I've had a fleeting interest in mathematics. I like the precision. I like its irrefutable arguments. I like that each problem has a correct or a number of correct answers.
The notation used in mathematics is very precise. Each has very specific, irrefutable purpose. We have a sign for 'the sum of', we have a sign for multiplication; we have the factorial we have a sign for 'greater than'; we have a sign for 'subset of'. There is even a sign for 'not equal to'
We also have a sign for equals.
There are separate signs for; approximately equal to, greater than or equal to, and for less than or equal to. And they each have very clear and specific meanings. They are not interchangeable.
I just cannot accept, actually refuse to accept that we are all equal. Which brings me back to the title.
is not equal to
This does not mean that one is less than the other. This does not mean that either is any less worthy. Brian Cox CBE is one of my all time favourite actors. Brian Cox OBE has done great things for the absolutely vital promotion of science.
I think it is despicable that equality is promoted as something that in some way would be a pinnacle of achievement for a society. In order to be equal we would have limit ourselves, our families, our species. Which is vastly, vastly counterproductive. Read 1984. Look at China under Mao or Cambodia under the Khymer Rouge.
We should exploiting, improving, promoting the diversity that we have among us. There needs to be an acceptance of the fact that is the bell curve. That it applies to everything in nature. To ignore it, to deny it is to make it impossible to utilise it.
I am wholeheartedly in favour of a fairer society. Absolutely this should be one humanities primary objectives. But if you start with the premise that we are all equal then it is just morally wrong and an avoidance of confronting things that need to be confronted.
An example.
15% of us have an IQ of less than 85. This also means that there are 15% of us that have an IQ in excess of 115. If we are not willing to accept that then we will not be able to put the supports in place to assist the former or to make the most of the latter.
Of course we can build our education system around providing for the middle part of the bell curve and, in the most part, within 2 standard deviations either side of the mean of any particular aspect of education the same education system will be appropriate.
But if we want to have a fairer society and for that society to move forward, we must acknowledge that both extremes of any bell curve need to be considered. Both of these extremes need to be valued within society which means ensuring that their development allows them contribute fully. You can't do that if you assume each is equally capable.
Education would always be one of my first considerations, but the same rules apply elsewhere. We are not equal, none of us. And we should be celebrating that and making the most of it.
Comments