4 ms·
This sounds a lot like the "Just World" fallacy under the cover of genetics. At one point 99% of the population was illiterate and living in thatch huts, and no
by Dr_tldr 11y ago
This sounds a lot like the "Just World" fallacy under the cover of genetics. At one point 99% of the population was illiterate and living in thatch huts, and no doubt members of the elite at that time also considered this to be an expression of natural order as well.
But as it turns out, almost all of those peasants were capable of learning to read, doing algebra, engaging in abstract reasoning, labor coordination, and operating some fairly complex machinery. Many of them were even capable of becoming software engineers. We know this, because pretty much all of us came from them, and if we can do it, they could've done it, given the proper environment. Someone advancing your argument 1000, 100, or even 50 years ago would've wrong, what makes your argument different?
Of course we shouldn't expect equal outcomes from all people, but to suggest that we've now reached such a level of access and fairness in society that everyone still at the bottom can't possibly be elevated any further seems... unintelligent.
- deleted 11y ago[deleted]
- danieltillett 11y agoYou might enjoy reading A Farewell to Alms [1]. More importantly your two positions are not excludable. It is possible that the elite of the past were wrong and some segment of the population is incapable of being raised any higher. I personally doubt this is the case, but it has not been ruled out. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Farewell_to_Alms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A_Farewell_to_Alms
- noir_lord 11y agoGiven the variance in intelligence I think there probably is an upper limit to how you can "raise" someone. I also suspect that we are a long way off that, hell who knows what the future looks like, we could end up with neural implants that allow everyone to boost their intelligence/recall. I'm not stupid but I know there is an upper bound on my intelligence that is lower than many other peoples, not everyone can be Einstein or Hawking. The more interesting problem is how do we optimise for people reaching their maximum potential or if that is even necessary.
- danieltillett 11y agoYes it is pretty unlikely that everyone is right at their maximum potential. The bigger problem of course is that a large section of the population is not wanted even if they achieve the best they can.
- creshal 11y agoAt least it cannot be significantly elevated further with the current education system. We definitely need improvements here. (We, as a species. The particular education system I went through scores much better than the US system in every benchmark, but it's still piss poor at actually imparting skills on pupils, instead of rewarding them for accidentally ending up with them for reasons nobody really understands. I don't think any system has properly figured that out yet.)
- bsbechtel 11y agoThank you for stating this. I've believed it for a long time, and find it frustrating when others accept that those who are less fortunate or educated than them (or just generally disagree with their worldview) are always going to be that way and incapable of learning or change.
- winter_blue 11y agoThank you for saying this. It's too sad how far wide spread this incorrect idea is.