1 upvotes, 1 direct replies (showing 1)
View submission: /r/philosophy Open Discussion Thread | February 24, 2025
But that is not necessarily true, lets take for example those who are born in harsh climate where ressources are scarce. They could theoretically be the most intelligent and competitive yet they would have no chance of even matching the ressources of those in more favorable environments.
The problem here is the assumption those people in favourable environments have the means to obtain those resources which is often not the case in reality especially in this interconnected world where l can be in harsh climates but so long as l've the means to obtain those resources, that factor isn't a problem which is what you see all the time
For example Africa is the most minerally rich continent and so by your line of reasoning those people in Africa should have more resources to allocate to themselves since they are in more favorable environments but that's not been the case as western nations have controled that distribution of resources
Even if it were true I struggle to understand how the vague notion of "better at hacking the game" would imply that competition is it's sole precursor.
Because competition breeds intelligence which has always been the most accurate predictor of obtaining resources matter what variables are involved
You say that inequality will arise once this occurs, but seem to agree that equality would occur regardless, I am struggling to understand what you're trying to point out.
I never agreed equality would occur but said if you were to remove those traits then equality might be of possibility but also said am not interested in that kind of utopian thinking
Comment by Choice-Box1279 at 25/02/2025 at 20:08 UTC
1 upvotes, 0 direct replies
The problem here is the assumption those people in favourable environments have the means to obtain those resources which is often not the case in reality especially in this interconnected world where l can be in harsh climates but so long as l've the means to obtain those resources, that factor isn't a problem which is what you see all the time
I mean at this point we are arguing narrow applications of ressource allocation and accessibility. I would say that europe managed to expand and advance further due to easier living and agriculture condition, while still having good ressources for earlier development.
Though at this point we're getting quite far from the topic.
Because competition breeds intelligence which has always been the most accurate predictor of obtaining resources matter what variables are involved
Says who? Throughout all history? In all societies?
Many cultures throughout history did not put intelligence at the topic of the value tables. Strenght and impression, along with social qualities unrelated to intelligence were far stronger precursors than pure intelligence.
I never agreed equality would occur but said if you were to remove those traits then equality might be of possibility but also said am not interested in that kind of utopian thinking
It might? But we have very strong evidence that it wouldn't. And most important of all true natural equality is a statistical impossibily. Think of the ridiculous conditions that would need to be met to obtain that, seems very very unlikely.