Quote:
Originally Posted by Poetry
Our means of reproduction never hinged on rape. It just was the most successful way of truly conquering your enemies and claiming a territory with lasting success.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poetry
But rape has been a very necessary function of society. Most, if not all, of us would not be here if our ancestors weren't talented and successful rapists.
|
...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poetry
So, at one time, successfully being able to rape and have reproductive offspring was of top priority and, therefore, top value. (In fact, in some countries, it still is.)
And if you're saying that ability to rape successfully is no longer of any value, you're also saying that values change as society changes.
|
but not our country, and not in today's society, which i think is the context of which the question was asked. would a different scoring system be needed in the future? absolutely. but the thought that every one is equal (some people are just better at other things and other people are better at others) or that somehow nature compensates for a deficiency somehow is ridiculous.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poetry
Which means that if any such study as you suggest was performed, it would only be able to apply to one time period.
|
yup, but it'd be worth it.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poetry
And since there are currently a total of three (theorized) universal laws (and even that is under much debate) because societies have such varying values and ideas of talents at any given time, that further causes the proposed study to only be able to assign quantified values to talents in one small section of society during one brief time period.
|
which laws are you referring to?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poetry
Even with that, you have to get your researchers to agree on how to assign values to "talents" and behaviors. (Not to mention, behaviors is an entirely other mess.)
|
i could care less about behaviors. also, i'm not making a prescriptive statement about what talents are bad and good, but i think you're getting too specific. think of it as IQ tests for more than just your IQ. not degrees or technical skills, but innate abilities like "probability to attract opposite sex after making an approach" or "rate at which person decreases their run time" or "number of fights entered/fights won"
this "different but equal" business sounds eerily similar to "separate but equal" when in fact we're all together and unequal.