(March 20, 2017 at 8:36 pm)InquiringMind Wrote: Can someone explain to me why talent, intelligence, and good looks don't quality as "unearned privileges"?

I think although you could argue that these are 'unearned', I doubt they would afford you a great deal of privilege, outside of the relevant professional circle. Any accompanying fame, yes that might give you greater privilege, but that could then be considered to be earned.

(March 21, 2017 at 7:38 am)ukatheist Wrote:

(March 20, 2017 at 8:36 pm)InquiringMind Wrote: Can someone explain to me why talent, intelligence, and good looks don't quality as "unearned privileges"?

I think although you could argue that these are 'unearned', I doubt they would afford you a great deal of privilege, outside of the relevant professional circle. Any accompanying fame, yes that might give you greater privilege, but that could then be considered to be earned.

No traits inherently give a person privilege but good looks and intelligence are definitely among traits that close to being a universal advantage.

There's not just some professional circles that appreciate intelligence and good looks, it's pretty much world wide.

(March 21, 2017 at 4:09 am)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I confess to being a little conflicted over the whole 'social justice warrior' thingy. I approve of social justice (the idea that society should be just as opposed to unjust), but some of the crusaders for a just society are, quite frankly, a little nuts.

I liken the whole thing to PETA. I'm all for treating animals ethically, but the idea that I'm a murderer for wearing leather shoes (and yes, I have been called out for that in RL) is simply stupid.

Boru

There's Social Justice Warriors, and then there's Social Justice Warriors.

Laying any reservations about talent (and intelligence) being the product of practice and determination, or good looks having at least a little to do with hygiene and learned habits...they would be unearned privilege if you were "just born that way"...wouldn't they be?

As to earned privilege..this is just my experience so it only goes so far...but an earned privilege is generally something you get for accomplishing some task.  Run a 5 minute mile, get out of PT the next day.  Post big efficiency numbers, write your own schedule.  I suppose it helps to have as much unearned privilege like the above as you can get to secure the earned privilege, yeah?  

Being born a "fit" person helps you hit the 5 minute mark (and sure maybe alot of running does the same thing, but hey - nice to be born skinny with long legs regardless, amiright)..and maybe being intelligent helps you post the big numbers (or you could just be a diligent performer that follows a proven method...but again...helps not to be dumb either way).

As far as this relates to social justice, unearned privilege does seem to have an effect on earned privilege, doesn't it?  The question for an sjw must be whether or not this is acceptable, or to what extent we might accept it.  So what do you think.  Is unearned privilege that helps us with earned privilege a blanket okay..or do you have some reservations about that?  Should my being more talented, more intelligent, and better looking than yourself be the metrics by which an earned privilege is decided between us?

I haven't noted a particular tendency on the left or right to categorize intelligence and looks as earned privileges, but earned or unearned, they would be intransigent to handle directly. It wouldn't be productive to ask engineering firms to hire more people with IQs below 100 or set up an 'attractiveness assessment board' to make sure that companies on average hire average-looking people (we've got too many pretty people in the data entry department, we've got to hire someone really ugly to bring us back to average).

Making sure people on the bottom economic rung have adequate healthcare, education, and access to other resources they need to have a secure life is a reasonable provision to compensate for whatever the situation may be that is keeping them at that level, and increases the chance that those who are able to get out of it will have what they need to do so.

But it behooves the more fortunate to remember how big a role being fortunate plays in being more fortunate. If you've got drive, determination, and talent; good for you; but you don't get credit for the circumstances that made you that way, and paying it forward to help other people have better circumstances is classy.

(March 21, 2017 at 10:26 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: It wouldn't be productive to ask engineering firms to hire more people with IQs below 100

Why not? I think all these types of jobs should be filled with people that have an IQ of 85 or less.

There is such a thing as a stupid question.

(March 21, 2017 at 3:04 pm)Mister Agenda Wrote: There is such a thing as a stupid question.

Don't tell me that you are prejudiced against intellectually challenged people.

Why would I be?

That I don't think limbless people are the ideal choice for a track team barring some sort of artificial assistance doesn't mean I'm prejudiced against limbless people. In the normal use of the word, to be prejudiced against a category of person implies that the opinion does not, in fact, follow from the category. 'White men can't be good at basketball' is prejudiced. 'Limbless people can't be good at basketball without significant assistance or concessions' is not. It is factual that few basketball teams would be improved in terms of winning more competitions with a higher percentage of quadriplegics on the floor. Unless they were in super-athletic, mobility-granting exo-suits. That would be awesome.

(March 21, 2017 at 2:54 pm)KUSA Wrote:

(March 21, 2017 at 10:26 am)Mister Agenda Wrote: It wouldn't be productive to ask engineering firms to hire more people with IQs below 100

Why not? I think all these types of jobs should be filled with people that have an IQ of 85 or less.

Having trouble finding jobs?