RParadela wrote:vcap180 wrote:RedPurpleBlue wrote:TLS_Dreamer wrote:
But why aren't UVA and Duke more prestigious than Harvard? If the former schools give you better employment options, aren't people who say Harvard is better just objectively wrong? Why do people give Harvard higher standing? It just makes no sense to me.
I'm not sure if you're serious, but I'll bite. Prestige is marginally based on employment statistics. Harvard Law produces presidents, Attorney Generals, Supreme Court Justices, U.S. Representatives, and Senators. UVA and Duke can't even compete in those regards. Combined they have 2 SCOTUS justices (one of whom didn't even graduate UVA and the other served on the court over 70 years ago), two presidents (Wilson didn't even graduate from UVA Law, and Nixon resigned as to not get impeached), and a few Reps./Senators I imagine, but those are few in number compared to Harvard. Plus, Harvard Law gets the added bonus of the prestige produced by the Harvard UG (where some of the smartest/wealthiest students have gone for 100s of years), and Harvard Grad (where some of the most preeminent scholars, doctors, and business people have gone). UVA and Duke have what? Strong graduate history programs, okay business schools, and the latter has a good medical school. That's about it. Harvard Law also gets a ton of great PI/Gov't jobs that are prestigious that don't fit inside the really limited (and thus dumb) BL + FC box that TLS salivates over.
I think it's pretty clear why everyone views Harvard as objectively better, regardless of what a couple points on BL + FC employment percentages say.
the lay prestige meter, which is the only thing that matters, reads as follows:
Harvard >>> Duke > NYU > UVA
Lol NYU has 0 lay prestige. NYU has the least lay prestige out of the T13 IMO
I agree NYU has low lay prestige, but it should beat at least Chicago, Virginia, Berkeley, and maybe Penn (State?).