Intellectual discrimination

[stevensen]

Intellect as the basis for discrimination

Word web defines discrimination as, ‘Unfair treatment of a person or group on the basis of prejudice.’ If a person were to suffer the consequences of something that he is not culpable for, then he can be legitimately said to have been discriminated against. Some of the most common bases of prejudice that are more or less universally accepted as cases of discrimination are discrimination on the basis of, color, caste, sex, religion, race etc.

In most progressive nations of the world, laws exist, that prohibit such discriminations as the ones cited above. We all agree that the segregation of men on some or all of the criteria of discrimination as listed above does not have a scientific basis, for the color of one’s skin has never made a person any worse or any better than he already is, and the same may be said of the rest. But there is one underlying assertion besides the one just stated, that we also implicitly accept if we agree on our initial examples of discrimination. We accept that a man is not responsible for the features and natural properties he is born with, we agree that since the circumstances of a man’s birth is not his choice, he can not be held as being responsible for the same, and as a consequence we can not have criteria which are determined at one’s birth and over which one has no control whatsoever, to be valid grounds for distribution segregation. We can not, for example, make physical prowess a basis for discrimination. Is the possession of superior physical prowess not an advantage? Of course it is, but the man who is born with average physical abilities can not be held accountable for this deficiency in his constitution, for the natural gift of physical prowess is something that is beyond a man’s control. We can not therefore have weight lifting as a basis for distribution segregation, because the very foundation for the determination of distribution in this case is flawed.

Why then have distribution segregation based upon intellect? If we were to determine the distribution function by, say having an Einstein or a Shakespeare as the lower limit, most of us would end up with nothing. We would have nothing to grudge against the truly extraordinary brains except the fact that not everybody can be an Einstein or a Shakespeare. Not every one is born with that level of intellect. Why then have this segregation based upon intellect, which grows more pronounced as we dig deeper into average intellect? Are we not punishing a man who is not perhaps as smart as the majority, simply because he was not born with that level of intellect? Is this not discrimination? Can a man be held responsible, just because he is born with fewer brains than his peers? If one day we were suddenly to make farm labor or factory labor as the basis for distribution discrimination, will all men with superior intellect be able to prove themselves superior in this field as well? Discrimination then, on the basis of physical labor or on the basis of intellect is as good or as bad as the other.

Is there then no criteria to determine effective distribution segregation? There is, there is one criterion, which may be used as an effective distribution segregation function. If we were to have a distribution function based solely upon individual effort, then we can have a just distribution segregation, one for which a man may be held genuinely accountable. The basis of distribution segregation should change from one based on abilities to one based upon endeavors. The existence of distribution segregation based upon ability is the acceptance of discrimination based upon the natural gift of intellect, for the presence of which no man has ever truly labored for and equally for the absence of which, no one has actually sinned for.

[Edelweiss]

Published!