Equality of Opportunity versus Equality of Outcome

Discussion in 'Off Topic' started by ToddStlluvsBacon, Apr 16, 2018.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. There are three different ways that humans are considered to be equal.

    The three categories for human equality: equality before God, equality of opportunity and equality of outcome. The first is the Founders’ use, the second is compatible with liberty, and the third is socialism.

    Equality before God was not something the Founders took literally. “They did not regard ‘men’—or as we would say today, ‘persons’—as equal in physical characteristics, emotional reactions, mechanical and intellectual abilities.” Jefferson himself was a remarkable man: He designed and built his own house, was an inventor, scholar, statesman, founder of the University of Virginia, governor of Virginia, and became the president of the U.S. Hardly equal in all senses to a white-collar, working class man.

    So what did Jefferson mean when he wrote that, “all men are created equal?” The answer is found in the proceeding phrase, “endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights.” This is how all persons are created equal, because God created us and gave us intrinsic value that we speak of in terms of ‘rights’ language.

    Equality of opportunity more simply describes some of our rights and how we are all equal before the law. This type of equality is not inconsistent with liberty, but “an essential component of liberty.” If someone is denied a job they are qualified for based on their ethnic background, color or religion, then they are being denied equal opportunity.

    Equality of outcome is the problematic view. This is the idea that everybody should literally be equal. There are many problems with this idea.

    First of all, ‘fairness’ is not an objective concept when dealing with wealth. One man’s garbage is another man’s treasure. Second, the passion behind this idea is that it isn’t fair for some kids to have advantages over others just because of the socioeconomic status of their parents. The focus against those who are advantaged is based on one’s property such as home or business values. However, property can also take the form of talents: musical ability, strength and intelligence. From an ethical standpoint, is there really any difference between the two? Many people resent the inheritance of property like houses and businesses, but don’t resent the inheritance of talents. I wish I could play basketball as well as Kobe Bryant. I’d be a multi-millionaire if I had that type of talent.

    But let’s consider where this leads. If we were to really try and equal the outcomes, then less advantaged kids would be given the greatest amount of training and the advantaged kids would be given the least amount of training. That’s fair, right? Not for the advantaged kids. The fact is, life is not fair. It is important to realize how we benefit from things being unfair. I take great pleasure in watching the best of the best play against the best of the best. That’s why we pay money to go to sporting events or watch movies with the best actors. “What kind of world would it be if everyone were a duplicate of everyone else?”
     
  2. What's with the copy paste threads? :lol:
    You forgot the last paragraph from the article.

    Link to it.
     
  3. Thanks Kurt Juros interesting reading even if it was 6 years ago
    Thanks Todd for another plagiarized article , true to form champ
     
  4. Just listen to Jordan Peterson. He basically explains this concept in laymans terms for everyone at home
     

  5. I like Peterson and thats where i originally heard about this but his explanation is a little harder to understand and he does convolute it alot with whats presently going on with news events especially with his situation at Greenwood ...this guys take is almost identical and easier to understand especially for morons like ella who barely have two brain cells to rub together.
     
  6. For those who are incapable of reading properly like ella and the microcephalic and would rather just listen to someone describe it. Do a search on podcast Joe Rogan Experience. Theres probably 5 or more podcasts and youtube episodes Rogan has put out interviewing Peterson on the subject.

    The OP was the most elemantary explanation I could find for this theory ...but apparently not elemantary enough for short bus riding windowlicking ella
     
  7. She isn’t that smart Todd. Ella and Bella will have to watch it together in order to form 1 nut case opinion.
     
  8. Who is this she you talk about Homo ?
     
  9. I did read , but no where was the authors name posted or acknowledged , therefore post was being past off as an original piece
    Sorry dude , we are all not as stupid as you look
     

  10. Again the great Ronikins (the mother of our rat babies) had spoken!!! ...I need no other approval

    POINT PROVEN

    LOCK THREAD PLEASE
     
  11. Todds favourite song?
    Like a virgin with madonna
     
  12. Locking per op request
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.