"5 Greatest Myths" #2 All men are created equal (posted for discussion)

[audtatious]

****The following is simply up for discussion. It's from some blog that was pointed out to me thus who the author is probably does not matter when discussing the writings.***** - audtatious

"That all men are equal is a proposition which, at ordinary times, no sane individual has ever given his assent." - Aldous Huxley

While I do revere our Declaration of Independence as one of the greatest documents to have ever been written in this country and as a matter of fact, the very document that began this country, anybody who has spent time in a high school gym class locker room shower knows the lofty notion that "all men are created equal" is a big, fat ****ing lie. The Declaration of Independence states:

"We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness..."

There are several points to this statement that bear scrutiny and rebuttal.

First of all, see The World's Biggest Myths - Part I (Note: this one is about religion so I'm not posting it in this forum). We are not endowed by our Creator with anything, because our Creator was nothing other than a very, very long evolutionary process that put modern humans here only in the last two-hundred-or-so-thousand-years of a four-and-a-half-billion-year process. If endowed with anything, Natural Selection chose us over other species because mammals survived the last extinction level event 65 million years ago; because of our ability to reason and solve problems; and because of an opposable thumb that allowed us to make tools. From this, and in a relative modicum of geological time, we have molded raw materials into a modern mechanized, industrialized and computerized society capable of traveling to other planets and extinguishing ourselves in the blink of an eye with some of the most awesome goddamn power known in the universe.

The Creationists, of course, will refute that claim, some more ridiculously so than others. True Creationists - the really, really ****ing stupid ones - believe this planet is only six or so thousand years old, and that dinosaur bones were put here by Satan to confuse us. Other Creationists concede the planet is much older, but still insist we could not have gotten here without divine intervention. Since I am done with rebuttals on that point in Myth #1, I won't get into the ludicrousness of that argument again.

Second of all, and on the notion that we have an unalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, it all depends on who you talk to. If you seek those things, then you hold them dear. If you are a war-mongering, savage, archaic *******, who just can't get over the fact that there are happier, more fulfilled and wealthier people than you - like most other people on this planet and practically everyone in the Middle East - you not only don't hold these concepts dear, you want to kick the ever-loving **** out of those of us with the audacity to not only pursue them, but to have had ancestors with the intelligence and forethought to have written them down in a document that began a nation.

Now, that doesn't mean you shouldn't assert your individual right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, but it does mean that you're probably going to have to kick back frequently and repeatedly in order to make your point and continue your pursuit with those who might otherwise take these rights away from you. More than half the world would like to take our Declaration of Independence and ignite an atom bomb with it right over our heads to show us how wrong we are.

Divinely endowed or not, the fact is that all men are not created equal. In the first place, we need only look around us to realize this isn't true. In the second place, it especially wasn't true at the time it was written. As the Declaration traveled to the hands of King George III in August 1776, it was printed in a popular London periodical called, The Gentleman's Magazine. In September of that year, the Declaration itself was followed by an editorial from an anonymous author pointing out some obvious inconsistencies in the Preamble of our Declaration:

"We hold (they say) these truths to be self-evident: That all men are created equal. In what are they created equal? Is it in size, understanding, figure, moral or civil accomplishments, or situation of life? Every plough-man knows that they are not created equal in any of these....That every man hath an unalienable right to liberty; and here the words, as it happens, are not nonsense, but they are not true: slaves there are in America, and where there are slaves, there liberty is alienated. If the Creator hath endowed man with an unalienable right to liberty, no reason in the world will justify the abridgement of that liberty, and a man hath a right to do everything that he thinks proper without control or restraint; and upon the same principle, there can be no such things as servants, subjects, or government of any kind whatsoever. In a word, every law that hath been in the world since the formation of Adam, gives the lie to this self-evident truth, (as they are pleased to term it); because every law, divine or human, that is or hath been in the world, is an abridgement of man's liberty."

Historical references to slavery and physical attributes in a locker room shower notwithstanding, let's just focus on cerebral strength and talent for a minute.

Everyone must concede that there are people smarter than ourselves, if only in relatively small quantifiable numbers (as in my case), and conversely, most everyone will concede that there are a lot of people dumber than ourselves. The latter is a fact of life for which I personally am eternally grateful and which continues to provide endless subject matter for this on-going blog of life observational and thought-provoking essays.

In the former, however, we have the creation and evolution of governments, the writing of poetry and literature, the creation of art, mathematics and science. Fortunately for us, and perhaps if only for the sheer numbers of us that have existed since we crawled down from the trees and began to walk upright, a lot of really smart people have figured out how to write a Constitution; how to unlock the secrets of chemistry, geology and physics; how to paint, sculpt and create works of artistic beauty; how to split an atom; how to structure financial institutions and free market systems; how to propel rockets to the moon; how to make bread; and how to make water run uphill.

People smarter that ourselves built pyramids, invented the printing press, discovered electromagnetism, invented calculus, drilled for oil and built refineries. Man has discovered how the planets rotate around the Sun and how far away the stars are; he has made Cheetos and learned how to grow okra; he has invented the light bulb and how to manufacture automobiles. He created the Internet and built computers capable of thinking at light speed.

But can any one of us do all these things? Or even some of these things? Of course not. No one has all of, or more likely, any of these abilities.

Specific people at specific points in time have accomplished the amazing, the wonderful, the sublime and have discovered the previously unknown. But not everyone - and in fact almost no one - can write a Fifth Symphony or paint a Mona Lisa or write a paper about Special Relativity or explain how a Lava Lamp works.

If all men were created equal, we should be able to go to practically anyone for anything and get the same results. If all men were created equal we could all be as dumb as Rosie O'Donnell or as smart as Stephen Hawking. But exactly where along the intelligence continuum might we all lay? And who would make such a decision?

Lucky for us, none of us are equal, and therefore all of us lay at different points along the continuum of intelligence and talent. Otherwise, we would not hesitate to fly in an aircraft piloted by, say, Chris Rock. Or listen to a Concerto written by Dale Earnhardt. Or have the Principia Mathematica explained to us by Ashlee Simpson. Or live in a house designed by Glen Campbell.

And so, the only truth to me that is self-evident is that all men are precisely not created equal. In fact most of us are very unequal in terms of size, strength, mental capacity, stamina, health, and personality. And not only are most people on this planet not Chuck Yaeger, not Wolfgang Mozart, not Isaac Newton or Frank Lloyd Wright, but most of the people on this planet aren't even experts in their own chosen field of endeavors. It takes a hell of a lot to get to the top of any mental pursuit, and the rest of us are just compass points on a continuum of lessening degrees of mediocrity.

I maintain, however, that there are a lot more people huddled at the lower end of the intelligence continuum than there are at the top, or even in the middle. One would expect an equal distribution of general intelligence in the continuum of all intelligence levels, averaged over time. But since knowledge is neither static nor finite, those deemed intelligent in their own time may well be considered dumb as **** in another time. A lot of really smart people, for example, thought the world was flat until Eratosthenes, a Greek mathematician, proved the world was round in the 3rd century BCE. Plus, we're learning new stuff every day. The total body of knowledge is being re-written about every two years, and technology is increasing at an exponential rate. And people generally smarter than most of us - i.e., people with whom we are not equal - are going to take us to our future.

Ray Kurzweil, a futurist and published author had this to say in his extensive web-essay, The Law of Accelerating Returns:

"An analysis of the history of technology shows that technological change is exponential, contrary to the common-sense "intuitive linear" view. So we won't experience 100 years of progress in the 21st century -- it will be more like 20,000 years of progress (at today's rate). The "returns," such as chip speed and cost-effectiveness, also increase exponentially. There's even exponential growth in the rate of exponential growth. Within a few decades, machine intelligence will surpass human intelligence, leading to The Singularity -- technological change so rapid and profound it represents a rupture in the fabric of human history. The implications include the merger of biological and nonbiological intelligence, immortal software-based humans, and ultra-high levels of intelligence that expand outward in the universe at the speed of light."

Clearly, all men are not created equal and as time marches on, I think our differences are apt to get ever vaster.

[Cold_Zero]

Sorry man, I couldnt get through the first couple of paragraphs before I lost interest. I am not a fan of egalitarianism... I like how he resorts to name calling in order to 'refute' creationists.

[rn79870]

Created equal references a social system of serfs and peons and wine drinking lords with turkey leg eating kings and barons and prince and princesses. We'll have none of that here, instead we're all born equal into this land. There can be no Sir rn79870 although it might not be a bad idea.

All men are created equal. What isn't equal is the opportunities and the abilities to respond those opportunities. Phelps is a better swimmer than I am, but he wasn't born a better swimmer, he applied himself to an endless regiment of work and dedication to achieve that goal.

So yes, all men are created equal here in America and in so doing, each is offered an opportunity to reach for the sky, or stare at the gutter. It's opportunities that are not equally distributed.

[audtatious]

It's posted for discussion. The first few paragraphs and some of his ramblings reflect is atheism. He does make interesting points concerning equality (from a non-biblical perspective)

[Sentientbydesign]

All men are created equal. What isn't equal is the opportunities and the abilities to respond those opportunities. Phelps is a better swimmer than I am, but he wasn't born a better swimmer, he applied himself to an endless regiment of work and dedication to achieve that goal.

Sorry Bob, I don't like coming over here, because of the large expanse of useless knowledge that resides between my ears.

Phelps WAS born to be a better swimmer than you. How? His body is proportioned in such a manner that he has specific advantages compared to an average man.

His training and determination are the only equal parts.

The same goes for bowlers (I am one, so I'm pulling from that great aforementioned expanse). Short to medium height bowlers are far better built for the sport than I am (6'3"). The only advantage we have is more leverage and a longer pendulum.

But in a sport where the goal is to crouch with your back upright and your shoulders square to your target, tall people have an extreme disadvantage.

I do agree with the blogger that some of the statements in the phrasing were hypocritical given the time. But I also believe that the phrase was taken out of its intended context (however unfocused that might be).

[audtatious]

Phelps is a better swimmer than I am, but he wasn't born a better swimmer, he applied himself to an endless regiment of work and dedication to achieve that goal.

That's not totally true. His physical makeup is what helps him be as fast as he is. You can take someone like me with a big chest, short arms/legs and I could follow the exact training that Phelps had throughout my life and I would never be near as good as Phelps.

[96Qowner]

I dunno, hard to argue it literally. Of course all men are not created equal.

But the point is that a governmental system should provide all men with equal freedom. ie, access to the benefits of the society. This is in direct contrast to monarchies, where a small portion of the society, by virtue of whom they were born to, had freedoms far greater than the average man.

So, for purposes of governance, all men are to be considered equal, with the right to as much life, liberty and pursuit of happiness as their talents allow them.

People often forget that "freedom" in the USA means that no one should be able to prevent others from taking full advantage of opportunities. It has never given anyone the right to have what others have. You are still expected to compete for it. In this country, who you were born to does not determine your opportunities. There are countless stories of Americans who have overcome disadvantages to compete and win, over those who are more fortunate. It happens ALL the time.

[audtatious]

I agree with that. I think the author may have intentionally avoided that in order to get people to think?

The flip side of the coin is that there are always going to be "poor" people due to low intelligence, lack of opportunity or laziness. In a utopian society, like Bob mentioned in another thread, everyone has access to everything and the differences between rich and poor are no longer an issue as everyone is on equal grounds. The problem with this is that once people have what they want they no longer feel the need to stive to reach some goal, thus they turn listless and lazy. In the utopian society, someone has to be working and if that person who is working is not being awarded for their efforts then they too will stop trying to reach a goal they are not _allowed_ to achieve, thus nobody works and society comes to a crashing halt. Then it's man vs man simply to survive.