Our grades should reflect that superiority, even if it means that the grade distribution in any one Harvard class will reflect the homogenous excellence of its students rather than a fictitious bell curve.

Finally, consider the psychological impact on the students whose grades are artificially lowered to reflect a statistician's agenda or to "discipline" us.

Students often talk about how alienating, humbling and competitive Harvard is. Could this be partly due to a grading system that encourages us to view the presence of our intellectual peers as a threat?

A lot of us came from high schools where we stood out, often painfully, by virtue of our superior talents or intelligence.

But now that we have been privileged to join a community of our fellows, however, the grading system works to exaggerate differences between students and to make us compete for a rationed-out recognition that should ideally be open to as many as deserve it. This somewhat diminishes out ability to appreciate belonging to a fellowship of elites, which we have probably never experienced before and may never experience again.

It doesn't take much to turn a first year Socrates into a senior Machiavelli. The first push along that road comes when bright young Veritas-seekers gets their first assignment back with grades that say "Surprise! You're a complete idiot!"

Grades that are intended to cut students down to size will not foster excellence. Instead, they will only create a cynical attitude about the fairness of the educational system, and ultimately the value of the learning process.