Why menial labor befits 90% of the population

[larrytetris]

As for the "better tenth" theory, i thought it was a parody so i didn't take it seriously

*highfives*

It was partially inspired by WEB Du Bois and his ideas about the Talented Tenth and social cohesion, opposite of Booker T Washington. Also a reference in there to the Great Society concept from the mid-20th century.

[Harganslee]

This is a very interesting read, Larry and I understand that it reflects a perverse methodology to achieve a solution and that it should not be taken personally.

The simple application of a rule which dicatates that those who do not achieve X will not have the ability to breed and will be forced into a labor force to support those who did achieve X is enough motivation to change the outcome of our current success rate in schools.  The psychological impact would be profound.  This is the biggest point that I would argue because that variable alone evinces that your modest proposal isn't necessarily the only or best solution.

Many of those who excel today are motivated to do so.  If everyone held that same standard of motivation, then some of these more successful students would certainly fall below the cutoff line in your proposed plan.  Likewise, other brilliant and gifted students who were previously unsuccessful due to their lack of motivation may show far more promising results.

It seems ironic that these otherwise successful individuals would be eliminated from the job market.  The motivation for those brilliant and gifted students who previously would not have excelled only extends until the end of his schooling.  After that, there is no real incentive to be productive and the motivation forced upon them becomes null and void.  They can go back to their unproductive nature.  For those who would have previously succeeded due to their motivation but who were later disqualified from part of the top percentile because they were not as brilliant and gifted as the others, this unsatisfying result (lack of productivity) would not necessarily hold true.  One's work ethic is vital to success.

Due to this factor alone, I think the plan will fail.  I find it interesting that you would not exterminate the intelligent within the masses as the irony will perpetuate.  For it is those who are a part of the masses with the intelligence to realize this coupled with their own sense of motivation, who will be advocates of an opposition to this proposal.  A revolution is inevitable.  As the collective bottom percentile far outnumbers that of the top percentile, your thesis of meritocracy will be presented with an antithesis.  The resolution must be a new synthesis which will most-likely undergo the same process in the times to come.


As for a Darwinian analysis, I think this proposal would align more closely to "artificial selection."  I have my own thoughts on how this could be better achieved.

On a personal note, I fully support the statement: "all men are created unequal."

[chopin]

On a personal note, I fully support the statement: "all men are created unequal."

If all men are created unequal, doesn't that mean that all men are created equally?

[Paul676]

You fail to take into account late bloomers into the equation larry.

[larrytetris]

You fail to take into account late bloomers into the equation larry.

Ah, but that's exactly the point!

The absurdity of the solution highlights the craze of a strict meritocracy.

First, it's impossible to enforce. How many people would actually allow themselves to be tested on? How would we keep 90% of the population from breeding?

Second, it leaves no room for error. If we're only allowing the top 10% of the population to breed, we'll soon be left with increasingly smarter people with an increasingly smaller standard deviation of, for example, IQ. As the intelligence of the bottom 10% over the course of a few generations increases, a simple error on whatever examination may be administered would mean an extinguished future excluded from the top 10%.

Third, the connotative language hopefully implied that meritocracy would allow such people as the drug dealer that was mentioned to remain prevalent; that primary education would be the limit of formal education, and any further education by the bottom 90% would be illegal; that, assuming a one-to-one pairing of males to females in the upper 10%, each couple would need to give birth to 18 children to maintain a steady population; that standing armies would essentially be human shields much like Stalin's resistance against Hitler in WWII; etcetc. All of these are outright ridiculous.

Fourth, as Harg brought up, there would be inevitable revolution. It will not remove the competitiveness of jobs (everyone in your job market, be it skilled labor or manual labor, are artificially filtered to be of approximately equal in skill level and credentials). Bitterness and discontent would reign; Lockean philosophy would be cited again and again. Foreign nations would interfere out of fear of the US becoming to strong, and aid the bottom 90%.


In sum, this is as brilliant a plan as eating babies.

[DAS44]

Woe to those who attack babies
http://americanfolklore.net/folklore/2010/...a_tar_baby.html

[Harganslee]

If all men are created unequal, doesn't that mean that all men are created equally?

Absolutely not.  The law of non contradiction states otherwise.  o.o

[Someone2knoe]

I actually read through this finally. I don't agree with most of the stuff in it, hopefully its just being satirical.

Even if you have a system that seems perfect you will never have a perfect society. There will always be human error. Many people jumped on to communism because a lot of it was good on paper, but when it got implemented it didn't even follow its own ideals.

[Magnanimous]

It's also completely arbitrary to decide on ten percent. If the person at the 89.9999th percentile has something extraordinary to offer, you're really just shooting yourself in the foot.

Plus, we all know how subjective standardized testing is... It's functionally impossible to fairly rank criticisms of The Scarlet Letter. Or any book. (Or most things.) Math and science are more objective, but you can't use them alone to judge someone's intelligence.

This sounds like serious business.

[Someone2knoe]

Testing is completely retarded.

For example I took a test and a question asked for the name of a person and it described him. I looked at the answer key and the letter I looked like L. So I put L.

The correct answer was I. That was the only question I missed on the entire exam. I brought it up to the professor and he said "I'm not a mind reader, and also its obvious that the letter i comes after H" and didn't change my grade.


Answer L was the title of a song, I would have to be an idiot to think it was the name of a person.

Therefore even though I put in the effort to study, I was downgraded by circumstance. Therefore the test didn't do its job, it did not assess what I had learned.

Another example:

I used a pen on a calculus exam. I was absent the day she said she wont accept the work in pen. I missed nothing on the exam and I was rewarded with a 0%. The exam grade assessed that I had learned nothing, when indeed I had learned everything required.

[chopin]

Testing is completely retarded.

For example I took a test and a question asked for the name of a person and it described him. I looked at the answer key and the letter I looked like L. So I put L.

The correct answer was I. That was the only question I missed on the entire exam. I brought it up to the professor and he said "I'm not a mind reader, and also its obvious that the letter i comes after H" and didn't change my grade.
Answer L was the title of a song, I would have to be an idiot to think it was the name of a person.

Therefore even though I put in the effort to study, I was downgraded by circumstance. Therefore the test didn't do its job, it did not assess what I had learned.

Another example:

I used a pen on a calculus exam. I was absent the day she said she wont accept the work in pen. I missed nothing on the exam and I was rewarded with a 0%. The exam grade assessed that I had learned nothing, when indeed I had learned everything required.

Nice

[DanielKCrandall]

I think Larry needs to to edit his first post to include the phrase "THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE IRONIC" in big red letters.

[Paul676]

"In sum, this is as brilliant a plan as eating babies."

But I LIKE eating babies

[Imperatore_Magia]

I think Larry needs to to edit his first post to include the phrase "THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE IRONIC" in big red letters.

That should be apparent to anyone who reads it.  If not at first, then certainly before they've read more than a few paragraphs.

This, however, doesn't change the fact that a small portion of the population would agree with this philosophy--however satirical it may be--despite valid arguments in its opposition.

[jujube]

YEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAH
GET THAT PHONE YESSSSSSS
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA