Chief
~ Shmalpha ~
- Admin
- #8,226
One example: have a look at the birth dates of the top athletes in football, basketball etc.What the article points out is that the left side of politics (or, at the very least, people who are progressive in mindset and/or possess a belief in the idea of progress) is faced with a conundrum created by the inequalities within society: that some individuals are superior to others (either by dint of superior intellect or athletic ability, which are genetic insofar as can be proven at them moment) or that it is the inherent structures within that society that create the inequalities. It then goes on to demonstrate - via surveys conducted within academia - that people of a left wing bent are more likely to blame those inequalities then the inherent superiority of individuals; dismissing the scientific.
It then points out how completely at odds that point of view is with the left wing's full endorsement of climate change action.
It's worth a read, if you've got the time.
As far as things go, I don't think this is an either-or proposition. Individuals are perfectly capable of being smarter/stronger/thinking faster etc than anyone else is, but it's completely pot luck most of the time determining this kind of thing from a genetic level, or attributing things to race or to gender. Per capita, men might be physically stronger than women, yet that does not immediately entail that I could beat Rhonda Rousey in a no holes barred smackdown. However, that this is true does not detract from the embedded inequalities that can be proven exist within most governmental systems. A mixture of both - individuals of superior attributes rising to the top, regardless of where they're from, and status and/or money creating an easier path to the upper classes than experienced by someone of different attributes/beginnings - seems to me to be a more reasonable take.
They are mostly at the start of the year or mid-year, depending on whether the season starts mid-year or early in the year.
Kids sign up at an age when 6-12 months normal development is a big factor. The more developed kids are picked and trained and fast tracked. Simply because they were born closer to the start date for the season.
There are very few sports where there is inherent talent or genetic advantage. Mostly it depends on how much development they receive at an early age. This includes how much their parents can pay for close, directed personal training. How much they can take time off to ferry them to events and training.
That is, it is social factors rather than genetic factors that determine who rises to the top in most sports.
Academically, there are very few geniuses. And "genius" (however you define it) is often not an indicator of success. Many child geniuses just plod along in the middle of the pack in adulthood.
In the US the biggest factor in a child's educational development is their postcode.
Physical health correlates to income.
So, I have never been convinced that genetics is a bigger factor in many of the success stories we see. The studies show it is mostly non-genetic. That's the best place to start if you want equality of opportunity. Just placing the same opportunity in front of two people isn't a guarantee of equality of opportunity if one is poorer than the other or socially disadvantaged in other ways.