[obstacle1]

> If their argument is it should be abolished because not everybody has the choice to go there

Why don't you read the article (or my comment to you, fully) to understand what the argument actually is?

[kkjjkgjjgg]

I have read it. Their argument about groups making many advances is rather weak, though. It only links to a list of 100 allegedly most important advancements in human history. If you need a good brain surgeon, a group and its advancements won't help you much. You need somebody with a very good education. I also don't assume there is a strict hierarchy of capabilities. You can still do your group advancements while Yale exists. The article simply does not make a very good argument.