13 ms·

> I will offer a pre-counterpoint: equality is not (should not be) about everyone being the same or at the same level, but more "from each according to their ab

> I will offer a pre-counterpoint: equality is not (should not be) about everyone being the same or at the same level, but more "from each according to their ability" — but at the same time considering the 100% effort from everyone to be (nearly) as valuable. Honestly, I'm not sure how to reply to that, because I don't think any single human in history has ever given anything near 100% effort or achieved 100% of their potential. Maybe a rare few individuals - da Vinci? Jefferson? Tokugawa? Socrates? But I'm not so sure of that, even. No matter how good you get, you can always make another incremental improvement. Couple that with the fact that the vast majority of major breakthroughs come from individuals or small teams, and I think anything that stifles excellence to potentially help get more out of everyone is misguided. Again, though, I realize that I hold the minority position on this idea.

rue 16y ago
Substitute 100% with a percentage you feel comfortable with. Whatever puny humans consider "full effort" without ever aspiring for more… I think it is probably correct to say that the tips of major breakthroughs come from small groups, but to claim entirety of the credit would be discounting all of the work, research, support and infrastructure currently and in the past. I do not think it is feasible to go to an "every man for himself"-system at this point — plus I'd like to see some historic examples of such successes if that is your gist. Notably fostering an overall empowering society is not the same as putting Joe Sixpack in the Manhattan project 'cause he's been trying so hard, bless his little cotton socks. You need not respond here, but I hope your article-in-potentia can sufficiently flesh out and support your idea instead of only trying to deconstruct the current (?) stifling environ.
joe_the_user 16y ago
I don't think any single human in history has ever given anything near 100% effort or achieved 100% of their potential. However ridiculous I might find much of what you say, I love your optimism here. Now, wouldn't it be desirable for more people to have more of an opportunity to achieve their potential? Also, I've experienced "taking by force" only a couple times in my life and I don't think the tax system resembles this.

rue 16y ago

Substitute 100% with a percentage you feel comfortable with. Whatever puny humans consider "full effort" without ever aspiring for more… I think it is probably correct to say that the tips of major breakthroughs come from small groups, but to claim entirety of the credit would be discounting all of the work, research, support and infrastructure currently and in the past. I do not think it is feasible to go to an "every man for himself"-system at this point — plus I'd like to see some historic examples of such successes if that is your gist. Notably fostering an overall empowering society is not the same as putting Joe Sixpack in the Manhattan project 'cause he's been trying so hard, bless his little cotton socks. You need not respond here, but I hope your article-in-potentia can sufficiently flesh out and support your idea instead of only trying to deconstruct the current (?) stifling environ.

joe_the_user 16y ago

I don't think any single human in history has ever given anything near 100% effort or achieved 100% of their potential. However ridiculous I might find much of what you say, I love your optimism here. Now, wouldn't it be desirable for more people to have more of an opportunity to achieve their potential? Also, I've experienced "taking by force" only a couple times in my life and I don't think the tax system resembles this.