Jordan Peterson - Equity and Equality of Opportunity
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 окт 2024
- Peterson talks about the dangers related to equity and how it's been invalidated by historical data as a practical doctrine.
Source: • Q & A 2018 08 August B
Support Jordan: / jordanbpeterson
Equality of outcome is impossible. Equality of opportunity is nessicery
Why is it impossible ?
@@joshuapowell3526 some people are smarter and harder workers than others
@@joshuapowell3526 It's impossible to micromanage. But it's also discriminatory and has the added negative affect of placing people in positions they're not qualified for. All of this is just another attempt to create chaos in the system to dismantle the current structure in place. It's Marxism.
no shit
This was good but we need more of this subject as the left is putting this equity idea in our schools' curriculum. Thanks
Government and corporations now as part of their CSR. Scary
“There is nothing more unequal than the equal treatment of unequal people.” Thomas Jefferson
He was a slave owner after all...
@@dsgio7254 He was also a great man of exceptional accomplishments but it sounds like you think more of yourself.
@@mikekensington1705 Is this a serious answer ?
He was a great man etc .... but he also had slaves and he was a racist .. This is what he meant by...... unequal people ?
@@dsgio7254 When speaking truth is racist then racism is just.
@@mikekensington1705
Is this from Jordan Peterson? Anyhow...
Then you should not be offended when one is called a racist... or you......
Of course the idea of "just" racism has been debunked ... scientifically from the time the Germans adopted it in 1933....
The lucky people gifted with high IQ will always solve the problems quicker and easier than regular people. This gives them a ridiculous advantage and they will always get to the top first and have a higher income. Some say.. well if you have a low IQ just work hard. Okay. What if they guy with high IQ works hard too? Doesnt matter what you do , you will lose. This has negative effects on your socio economic status which will directly effect your mental health and brain chemistry.
its just a bit of common sense and logic shown here. But the pinko's just don't like logic much though do they. :(
Pinko?
A business hires a manager that is best qualified for the job. The business is successful and all the employees have job security. Another business hires based on the fact that they need to hire someone of a specific group, but has no real qualifications, business shuts down and everyone is out of a job. Which makes sense to do?
Seeing as communism is celebrated in liberal circles I suppose they will go with the second choice.
Unlikely scenarios.. In Europe there are such protections . do the companies fail ? Please ...
Sorry but i think the Cat logo just doesn't have any place on the video
take a walk and cool off, it's not a big deal . . .
I'd argue that even the idea of Equality of Opportunity is one that needs to be approached with some caution. It's only really possible to provide everyone with a very limited amount of Equality of Opportunity (things like equality before the law, equal access to certain services). But it's just not possible for different people to have the same _amounts_ and types of Opportunities in life. Why? Because Opportunities flow from Outcomes, rather than just vice versa. So as long as people freely achieve different outcomes, they (and their children) will have different amounts and types of Opportunities in life as a result.
I think the notion that equality of opportunity is desirable means that society does not perpetuate say a royal family of increasingly inbred morons who due to privilege access the highest advantage for outcomes against a crop of better candidates. There will never be equality as such but rigid social stratification is anathema and equality of opportunity is the progressive ethos that can counter such counter survivalist outcomes.
Savage Cabbage
That's what people mean by equality of opportunity; FORMAL equality under the law regardless of socioeconomic class.
Intresting Ideas Cabbage
@@marlonmoncrieffe0728 savage cabbage lol
Marlon Moncrieffe p
Dear Dr. Peterson, I am taking a Psych in Ed course right now and they give an example of equity: "If a child has hearing loss include subtitles on video presentations."
Can you please explain why this isn't equitable?
Also a child is getting sick ... his parents have no money .. Should society take care of him or let him perish ?
Very true,
What about the extreme poor health outcomes for those in the lower class? They have no opportunity, especially in America, to advance or change their status, sometimes trapped by their own relief aids that disappear if they take a higher paying job.
Mark: Anyone failing to take a higher paying position so they can hang on to government handouts has been fully rewired to doom themselves to mediocracy at best, failure at worst. Government benefits will NEVER provide one more than a minimal existence. If you are "poor", rising beyond your present circumstances will, for most of us, require risk-taking. If one is not willing to take the risk (in this case taking the better job) one remains poor. Life is filled with risks. To deny that is to deny reality. You can deny reality, but you can never deny the consequences of denying reality. It saddens me to think that you were likely taught, in American schools, that the lower class Americans have no opportunities to "advance or change their status". THAT is demonstrably false. Why do you think the world's poor are willing to crawl under walls, swim dangerous waters and cross miles of inhospitable deserts to get here? Even they know better. I have known and worked with many refugees who fled to our shores with almost nothing but a desire to work. And despite their hardships they are universally grateful to be here.
@The Mechanicals Thanks. As I recall, I had just drank way too much coffee, lol.
17 resentful lefties left the chat
Too bad we only got every fourth word of wisdom from Jordan. Darn it
“Human beings are born with different capacities, if they are free, they are not equal, and if they are equal they are not free.” Alexander Solzhenitsyn
Free to enslave others ?
He said tool....
yes he did...and?
That part
But what does equality of outcomes mean?
It means GULAG
It means that no matter how hard you work to make yourself better and make your life better, the guy next door who sleeps all days and doesn’t try will get the exact same as you do. Same pay, same house, same opportunities.
I could be wrong, but I think he's using the word "equity" incorrectly. unless I'm completely misinterpreting it, the definition of equity seems closer to equality of opportunity than equality of outcome. I agree with what he meant, but the word confusion bugged me a bit.
yes, you are misinterpreting it
Equity at my company means to pay fairly for the job. They want to make sure there is no gender gap. They supposedly review the data. I haven't seen any mass raise to all women, so I assume it is not real where I am lol. I am in tech.
What about community capitalism? Or a baseline equity? Not everyone is or deserves to be a rocket surgeon, and not everyone should be stuck pumping your lawn to make it by, saving to maybe get a higher education, simply put, scholarships aren't enough considering the amount of those and the amount of jobs requiring such education, and even if there was an exact amount, then what about those who then prove they weren't worthy of the job or even fail the school system for it, people can't be expected to gain scholarship from a special education school (little to none for academic prowess) and they also shouldn't be expected to be beat up and chased, being called gay all the time (I wasn't gay BTW) just to get an education that could lead to a scholarship, with stress of situation causing much degradation in informational absorption rates, so those willing to go through what those today do just to survive, should be able to save up money and get a higher education (current prices seem too steep to allow it to be socialized, simply put, everyone would want to go even when they didn't need to, or maybe even deserve to) we have many sources of energy that don't require massive input or resources to maintain or run, ones that aren't seen as pollutive (solar, wind..., nuclear, rather than any form of post modern solar like coal or fossil fuels), we have many forms of automation, why make people live in a system that makes them work when many of them don't have to? So many people want jobs to be created, its easy to create a job you don't need to, I could go around punching people who litter, and also not pick up the litter, this gives a job to those who clean the litter and also to the paramedics, I don't see a problem other than my fist getting g sore, do you? (I hope you do see a problem, I see many, I'm just trying to be funny) we live in a world where we can give people all the tools needed to prove themselves, a world where we can allow those who don't raise up to the bar, and who raise children who don't or can't either to show themselves, some of these people didn't ask to be born, we can give them options if they feel that there is a cycle that they can break, they can live a satisfying life and not need to pass their problems down to the rest of us, these people, once known, can even be given the help they need to love fulfilling lives and bring forth offspring that live up to societies standards, or even surpasses them, we can allow them to make a choice even, to help remove patterns and code from the populous that is deemed detrimental, though we don't have to go that far, as it is or boarders on eugenics, but we can at least allow them to choose a better life for their offspring, and the system for that needs to be improved too, foster care and related systems often have people just as abusive if not worse in them, and sometimes children end up in homes and situations worse then they left from
Good points except when he starts talking about iq tests. As a psychologist he should know that it is a dubious form of test as there are many different forms of intelligence. To hint that you need 145 in an iq to be a success as a lawyer for example is absurd. The ability to recognize patterns and sequences does not necessarily mean you have the emotional intelligence and written and oral fluency to be a success there for example.
late reply, but I think he was merely illustrating the wide variety of abilities we have as individuals.
Every good psychologist knows that IQ is the single best predictor of future success in life. It's not dubious, it's the most reliable predictor we currently have.
@@florisr9 listen to his point, he's not saying that IQ isn't the best predictor of future success in life, he's saying that equaling IQ to intelligence is dubious. Anyway, JP didn't say that an IQ of 145 is a requirement for success in law, he merely said it would help a lot
@mattbod, there's no such thing as your bulshit emotional intelligence.
@@georgestate9384 say it for the people in the back
I doubt that I agree with the so-called "truism" articulated near the beginning of the video: "The interests of individuals and society are best served by opening the door to the participation of all who are qualified, regardless of attributes in domains that have nothing to do with the qualifications for the position."
For example, people don't usually get to keep their day jobs when they are caught committing serious crimes. However, if the crime has nothing to do with the person's occupation, then the attribute that has manifested itself in criminal activity has nothing to do with doing the job that the person normally does.
For a more specific example, suppose that a man is a skilled accounting clerk who isn't aware of or participating in any illegal activity at work, but he recently murdered his children, specifically because his girlfriend decided that she wanted to break up with him, and she anticipated that he would react in a hostile way if she disclosed the real reason, so she instead invented the pretext that there was some strong but unexplained incompatibility between her and his children, even though she actually liked his children very much. In that scenario, the door of a court of law should open, and later the door of a prison should open. For such a man to simply continue to participate as an accounting clerk might not serve the interests of individuals and society.
Does anybody disagree, with a reason for disagreeing?
I’m sure he would make a great accountant for the prison commissary.
He is qualified for that work.