"All humans are equal!"

[meme duchess]

DISCLAIMER: Long-winded and I'm not really sure where I'm going with this so feel free to voice out whatever personal thoughts you have on the manner without necessarily responding to mine.

I never understood the mentality of dumbing everyone down to the same level with the same justification implied in the title... because they're humans.

Not enough. I don't understand this, maybe because I don't believe that everything is subjective. I'm not going to use the whole entire world for comparison but let's imagine a situation (unrealistic and probably taking on the black and white mentality to a level but hypothetical for a reason) where we were forced to kill one out of two people - one, ability-wise, is horrible at everything and another perfect at everything. Wouldn't we choose the one who happened to be... perfect at everything? More potential to help both themselves and others, while the one horrible at everything doesn't. Or, maybe, let's take the concept that everyone is equal and apply it to a popular moral question: there's a train that won't stop and it's heading into two different directions - one has two people who you're unfamiliar with while the other has only one. The train is currently heading towards those two people but you have the option of pushing a switch so that it goes the other way. By the standard of humans being equal, unless you're a psychopath and want to see more being killed for the shits and giggles, you'd then make it so you kill the 1 over the 2. But humans aren't really equal, so imagine - if we happened to understand the context of each and every single life and one human had more "potential" to live a better life than all two combined, wouldn't we kill the two over the one? I think you get the point.

Okay, monologue over. And...

//out.

 

[Xann]

DISCLAIMER: Long-winded and I'm not really sure where I'm going with this so feel free to voice out whatever personal thoughts you have on the manner without necessarily responding to mine.

I never understood the mentality of dumbing everyone down to the same level with the same justification implied in the title... because they're humans.

Not enough. I don't understand this, maybe because I don't believe that everything is subjective. I'm not going to use the whole entire world for comparison but let's imagine a situation (unrealistic and probably taking on the black and white mentality to a level but hypothetical for a reason) where we were forced to kill one out of two people - one, ability-wise, is horrible at everything and another perfect at everything. Wouldn't we choose the one who happened to be... perfect at everything? More potential to help both themselves and others, while the one horrible at everything doesn't. Or, maybe, let's take the concept that everyone is equal and apply it to a popular moral question: there's a train that won't stop and it's heading into two different directions - one has two people who you're unfamiliar with while the other has only one. The train is currently heading towards those two people but you have the option of pushing a switch so that it goes the other way. By the standard of humans being equal, unless you're a psychopath and want to see more being killed for the shits and giggles, you'd then make it so you kill the 1 over the 2. But humans aren't really equal, so imagine - if we happened to understand the context of each and every single life and one human had more "potential" to live a better life than all two combined, wouldn't we kill the two over the one? I think you get the point.

Okay, monologue over. And...

//out.

Congratulations, you've just connected to a basic truth the vast majority of humanity either cannot or will not accept which highlights the greater political struggles of the world today. By dumbing down everyone infinitely and ignoring this first basic objective truth it sets a standard for those in control of the political agenda to eventually get the masses to believe whatever they want eventually, as in giving up their free speech and gun rights is actually a good and moral thing to do. This line of thinking scares people because humanity has such a long and frightening history of genocides and by being able to apply the standard to one person based on quality of traits alone it opens the door to applying it to groups as well. The vast majority of people would rather continue to live in subjective happy land forever because it gives them the delusion it will keep them and everyone else safe. But those who surrender freedom (in this case of thought based on their emotions) for security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one.

 

[Bush]

Whether or not all humans are "equal" wholly depends on the metric(s) you're using.

 

[Xann]

Whether or not all humans are "equal" wholly depends on the metric(s) you're using.

If you mean "theoretically morally equal" in the sense I think you're trying to convey, then yes. But objectively different in certain traits, no. Both are different uses of the term equal and both tie in together infinitely when it comes to reality.

 

[Bush]

If you mean "theoretically morally equal" in the sense I think you're trying to convey, then yes. But objectively different in certain traits, no. Both are different uses of the term equal and both tie in together infinitely when it comes to reality.

Crap, I should've put in my disclaimer.

This isn't a moral appeal. This isn't to say that one should seek out and evaluate only on the measures where they are equal. Just sayin', from one perspective it's a way to guide the question.

 

[Xann]

Crap, I should've put in my disclaimer.

This isn't a moral appeal. This isn't to say that one should seek out and evaluate only on the measures where they are equal. Just sayin', from one perspective it's a way to guide the question.

Ah okay, gotcha. I think it's hard to deny for anyone who is willing to evaluate on all measures and not purposefully avoid others that humans are not in a complete sense equal in the objective use of the term, once the song and dance of semantics and political correctness is over. Otherwise there would be nothing to identify or differentiate people from one another.

 

[Virtual ghost]

DISCLAIMER: Long-winded and I'm not really sure where I'm going with this so feel free to voice out whatever personal thoughts you have on the manner without necessarily responding to mine.

I never understood the mentality of dumbing everyone down to the same level with the same justification implied in the title... because they're humans.

Not enough. I don't understand this, maybe because I don't believe that everything is subjective. I'm not going to use the whole entire world for comparison but let's imagine a situation (unrealistic and probably taking on the black and white mentality to a level but hypothetical for a reason) where we were forced to kill one out of two people - one, ability-wise, is horrible at everything and another perfect at everything. Wouldn't we choose the one who happened to be... perfect at everything? More potential to help both themselves and others, while the one horrible at everything doesn't. Or, maybe, let's take the concept that everyone is equal and apply it to a popular moral question: there's a train that won't stop and it's heading into two different directions - one has two people who you're unfamiliar with while the other has only one. The train is currently heading towards those two people but you have the option of pushing a switch so that it goes the other way. By the standard of humans being equal, unless you're a psychopath and want to see more being killed for the shits and giggles, you'd then make it so you kill the 1 over the 2. But humans aren't really equal, so imagine - if we happened to understand the context of each and every single life and one human had more "potential" to live a better life than all two combined, wouldn't we kill the two over the one? I think you get the point.

Okay, monologue over. And...

//out.

Perhaps you are just not looking deep enough into the matter.

 

[Stephano]

The problem is that some people took the phrase "All people have equal rights" and transformed it into "All people are equal".
The first one is about giving everyone a chance and the second one about dumbing down children in school so fantasy can be turned into reality.

 

[Cellmold]

Predictive systems in assumed reality score more points of objectivity than the comforting blanket of lies that imply we all start with the same basic chances.

 

[indra]

How are children being dumbed down?

 

[Kanra Jest]

Well people certainly aren't getting any smarter.

 

[á´…eparted]

All humans are not equal. You'd have to be deluded to think so.

However, we should still treat everyone as equals, and give people the best chance they can to move up if possible. I loathe the idea of excessively bringing people down though. We should not force everyone to be equivalent. Difference matters, it just needs to be fair.

 

[Kanra Jest]

Perhaps a true meritocracy is in order.

 

[great_bay]

When people say all humans are equal, what the sentence means is that all humans have an equal basic moral rights. The sentence doesn't mean all humans have the same social status like a five year old being held in the same regard as a forty year old. However, not all humans have a basic moral right.

 

[Magic Poriferan]

I can think of no really valid way to consider everyone equal. It's just that, whenever the subject of peoples' equality comes up, it is almost always because someone was using very invalid criteria to categorically deem large numbers of people superior or inferior (racism, sexism, homophobia, etc).

EDIT: I think there are many people who know something is wrong with that, but don't quite know how to articulate it, and they resort to over-simplified principles of universal equality to convey their point.

 

[á´…eparted]

EDIT: I think there are many people who know something is wrong with that, but don't quite know how to articulate it, and they resort to over-simplified principles of universal equality ro convey their point.

This is an important note, and a nuance that took me a while to learn (as I tend to take people rather literally to what they say at the risk of misreading them). One needs to pay attention to the person making their statement for a period of time. Humans naturally aren't 100% clear all the time. In particular in matters where there is an emotionally charged backing, people are much less likely to mean what they intend, or have the ability to convey it, as you said.

 

[Forever]

//out.

You commented on your code. ;o

 

[ChocolateMoose123]

Yeah. According to the Constitution all men are created equal. Except some men and women weren't considered equals. As such they aren't starting from the same gate but we are all in the same race.

Somehow now we are in a relay. It isn't fair to the fastest of us all...

Yadda yadda. Yawn.

 

[Coriolis]

Whether or not all humans are "equal" wholly depends on the metric(s) you're using.

Exactly. Moreover, I never take equality to mean identity, in other words, 100% sameness. Bakers know that 1/2 teaspoon cream of tartar plus 1/4 teaspoon baking soda is equal to 1 teaspoon of baking powder for leavening purposes. But the two combinations are not chemically identical.

So, as others have pointed out, people can be considered equal morally, or even legally (law applies equally to all). People might be considered equal when allotting airplane seats, or life jackets, etc. The most important equality, though, is external to the individual, and that is the equality of rights and opportunity that has also been mentioned. It means the playing field should not be biased against any one group or individual. Everyone has an equal chance to make the most of their individual, and often different, potential.

 

[Ursa]

This basically re-phrases the old, old question as to whether act utilitarianism is true.