WritersBeat.com
 

Go Back   WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table

The Intellectual Table Discussions on political topics, social issues, current affairs, etc.


Disparity in outcome

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #1  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:26 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default Disparity in outcome


So I am often surrounded by people who make the basic assumption that disparity in outcome is the result of a discriminatory society.

Much like the Christian idea (which Nietzsche took down, accurately) that all are created equal, any group which are identified as underperforming must be disenfranchised.

Not enough black people in Tennis... racism.

Not enough white sprinters... silence.

Not enough women in stem cell research... sexism.

Not enough male primary school teachers... silence.

It seems to me that we're still terrified by the idea of natural ability and no-one is really allowed to talk about intelligence as a measure for success. Culture is another untouchable. In fact, anything is pretty much off the table, intelligence, culture, hours worked, risks taken, businesses started, products invented, businesses owned, exam results, criminality, there's just a crazy amount of variables relating to success which aren't even discussed when it comes to the idea that the game is rigged in favour of whoever's at the top (ahem... white men).

Diaspora (or Ashkenazi) Jews are said to have the highest IQ of any group. I think this most likely pertains to their success over some overarching Jewish conspiracy to rig the game and rule the world. They're just really smart... and their culture produces successful people. Asians are next -- again super smart and will pose the biggest threat to western predominance in the next few decades.

If we rely solely on the discrimination card then underperforming groups have nothing to learn from Diaspora Jews, the only difference between Jews and everyone else is that they must not suffer as much racism; which when you think about it is scarily idiotic.

I'm usually on an island on my own with this type of stuff so I thought I'd chuck it into WB to see what happens...

__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnConstantine For This Useful Post:
PickleBottom (07-12-2017)
  #2  
Old 07-12-2017, 09:56 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Christianity across the board does not believe that God created all men equally. I think that came later, from the "Enlightenment".

Jesus told the story of the talents - in the parable each was given a different amount of talents (then a monetary unit) and each did differently with them. In the modern understanding of Talent or Talents, We are all given different talents and are certainly not born equal.

Not everyone is born to be a poet, a novelist, a physicist, Engineer, race car driver,etc. Some are born to be plumbers and lawn care specialists.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 07-12-2017, 11:26 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
Christianity across the board does not believe that God created all men equally. I think that came later, from the "Enlightenment".
Naw -- I don' think so.

The idea that came out of the Enlightenment was that all men are endowed with rights that are natural and inalienable -- in that respect they are equal.

Doesn't have anything to do with "talent."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 07-12-2017, 11:56 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
Naw -- I don' think so.

The idea that came out of the Enlightenment was that all men are endowed with rights that are natural and inalienable -- in that respect they are equal.

Doesn't have anything to do with "talent."
If we are talking about a Christian or biblical view I am correct. T

I doubt if you'll read in the Bible that "all men are created equally - that was something Thomas Jefferson penned (and perhaps borrowed from Phillip Mazzei)

So yes, the "God created all men equally" is something that came from the time period of the Enlightenment.


The Parable of the Talents is just one example that God did not create men equally.

The Bible has numerous examples where some are greater than others, some are put in higher positions than others, and so forth.

God creating all men equal is a Deist construct,not a Christian or Biblical construct.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:03 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

I don't care about the Christian or Biblical view.

Otherwise, yes -- the idea is that men were endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.

That still doesn't have a thing to do with "talents" or abilities.

Last edited by Myers; 07-12-2017 at 12:07 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:26 PM
Grace Gabriel's Avatar
Grace Gabriel (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,385
Thanks: 1,945
Thanks 1,045
Default

I just wrote a lengthy response to Mo.

The computer ate it.

Hand of God perhaps?
__________________
GRACE GABRIEL
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:28 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

Well, I'm certainly interested in what you have to say -- so I hope you don't give up...
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:32 PM
Grace Gabriel's Avatar
Grace Gabriel (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,385
Thanks: 1,945
Thanks 1,045
Default

Sure I'll come back. Fairly stunned to see the reply box delete itself!
__________________
GRACE GABRIEL
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:33 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

I don't care about the Christian or Biblical view.

Otherwise, yes -- the idea is that men were endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights.

That still doesn't have a thing to do with "talents" or abilities.
If you don't care about the Christian or Biblical view, why frame your argument the way you did?

I was making a point to John that Nietzsche's "doing a take down on the Christian Belief that all men are created equal is a red herring.

I could have been clearer. I should have just come out and said that when Nietzsche deconstructed that, he did not deconstruct it based on the Bible.

I am agreeing with John's point that people are not created equally. I am disagreeing with his point about Nietzsche, because if Nietzsche said that he had it wrong.

I don't know if I should use Irony or Shadenfreude that the guy who expanded on the Hobbe-Locke-ian idea of Life, Liberty, etc obviously didn't believe it himself. O, Irony is a better word.

If you want to use the final draft of the Article of the First 'Murrican Secession (The Declaration of Independence) as a holy writ then go ahead, but I won't pretend that it's anything sacred, nor will I acknowledge it as based on anything Christian.

In sum:
1. JohnC is right when he opines that all men are not created equally.
2. To assert that Judaism, Christianity, or scriptures shared (Old Testament) and not shared (New Testament) say that all men are created equally is wrong.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.

Last edited by Mohican; 07-12-2017 at 12:44 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:44 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

I didn't frame my argument that way.

I think the idea that men are born with or are naturally endowed with certain rights is a pretty darn good one.

That it was accidentally attributed to God is beside the point...

And STILL doesn't have anything to do with talent.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:46 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by Grace Gabriel View Post
I just wrote a lengthy response to Mo.

The computer ate it.

Hand of God perhaps?
I've found, even when The 'Beat had a "solid platform" that writing lengthier responses was better done in Word and then cut/paste because of disappearing issues or the page "timing out".
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old 07-12-2017, 12:54 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

Originally Posted by Mohican View Post
Christianity across the board does not believe that God created all men equally. I think that came later, from the "Enlightenment".
Here's where you said it.

John is talking about intelligence, work ethic, natural ability etc. -- in that respect, we aren't all equal.

You said the idea that we are equal with regard to those things came from the enlightenment.

It didn't.

The idea that came out of the enlightenment is that we all have certain inalienable rights -- meaning that they are inherent. In that regard we are equal. It's not about talent or ability.

It's not that complicated.

Last edited by Myers; 07-12-2017 at 01:46 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old 07-12-2017, 01:55 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,844
Thanks: 361
Thanks 847
Default Disparity in outcome

The Bible is more concerned with all men having a soul and in that respect they are equal. But the rest is conditional upon what a man (with free will and access to the truth) does in his life. Therefore Mo is right about essentially lazy people or dumb people not ending up equal in life.

Where I think John is wrong here is his implication that the market will distribute means in accordance with effort.

As soon as a few gather enough means they will easily start to extract options from the poor dumb and lazy to a point where there is little way for others to profit.

You can't have a truly free market outside the confines of a tiny group without regulation. And with regulation one gets corruption.

The best choice for me would be a social democracy where the peasants are afforded enough to keep them from cutting the throats of the rich and taking their shit by force.
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old 07-12-2017, 02:08 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,844
Thanks: 361
Thanks 847
Default

Oh, that and asians have higher IQ's. Statistically that's not true.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 07-12-2017, 02:18 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,844
Thanks: 361
Thanks 847
Default

And yeah, this new liberal SJW shit is mostly bullshit from the the other side. Just as disingenuous in its extremes as a right-wing trickle down argument.
Reply With Quote
  #16  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:10 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
Therefore Mo is right about essentially lazy people or dumb people not ending up equal in life.
Of course, he's right.

Just to be clear, I wasn't arguing against that. It's kind if no brainer -- isn't it?
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:14 PM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
Where I think John is wrong here is his implication that the market will distribute means in accordance with effort.
It might to some degree. Otherwise, that's just a variation of the old "bootstraps" baloney.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:49 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,844
Thanks: 361
Thanks 847
Default

Originally Posted by Myers View Post
It might to some degree. Otherwise, that's just a variation of the old "bootstraps" baloney.


I'd say in a free market capitalist society, once the smart quick free-marketeers get all the capital they can pretty much do whatever they want. The price of boot straps gets higher and higher and the cream of the crop are shaved off and brought into business to perpetuate the grinding. Wages for workers doesn't keep pace with inflation and the rich get richer and the poor get poorer.

Also, and we're seeing this just now, the smart people are less and less becoming doctors or teachers or NASA engineers, and more going into business. So we have the highest infant mortality rate of any developed country, the fewest high quality teachers, and well, NASA... not what it used to be.

And the problem with that—when you starve out the working class—is you end up with movements that elect people like Trump. The media is bought and on a budget, we have low quality education, only the military has the budget for proprietary spending, and all of the brains are working on algorithms to extract more profit to the top.

Eventually, the masses of poor and working class will rise up and take the prize at the top with pitchforks if need be.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 07-12-2017, 03:52 PM
PickleBottom's Avatar
PickleBottom (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 1,980
Thanks: 1,312
Thanks 377
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
So I am often surrounded by people who make the basic assumption that disparity in outcome is the result of a discriminatory society.

Much like the Christian idea (which Nietzsche took down, accurately) that all are created equal, any group which are identified as underperforming must be disenfranchised.

Not enough black people in Tennis... racism.

Not enough white sprinters... silence.

Not enough women in stem cell research... sexism.

Not enough male primary school teachers... silence.

It seems to me that we're still terrified by the idea of natural ability and no-one is really allowed to talk about intelligence as a measure for success. Culture is another untouchable. In fact, anything is pretty much off the table, intelligence, culture, hours worked, risks taken, businesses started, products invented, businesses owned, exam results, criminality, there's just a crazy amount of variables relating to success which aren't even discussed when it comes to the idea that the game is rigged in favour of whoever's at the top (ahem... white men).

Diaspora (or Ashkenazi) Jews are said to have the highest IQ of any group. I think this most likely pertains to their success over some overarching Jewish conspiracy to rig the game and rule the world. They're just really smart... and their culture produces successful people. Asians are next -- again super smart and will pose the biggest threat to western predominance in the next few decades.

If we rely solely on the discrimination card then underperforming groups have nothing to learn from Diaspora Jews, the only difference between Jews and everyone else is that they must not suffer as much racism; which when you think about it is scarily idiotic.

I'm usually on an island on my own with this type of stuff so I thought I'd chuck it into WB to see what happens...
Well there is a biological basis to all human activity, as we cannot be breatharians, and then there is an enormous amount of variation within the human population where we find some people with biology which allows them to have a behaviour that is greater than another person, for example, be taller, smarter, fatter, lactose tolerant etc. Then there is trying to group people based on socially constructed groups, cultural or historical divisions which has nothing to do with biology.

For example, when a person tries to group people based on genetics (looking at different forms of the same gene - alleles) they will find that all the socially constructed groups, cultural or historical divisions do not exist. That is, if a person decides that all people with the allele X1 belongs into one group and all people with the allele X2 belongs in another group they will find that they have created divisions where in one family two siblings belong into two different groups. A person could then use frequencies of alleles but what they will find is the frequency for one allele (Sickle-cell anaemia) will align people of "recent" African ancestry (DNA sequences) with people of "recent" South Asian ancestry and the frequency of other alleles (Blood type) will align some people of "recent" African ancestry to people with "recent" European ancestry.

What do we do with this information societally? Well all people are not created equal (biologically) but this is what a society should address, and therefore, all people under a social contract should be given equal "freedoms".

The TLDR here is there is variation in the human population, some people will be better than other people at certain activities and in some cases this could be biological, but this biological variation is not due to current and historical, societal and cultural divisions.

Incidentally, apparently Lewis Hamilton is the only "black" person given a chance to drive a Formula One car and he seems to be alright (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willy_T._Ribbs), Serena and Venus Williams are tennis players (two out of ~50 players of African American heritage represented at Grand Slams (from what I understand) and ~3 other people from this list won a grand slam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego...tennis_players), and they seem to be good. At an undergraduate level, PhD level, and early career (Level A & B), there is an approximately equal number of women and men in STEM but then from Level C onwards... http://theconversation.com/how-to-ke...ics-stem-61664
__________________
If you have an apple and I have an apple and we exchange these apples then you and I will still each have one apple. But if you have an idea and I have an idea and we exchange these ideas, then each of us will have two ideas
-George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 07-12-2017, 04:44 PM
Nick Pierce's Avatar
Nick Pierce (Offline)
Samuel Johnson, obviously!
Official Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 6,686
Thanks: 1,949
Thanks 1,262
Default

[QUOTE=brianpatrick

Eventually, the masses of poor and working class will rise up and take the prize at the top with pitchforks if need be

[/QUOTE]


Historical references?
__________________
Through the smoke and fog there comes a form ... shape shifting ... could this be the Future?
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 07-12-2017, 05:59 PM
brianpatrick's Avatar
brianpatrick (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Arizona
Posts: 3,844
Thanks: 361
Thanks 847
Default

Originally Posted by Nick Pierce View Post
Historical references?


Is this a question or a demand?

Sometimes, Pierce, you're too cryptic.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 07-13-2017, 03:11 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by PickleBottom View Post
Incidentally, apparently Lewis Hamilton is the only "black" person given a chance to drive a Formula One car and he seems to be alright (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willy_T._Ribbs), Serena and Venus Williams are tennis players (two out of ~50 players of African American heritage represented at Grand Slams (from what I understand) and ~3 other people from this list won a grand slam https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catego...tennis_players), and they seem to be good. At an undergraduate level, PhD level, and early career (Level A & B), there is an approximately equal number of women and men in STEM but then from Level C onwards... http://theconversation.com/how-to-ke...ics-stem-61664
So is Lewis Hamilton the only black person 'given a chance' or, the only black person good enough? -- that's the question.

My inclination goes for the latter -- because F1 teams are rational business and profit minded people whose goal is to find the best drivers in the world to win as many championships as possible.

Now you might say, well in order to train as an F1 driver you're going to have to have a certain degree of capital behind you to pay for all the equipment, lessons, time on the track etc etc. Then because there is a differential in wealth between races this puts white people at an advantage when it comes to producing competent drivers.

But that's not discriminatory. F1 isn't consciously excluding black people, it just implicitly excludes people whose income or capacity to invest isn't at a certain level. Is there any kind of moral cause to do anything about that? Is there a moral basis for affirmative action (which in this scenario would presumably take a form of F1 scholarships to low income individuals... how you determine whether these individuals have promise as drivers would be very tricky I imagine), do we need to run around accosting people for 'unconscious bias'?
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.
Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to JohnConstantine For This Useful Post:
PickleBottom (07-14-2017)
  #23  
Old 07-13-2017, 03:19 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
Eventually, the masses of poor and working class will rise up and take the prize at the top with pitchforks if need be.
The masses are always doing stuff like that in one form or another... doesn't tend to work out so good in general.

In our lifetime the pattern seems to be whenever the masses get disgruntled enough to shake the foundation beneath whichever regime they're unhappy with, an interested group, and perhaps a collection of state powers will commandeer the movement.

Regime change doesn't seem to me to be a very attractive policy, either for those foreign powers supporting it, or those working class masses calling for it.

Mao and Stalin died naturally... China and Russia are better off for it. Meanwhile my vote goes to whoever wants to reduce the capacity of state power eventually to such a degree that we learn to live independently from it.

Then you don't need to rise up, you just unsubscribe, vote with your wallet, etc etc.

Oh and hyperinflation is created by governments.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 07-13-2017 at 03:37 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 07-13-2017, 06:17 AM
Grace Gabriel's Avatar
Grace Gabriel (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,385
Thanks: 1,945
Thanks 1,045
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
So is Lewis Hamilton the only black person 'given a chance' or, the only black person good enough? -- that's the question.

My inclination goes for the latter -- because F1 teams are rational business and profit minded people whose goal is to find the best drivers in the world to win as many championships as possible.

Now you might say, well in order to train as an F1 driver you're going to have to have a certain degree of capital behind you to pay for all the equipment, lessons, time on the track etc etc. Then because there is a differential in wealth between races this puts white people at an advantage when it comes to producing competent drivers.

But that's not discriminatory. F1 isn't consciously excluding black people, it just implicitly excludes people whose income or capacity to invest isn't at a certain level. Is there any kind of moral cause to do anything about that? Is there a moral basis for affirmative action (which in this scenario would presumably take a form of F1 scholarships to low income individuals... how you determine whether these individuals have promise as drivers would be very tricky I imagine), do we need to run around accosting people for 'unconscious bias'?
Hamilton is British - and he was winning major events by the time he was ten years old. He had access to training tracks and had parents that could pay for it.

If he'd been born in Somalia, there's no chance his talent would have been noticed.

Life is intrinsically unfair.

Our genetic legacy is not equal. Our family backgrounds are not equal. The opportunities available in different countries are not equal.

John,you mentioned Jews and Asians in your first post - no, they're not more intelligent. However, both cultures have strong family values and are far more likely to produce secure, well adjusted adults that can reach their full potential.

Some people thrive in adversity and overcome the odds. Others are mentally crippled from being raised in an environment that made them feel worthless.
__________________
GRACE GABRIEL
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 07-13-2017, 06:46 AM
Grace Gabriel's Avatar
Grace Gabriel (Offline)
Always Online
Official Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 2,385
Thanks: 1,945
Thanks 1,045
Default

Originally Posted by JohnConstantine View Post
So is Lewis Hamilton the only black person 'given a chance' or, the only black person good enough? -- that's the question.

My inclination goes for the latter -- because F1 teams are rational business and profit minded people whose goal is to find the best drivers in the world to win as many championships as possible.

Now you might say, well in order to train as an F1 driver you're going to have to have a certain degree of capital behind you to pay for all the equipment, lessons, time on the track etc etc. Then because there is a differential in wealth between races this puts white people at an advantage when it comes to producing competent drivers.

But that's not discriminatory. F1 isn't consciously excluding black people, it just implicitly excludes people whose income or capacity to invest isn't at a certain level. Is there any kind of moral cause to do anything about that? Is there a moral basis for affirmative action (which in this scenario would presumably take a form of F1 scholarships to low income individuals... how you determine whether these individuals have promise as drivers would be very tricky I imagine), do we need to run around accosting people for 'unconscious bias'?
Skin colour is irrelevant.

Serena and Venus Williams are American. They had a father that invested time in coaching them and driving them forward - and L.A courts to practice on.

An Indian orphan living in the city rubbish dump might
save hard for a shoe shine business or buy books and study hard enough to get a secure job with the railway. Tenacity will give him some degree of success. But, there is no likelihood that he will become a surgeon - because there's no funds for med school, and insufficient education to be accepted. Chances are, the boy is brilliant.

That's life. Nothing will ever make it fair.
__________________
GRACE GABRIEL
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 07-13-2017, 08:02 AM
Myers's Avatar
Myers (Offline)
Heartbreaking Writer of Staggering Genius
Official Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Posts: 1,745
Thanks: 338
Thanks 355
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
Eventually, the masses of poor and working class will rise up and take the prize at the top with pitchforks if need be.
My wife's extended family and most of the community is poor and/or working class. They have just enough to get by and still have a few creature comforts, like cable and internet. And a lot of them get their "checks."

It's hard to explain, but despite their knowledge of and limited exposure to affluence or even their local version of it, it's like they can't conceive a path or way out of poverty -- even if it means just getting a high school diploma. Never mind the bootstraps. What's odd is that the mindset isn't really multi-generational. A lot of their grandparents had working farms or decent paying mill jobs. Could be that there isn't a history of valuing education -- there wasn't a need for it.

These aren't the people who aren't going to rise up -- unless maybe the checks stop coming. (And no surprise -- most of them voted for Trump.) But I suppose over time, as the middle class shrinks and more join the ranks of the poor and working poor, this scenario might be somewhat more plausible.

But my guess is, the catalyst would have to be some kind of economic disaster -- that people would have to literally be starving. As it is, there is just too much complacency, distraction -- and false hope that somehow things will be fixed. So I think revolution is a long, long way off.

P.S. The thing that annoys me to no end about the bootstraps thing is the usual context. I know people who grew up in the suburbs with every possible advantage who could look at you strait faced and tell you how they started out with nothing and no one ever handed them anything etc. etc. -- so why can't "they..."

Last edited by Myers; 07-13-2017 at 10:26 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 07-13-2017, 08:21 AM
JohnConstantine's Avatar
JohnConstantine (Offline)
Verbosity Pales
Official Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 3,636
Thanks: 198
Thanks 693
Default

Originally Posted by Grace Gabriel View Post
Hamilton is British - and he was winning major events by the time he was ten years old. He had access to training tracks and had parents that could pay for it.

If he'd been born in Somalia, there's no chance his talent would have been noticed.

Life is intrinsically unfair.

Our genetic legacy is not equal. Our family backgrounds are not equal. The opportunities available in different countries are not equal.

John,you mentioned Jews and Asians in your first post - no, they're not more intelligent. However, both cultures have strong family values and are far more likely to produce secure, well adjusted adults that can reach their full potential.

Some people thrive in adversity and overcome the odds. Others are mentally crippled from being raised in an environment that made them feel worthless.
Skin colour is irrelevant, intelligence is not. Yes cultural inculcation within Asian and Jewish groups will absolutely contribute to they success, but their topping of the IQ ranks does too and there's no use in denying that in my eyes. And in any event, say it is ALL cultural. Then there must be something wrong with certain cultures? (see I like to ask these questions that really poke people in the axioms, it's important, but mainly it entertains me)

And here's the problem, it's the age old nature nurture debate and we really don't know the split. But what someone more educated in this type of stuff than I might say is that heritability of intelligence is maybe 60 per cent.

So if someone inherits an IQ of 140 they just have a massive advantage over someone who inherits an IQ of 90. In the same environment these two individuals are most likely going to produce vastly different outcomes.

OK but what if a bunch of 100 IQ people produce vastly different outcomes which correspond with their race? Well apparently that doesn't really happen.

People whose IQ is 100 tend to do equally as well in the market regardless of skin colour. That's fascinating to me.
__________________
I don't want any gay people hanging around me while I'm trying to kill kids.

Last edited by JohnConstantine; 07-13-2017 at 08:24 AM..
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 07-13-2017, 10:24 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

I don't think Asians nor Jewish Groups top people in IQ, OTOH if you use a standardize test some groups will peak and some will not do well.

Part of seeming smart to people outside the group is insularity. I would use the various Anabaptist groups as an example. (Amish, Mennonite, Hutterite) If your public face is only the very brightest or most monetarily successful then people will think the group as a whole is smarter. Especially if your idiots are kept out of the public view.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 07-13-2017, 10:50 AM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

Originally Posted by brianpatrick View Post
I'd say in a free market capitalist society, once the smart quick free-marketeers get all the capital they can pretty much do whatever they want. ....
I don't view Free Marketeers and Capitalists in the same light.

Disregard the Rush Limbaughs of the world. Capitalism didn't evolve as a free market system. What people came to understand as capitalist came about Post Bellum, in part driven by things like building transcontinental railroads.
Capitalism as it developed counted on governmental assistance (land grants, bonds, etc)

That aside, yes, there is potential for abuse with free markets.

Guess what - there is potential for abuse with government controls, too. And the further away the power is from the population, the less responsive it becomes.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 07-13-2017, 12:10 PM
Mohican's Avatar
Mohican (Offline)
Tall Poppy
Administration
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: Not quite back of beyond
Posts: 3,849
Thanks: 330
Thanks 651
Default

To john's point - Intelligence/IQ is part of it. You have to be smart enough.

There are a lot of people I know who started successful businesses that are smart but not can do Differential Equations In Their Sleep Smart.

A lot of people that do "bootstrap" themselves are more willing to take risks than perhaps some smarter people.
__________________
If you surrender a civilization to avoid social disapproval, you should know that all of history will curse you for your cowardliness - Alice Teller

If John of Patmos would browse the internet today for half an hour, I don't know if the Book of Revelations would be entirely different or entirely the same.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  WritersBeat.com > General Discussion > The Intellectual Table


Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
global disparity Nacia Free Writing 1 05-20-2015 04:28 PM


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 09:40 PM.

vBulletin, Copyright © 2000-2006, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.