Tag Archives: p2

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Equality is the assertion that ‘all men are created equal’ and that consequently, we are entitled to the same ‘unalienable rights’. I contest the former point, as we are constituted of attributes such as, but not limited to, intelligence and physical prowess. In a competitive environment, as in nature, how well we fulfill these criterion will determine whether or not we survive; natural selection will take its pick based on the inherent inequality within us. Thus, when a persons is quantified based on the ‘net survival skill’ he/she has, and compared to that of an ‘inferior’ being, the relation would be p1>p2 instead of p1=p2. It would thus not be logical for the relatively inferior human to be deemed the equal of a being superior in all aspects of life (this will not be subjective if they are assessed by a rubric).

This inequality does not connote any thing in the field of politics. Whether morality and ethics are intrinsic or empirical, we have learned to embrace ‘inequality’, as the alternative would be mass genocide and forced sterilization, as witnessed by the Third Reich’s Holocaust. We have learned to empathize with and accept the flaws of one another, and have established laws because of this capability. Equality is thus nonexistent, but we must not discriminate because of this. //

What are the weak points? Any logical fallacies? Anything you agree/disagree with? Which points could I expand upon? Thanks in advance!
What do you mean?

On “Equality”. Any flaws in reasoning?

Equality is the assertion that ‘all men are created equal’ and that consequently, we are entitled to the same ‘unalienable rights’. I contest the former point, as we are constituted of attributes such as, but not limited to, intelligence and physical prowess. In a competitive environment, as in nature, how well we fulfill these criterion will determine whether or not we survive; natural selection will take its pick based on the inherent inequality within us. Thus, when a persons is quantified based on the ‘net survival skill’ he/she has, and compared to that of an ‘inferior’ being, the relation would be p1>p2 instead of p1=p2. It would thus not be logical for the relatively inferior human to be deemed the equal of a being superior in all aspects of life (this will not be subjective if they are assessed by a rubric).

This inequality does not connote any thing in the field of politics. Whether morality and ethics are intrinsic or empirical, we have learned to embrace ‘inequality’, as the alternative would be mass genocide and forced sterilization, as witnessed by the Third Reich’s Holocaust. We have learned to empathize with and accept the flaws of one another, and have established laws because of this capability. Equality is thus nonexistent, but we must not discriminate because of this. //

What are the weak points? Any logical fallacies? Anything you agree/disagree with? Which points could I expand upon? Thanks in advance!
What do you mean?