your discomfort with this new information. Basically, I think you were just pissed you couldn't counter what I was telling you so you resorted to name-calling and disengagement.
 
wolfie77 said:
"based on his race" < that's in my quote

No one said your feelings were hurt based on your being white. Heck, I didn't even know that for sure until you volunteered that information.

I was talking about hurting your feelings based on your inability to comprehend the information I was giving you + your discomfort with this new information. Basically, I think you were just pissed you couldn't counter what I was telling you so you resorted to name-calling and disengagement.
Click to expand...

Incorrect, I countered it then you started making your "only white people are racist" argument which I found to be very very stupid. So I told you that I found it to be very very stupid. You couldn't handle that.
 
Sandstorm said:
Incorrect, I countered it then you started making your "only white people are racist" argument which I found to be very very stupid. So I told you that I found it to be very very stupid. You couldn't handle that.
Click to expand...

Your argument continues to be attacking me and telling me I can't handle it. *yawn*. Maybe that's your go to.
 
Shockwave456 said:
It's not self-centered to support the system when less qualified applicants are being accepted simply because of the color of their skin? What effect does that have on their communities?
Click to expand...

Can you show one instance where this has happened?
 
Sandstorm said:
Incorrect, I countered it then you started making your "only white people are racist" argument which I found to be very very stupid. So I told you that I found it to be very very stupid. You couldn't handle that.
Click to expand...


"Your argument is stupid." is an emotional response with no substance. My 4 year old sister could make it.
"Your argument is stupid, because....XYZ reasons." is an actual response here in civilized America.
 
Shockwave456 said:
I just disagree that an applicant should have to best among of his/her race/ethnicity. He/she should be among the best of the total applicant pool. It's not broken down by disability status, sexual orientation, gender identity, or other demographics that are much more discriminated against today. Just because racial minorities are URMs does not mean they should only have to compete against other URMs.
Click to expand...

We don't have the data but I'd be willing to bet that slighly less than half of the disabled applicants get admitted, slightly less than half of the gay applicants get admitted, slightly less than half of the transgendered applicants get admitted and slightly less than half of the white men get admitted. Be in the top half of your peer group and you have a good shot.

Remember, if no URM was admitted, there would still be ~14,000 ORM (rather than 15,000+) who would not get in during a given cycle. The URM aren't taking that many seats.
 
wolfie77 said:
"Your argument is stupid." is an emotional response with no substance. My 4 year old sister could make it.
"Your argument is stupid, because....XYZ reasons." is an actual response here in civilized America.
Click to expand...

We did...you just chose to ignore xyz. Don't blame me for your ignorance
 
Sandstorm said:
We did...you just chose to ignore xyz. Don't blame me for your ignorance
Click to expand...


O by xyz, are you referring to "but minorities can be mean to white ppl too!"?
I acknowledged that.

Anyway, I don't think I want to take up any more of this thread with our argument. However, if you're interested, I think it would be cool if we discussed this further through PM.
 
wolfie77 said:
O by xyz, are you referring to "but minorities can be mean to white ppl too!"?
I acknowledged that.

Anyway, I don't think I want to take up any more of this thread with our argument. However, if you're interested, I think it would be cool if we discussed this further through PM.
Click to expand...

No thanks, I'm done hitting my head against the brick wall that is you.
 
plumazul said:
Can you show one instance where this has happened?
Click to expand...

Many actually. Refer to the AAMC's breakdown of acceptance rates by GPA and MCAT. You will notice that the acceptance rates for whites and Asians are significantly lower than those for URMs having the same GPA and MCAT. It's a simple concept of scarcity - admitting one applicant means denying another.
 
Shockwave456 said:
Many actually. Refer to the AAMC's breakdown of acceptance rates by GPA and MCAT. You will notice that the acceptance rates for whites and Asians are significantly lower than those for URMs having the same GPA and MCAT. It's a simple concept of scarcity - admitting one applicant means denying another.
Click to expand...


Hey you know what else you can get worked up over?
Politically motivated med school admissions!!

http://chronicle.com/article/Florida-Medical-Dean-Overrules/40749/
 
wolfie77 said:
Kinda like when you and slice of bread's wittle feelings got hurt you both got a wittle mad when you didn't like the my interpretation of race dynamics? And you both just kinda stopped being reasonable and started to spew insults instead of reasoned argument?
Click to expand...

Lol at the hypocrisy in this post. And by the way, you still haven't made a reasoned argument that you supported. You just said "I'm right, deal with it".
 
sliceofbread136 said:
Lol at the hypocrisy in this post. And by the way, you still haven't made a reasoned argument that you supported. You just said "I'm right, deal with it".
Click to expand...


Like I told Sandstorm, I'm done arguing on this thread. However, I wouldn't mine continuing a discussion through PM.
 
Shockwave456 said:
Many actually. Refer to the AAMC's breakdown of acceptance rates by GPA and MCAT. You will notice that the acceptance rates for whites and Asians are significantly lower than those for URMs having the same GPA and MCAT. It's a simple concept of scarcity - admitting one applicant means denying another.
Click to expand...

Your post spoke to being "qualified". It did not say anything about GPA or MCAT score? Are you under the mistaken impression that GPA and MCAT determine qualification? Then why are any of the very high GPA, MCAT applicants rejected? (which the data clearly shows happens every year)
 
Shockwave456 said:
Legacy/politically motivated admissions are equally outrageous. I am simply advocating merit-based admissions, without exception for race/legacy/politics/similar irrelevant factors.
Click to expand...


That's cool and I respect that position. Just wish I'd see more threads railing against legacy admits or singling them out or mentioning them more often. [I've seen posts where specific URM students get brought up for being admitted with lower than average stats.] Something about URM specifically seems to get people riled up a little more than these other pathways into med school...
 
sliceofbread136 said:
That is a good decision. He is right because he says so, there is really nothing we can do.
Click to expand...

Honestly, I don't care that you don't want to continue the discussion. However, I feel this speaks volumes about both your conviction and the strength of your argument.
 
plumazul said:
Your post spoke to being "qualified". It did not say anything about GPA or MCAT score? Are you under the mistaken impression that GPA and MCAT determine qualification? Then why are any of the very high GPA, MCAT applicants rejected? (which the data clearly shows happens every year)
Click to expand...

They do not solely determine qualification, but they are significant indicators of aptitude for medical school. There is a correlation between MCAT scores and Step 1 scores: http://www.usmleworld.com/Step1/step1_facts.aspx
 
wolfie77 said:
Honestly, I don't care that you don't want to continue the discussion. However, I feel this speaks volumes about both your conviction and the strength of your argument.
Click to expand...

That's cool. You can be convinced you are right, but I'm pretty confident that most objective observers would disagree.
 
sliceofbread136 said:
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racism

Dont see anything on the definition about only whites being racsit.
Click to expand...

sliceofbread136 said:
Ok so now that the dictionary is a bad source I'll go find some more:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Racism
http://www.adl.org/hate-patrol/racism.asp
http://www.allaboutpopularissues.org/what-is-racism-faq.htm
http://www.usariseup.com/latest-news/what-is-racism

I could site enough sources for this post to have like 100 gb of data because literally every source on the internet disputes your bullcrap
Click to expand...

Before I go see Batman, I'd like to repeat these posts. Based on almost every major source, the definition of racism is inclusive of discriminatory acts on white people.
 
plumazul said:
So you are using a "correlation" as your one example?! Sorry, that doesn't cut it. Try again

(or you can just retract your comment)
Click to expand...

What did you expect, personal examples? Are you disputing that GPA and MCAT are predictors, at least in part, of med school performance?
 
wolfie77 said:
Don't mean to be an a-hole, but what's wrong with correlation?
Click to expand...

His/her statement was:

It's not self-centered to support the system when less qualified applicants are being accepted simply because of the color of their skin?
Click to expand...

I asked for one example. He/she has yet to even show an understanding of what "qualified" means. Qualified certainly is not determined by GPA and MCAT scores.
 
Shockwave456 said:
What did you expect, personal examples? Are you disputing that GPA and MCAT are predictors, at least in part, of med school performance?
Click to expand...

??😕 "Predictors"?? Can you show that it has actually happened! Do you understand the question? Reread your original comment.
 
plumazul said:
His/her statement was:



I asked for one example. He/she has yet to even show an understanding of what "qualified" means. Qualified certainly is not determined by GPA and MCAT scores.
Click to expand...


higher GPA/MCAT ----> better performance in med school/more likely to pass/score higher on USMLE = more qualified

I don't mean to imply that this is true for everyone, only that this is a general relationship that holds true. But it's the best measure we have right now.
 
THESE THREADS ARE ALWAYS SO PRODUCTIVE!!!👍👍😀🙂+1+1
 
Shockwave456 said:
higher GPA/MCAT ----> better performance in med school/more likely to pass/score higher on USMLE = more qualified

I don't mean to imply that this is true for everyone, only that this is a general relationship that holds true. But it's the best measure we have right now.
Click to expand...

Do you seriously believe that this is the only criteria used by adcoms when selecting applicants? 😱

Sorry, I can't continue, gotta catch a flight to LAX!
 
plumazul said:
Do you seriously believe that this is the only criteria used by adcoms when selecting applicants? 😱

Sorry, I can't continue, gotta catch a flight to LAX!
Click to expand...

That's not what I said at all. But they are basically the only quantitative stats, so objective conclusions/relationships are much easier to draw/state. Anyway, I wasn't talking about screening criteria but rather about predictive power.
 
wolfie77 said:
I told you it was uncomfortable. But just bc you don't like it, doesn't make it untrue.

Racism, on our planet, is a white-at-the-top enterprise. It could have been some other way, but for historical reasons it ended up this way.

Now, that doesn't mean that a non-white can't be hateful or discriminatory against a white person, but that doesn't make it racism.
Click to expand...

Haha yes! I knew this would come up sooner or later. If that was the case sir, we really should then just change the definition of "racism" so that it could match your definition.

So let me try to understand your flawed logic. Having done something more in the past = Invulnerability?.

My my, then it should be the Egyptians since they enslaved whites in the past.
Your argument is so flawed I've seen it destroyed in debates time over time.

This is the definition of racism as it currently stands.
a) a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

b) hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

So sir, until the definition is changed your argument is floating on what ever subjective ideologies you have in your mind.

I do however advice you to maybe look at another word for your biased outlook.
Something along the lines of "whiteism" or "white-dominance" or something, but
"racism" and the act of being "racist" is not the word you seem to be looking for. :laugh:
 
Shockwave456 said:
higher GPA/MCAT ----> better performance in med school/more likely to pass/score higher on USMLE = more qualified

I don't mean to imply that this is true for everyone, only that this is a general relationship that holds true. But it's the best measure we have right now.
Click to expand...

If this were the case, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. The minority pool of physicians would be much smaller than it already is, and the vast majority of doctors would be complete geniuses academically with the wrong personalities/values as well as probably reasons for going into medicine in the first place.

Better performance in med school obviously involves the gpa/mcat ratio, but that's why those aren't the only two things that you send to med schools for an application.
 
drbull said:
If this were the case, then we wouldn't be having this conversation. The minority pool of physicians would be much smaller than it already is, and the vast majority of doctors would be complete geniuses academically with the wrong personalities/values as well as probably reasons for going into medicine in the first place.

Better performance in med school obviously involves the gpa/mcat ratio, but that's why those aren't the only two things that you send to med schools for an application.
Click to expand...

Right, there are many other factors, such as ECs, commitment to medicine, etc. But you are assuming that URMs excel in these areas relative to non-URMs, and I don't believe there is any evidence to support that.
 
Coldsoldier said:
Haha yes! I knew this would come up sooner or later. If that was the case sir, we really should then just change the definition of "racism" so that it could match your definition.

So let me try to understand your flawed logic. Having done something more in the past = Invulnerability?.

My my, then it should be the Egyptians since they enslaved whites in the past.
Your argument is so flawed I've seen it destroyed in debates time over time.

This is the definition of racism as it currently stands.
a) a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

b) hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

So sir, until the definition is changed your argument is floating on what ever subjective ideologies you have in your mind.

I do however advice you to maybe look at another word for your biased outlook.
Something along the lines of "whiteism" or "white-dominance" or something, but
"racism" and the act of being "racist" is not the word you seem to be looking for. :laugh:
Click to expand...

The term you want exists: white supremacy. It's the bedrock and focal point of racism in our world.

To your other points, racism (like race itself) is a completely socially constructed, historically dependent phenomenon. Let's dissect what that means:

It's socially constructed because there is no biological basis to race. Ask a scientist. Across all major differing characteristics, major studies have shown that there is more individual-individual variation within a group than group-group variation (with respect to groups of race and nationality, for example).

Because of it's social construction, race is fluid, dynamic, and historical. For example, Jews, the Irish and the Italians were not considered part of the "white race" when they originally came to America. They went through a process of racialization and shedding of their cultural characteristics that has led them to become part of "white America." If you want proof of this, look up articles and op-eds from the turn of the previous century: you'll see the Irish called a "degenerate race of men" and other such gems. History has shaped our concept of race as well as race dynamics.

So don't you see, my friend, whenever anyone talks about race, the whole endevour is "floating on subjective ideologies" since race does not exist.

My definition of racism is basically in line with the a & b points of yours, except that I incorporate "c" (power dynamics) into my thinking.
 
wolfie77 said:
The term you want exists: white supremacy. It's the bedrock and focal point of racism in our world.

To your other points, racism (like race itself) is a completely socially constructed, historically dependent phenomenon. Let's dissect what that means:

It's socially constructed because there is no biological basis to race. Ask a scientist. Across all major differing characteristics, major studies have shown that there is more individual-individual variation within a group than group-group variation (with respect to groups of race and nationality, for example).

Because of it's social construction, race is fluid, dynamic, and historical. For example, Jews, the Irish and the Italians were not considered part of the "white race" when they originally came to America. They went through a process of racialization and shedding of their cultural characteristics that has led them to become part of "white America." If you want proof of this, look up articles and op-eds from the turn of the previous century: you'll see the Irish called a "degenerate race of men" and other such gems. History has shaped our concept of race as well as race dynamics.

So don't you see, my friend, whenever anyone talks about race, the whole endevour is "floating on subjective ideologies" since race does not exist.

My definition of racism is basically in line with the a & b points of yours, except that I incorporate "c" (power dynamics) into my thinking.
Click to expand...

Ah you added "power dynamics" which is your own incorporation. Yet you talk as if the what is now "your subjective" definition of race/racism to be the sole correct one.

As if even though you are a pre-med, somehow you have uncovered the entire truth to race in America. Its quite arrogant.

I could come here and state the same but instead add something like "Primacy effect" and say oh well, if you look at the past the first people to enslave others were so and so, and by that we can now say they are immune from racism.

Adding "something external" to a definition and then falling back to "Its all subjective" as a way to defend a mis-use of a term doesn't hold my friend.

Love is subjective, so would an argument about love only happening to stupid or fat people based on another notion of "cost of love in reference to weight" be a credible argument? No.
 
Last edited:
Coldsoldier said:
Ah you added "power dynamics" which is your own incorporation. Yet you talk as if the what is now "your subjective" definition of race/racism to be the sole correct one.

As if even though you are a pre-med, somehow you have uncovered the entire truth to race in America. Its quite arrogant.

I could come here and state the same but instead add something like "Primacy effect" and say oh well, if you look at the past the first people to enslave others were so and so, and by that we can now say they are immune from racism.

Adding "something external" to a definition and then falling back to "Its all subjective" as a way to defend a mis-use of a term doesn't hold my friend.

Love is subjective, so would an argument about love only happening to stupid or people based on another notion of "cost of love in reference to weight" be a credible argument? No.
Click to expand...



Never did I say that. Please look back at my earlier posts if you really think so. I'm not arrogant enough to think that I discovered something like this. lol. I do, however, think my view is valid. I always asked for opposing views with support but never received it.

Also, I'm not pulling the race power dynamics piece out of my a*s. There is tons of scholarship and research on this issue (Off the top of my head Victor Lee Lewis and Peggy McIntosh come to mind). Do you accept my assertions about race and racism being constructed and historical?

I don't understand what you meant in the second bolded part.
 
Well...I'd guess African American male>White male if everything else is exactly the same.

It may affect your chances a little bit, but really, you should be worried about other parts of your application. URM isn't really a deal breaker. You may get into med school because of your URM status, but you may not last.

Don't cheat yourself like that. You're just like everyone else. "Oh I'll get in. I'm hispanic."

👎
 
wolfie77 said:
[/B]


Never did I say that. Please look back at my earlier posts if you really think so. I'm not arrogant enough to think that I discovered something like this. lol. I do, however, think my view is valid. I always asked for opposing views with support but never received it.

Also, I'm not pulling the race power dynamics piece out of my a*s. There is tons of scholarship and research on this issue (Off the top of my head Victor Lee Lewis and Peggy McIntosh come to mind). Do you accept my assertions about race and racism being constructed and historical?

I don't understand what you meant in the second bolded part.
Click to expand...

Oh, it seemed that way from the way you debated with the other fellas here :laugh:
I whole-heartedly accept that racism and race is a social construct but the statement you made about whites being the only ones able to carry it out I do not.


See with the power dynamics, Its very easy to agree that the white race (which doesn't really exist) has had most of the power in the world for quite a long time. However, with the way the world is headed that cannot be said anymore. Basing your argument on power dynamics is something I personally don't find very reassuring seeing as they do change. Your power dynamics are all based on the past, but racism isn't simply bound to the past.

On the second part, I copied what you did. Lol well sorta just without any scholarship.

I took a word with an understood meaning. I then added another factor like your power dynamics and from there drew a conclusion that I then traced back to the entire word and its definition. Arguments like this really won't hold ground.

To take the definition of something, add another factor, draw a conclusion from that factor and apply it to the entire understood definition without including the factor in which the conclusion was drawn can create a misuse of said word and its definition.

If you however state that "In the historic and power dynamic context, the white race has been immune from racism", then that is a credible stance on the subject.

Power dynamics is but one factor others have looked at. They are many others that can be applied to form different conclusions. I do however believe that what you are saying in terms of history and power dynamics is valid. However in terms of the entirety of racism, those which we have not seen nor will be know, I do not.
 
Last edited:
Coldsoldier said:
Oh, it seemed that way from the way you debated with the other fellas here :laugh:
I whole-heartedly accept that racism and race is a social construct but the statement you made about whites being the only ones able to carry it out I do not.


See with the power dynamics, Its very easy to agree that the white race (which doesn't really exist) has had most of the power in the world for quite a long time. However, with the way the world is headed that cannot be said anymore. Basing your argument on power dynamics is something I personally don't find very reassuring seeing as they do change. Your power dynamics are all based on the past, but racism isn't simply bound to the past.

On the second part, I copied what you did. Lol well sorta just without any scholarship.

I took a word with an understood meaning. I then added another factor like your power dynamics and from there drew a conclusion that I then traced back to the entire word and its definition. Arguments like this really won't hold ground.

To take the definition of something, add another factor, draw a conclusion from that factor and apply it to the entire understood definition without including the factor in which the conclusion was drawn can create a misuse of said word and its definition.

If you however state that "In the historic and power dynamic context, the white race has been immune from racism", then that is a credible stance on the subject.

Power dynamics is but one factor others have looked at. They are many others that can be applied to form different conclusions. I do however believe that what you are saying in terms of history and power dynamics is valid. However in terms of the entirety of racism, those which we have not seen nor will be know, I do not.
Click to expand...

His argument stems from the idea that the majority of racism came from whites therefore the definition of racism is solely whites hating other races.

That Webster guy has nothing on him, don't bother arguing, literally..

His argument is akin to the argument ..

There's a teacup floating around the moon. It can't be seen by any telescope known to man, but simply because you can't PROVE that I'm lying, it must mean that I'm not lying.

I can point to sources that say this is the case, regardless of if they're widely accepted or not...mostly the existence of this teacup is evidenced by the fact that I said its there and you can't prove me wrong....
 
Google russell's teapot if you're confused. It pretty much shows you the impossibility of arguing with him, because he is basing his argument on "because he said so" and whatever obscure source he can point a finger at. Any logical counter argument you make he will quickly turn into an illogical argument in his favor and say "HA! You just can't accept that you're wrong" whilst proving nothing.
 
wolfie77 said:
[/B]


Never did I say that. Please look back at my earlier posts if you really think so. I'm not arrogant enough to think that I discovered something like this. lol. I do, however, think my view is valid. I always asked for opposing views with support but never received it.

Also, I'm not pulling the race power dynamics piece out of my a*s. There is tons of scholarship and research on this issue (Off the top of my head Victor Lee Lewis and Peggy McIntosh come to mind). Do you accept my assertions about race and racism being constructed and historical?

I don't understand what you meant in the second bolded part.
Click to expand...

Coldsoldier said:
Oh, it seemed that way from the way you debated with the other fellas here :laugh:
I whole-heartedly accept that racism and race is a social construct but the statement you made about whites being the only ones able to carry it out I do not.


See with the power dynamics, Its very easy to agree that the white race (which doesn't really exist) has had most of the power in the world for quite a long time. However, with the way the world is headed that cannot be said anymore. Basing your argument on power dynamics is something I personally don't find very reassuring seeing as they do change. Your power dynamics are all based on the past, but racism isn't simply bound to the past.

On the second part, I copied what you did. Lol well sorta just without any scholarship.

I took a word with an understood meaning. I then added another factor like your power dynamics and from there drew a conclusion that I then traced back to the entire word and its definition. Arguments like this really won't hold ground.

To take the definition of something, add another factor, draw a conclusion from that factor and apply it to the entire understood definition without including the factor in which the conclusion was drawn can create a misuse of said word and its definition.

If you however state that "In the historic and power dynamic context, the white race has been immune from racism", then that is a credible stance on the subject.

Power dynamics is but one factor others have looked at. They are many others that can be applied to form different conclusions. I do however believe that what you are saying in terms of history and power dynamics is valid. However in terms of the entirety of racism, those which we have not seen nor will be know, I do not.
Click to expand...

Nope, redefining words for your argument's use is perfectly acceptable..
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
How much does a mediocre LOR affect an application?
Replies
2
Views
756
asterok
A
F
How much weight does boyfriend resident at an institution carry
Replies
11
Views
1K
throwawayftw
T
premedbarista
how much does a good MCAT score make up for a not so good GPA/sGPA?
Replies
5
Views
972
Mr.Smile12
Mr.Smile12
R
How much do letters of intent and updates matter when being considered for an interview
Replies
10
Views
1K
GoSpursGo
GoSpursGo
F
Does the type of research I do matter?
Replies
10
Views
713
2026PreMed
2026PreMed
Top