First time lurker, long time poster...no, long time poster, first time...ah feck it....
So everyone nails their Quantitative. I get it. After all, it's the easiest part of the GRE, right? I'm sorry but why don't we call it what it is - the ability to master MATH, and by math, a set of definitions and rules, invented by humans as a sort of lens to describe, analyse and predict natural laws in the natural world, with greater or less success, and more success as time goes on (you could, by the way, same the same thing about Hungarian, or any other language). Useful, important, a great technical achievement - we should be proud of our species! But as an indicator of someones logical/critical thinking skills - I am sorry. It's an indicator of your fluency at speaking math.
Quantitative high-scorers, set upon me! The gates are open!
As you can probably guess I didn't do so hot on the the math portion (510 -610). Did alright on the verbal (650 - 750V).
I've been doing a lot of research on schools in these forums and it seems like the Math far outweighs the Verbal. Obviously public/social policy and economics research requires some basic to decent skills in 'quantitative' areas. But does it so far outweigh the qualitative aspect? Last time in checked those running our society/making the decisions weren't necessarily the technical experts. Have we become so insecure of ourselves as a society that the only people we admit into our schools are those with these anxiety free quantifiable super scores? Since when is this the be all end all when determining a persons worth/ability to contribute to society?
I guess I just want to stick up for the verbal. And I'm a little stressed out from studying the bloody math portion for the past three weeks.
Which brings me to my question. Which schools, in your experience, value the qualitative aspect of an applicant, instead of bowing down at the feet of the quantifiable master, crying out with devotion: "I believe in you because I can see you! Nothing that is not there is not there!"