WHY NO ONE IS BETTER THEN ANYONE ELSE
(AKA "All men (as generalized into all humans) are created equal")
No one is BETTER then anyone else (as a person) and therefore no one is more DESERVING then anyone else (as a person).
The reason we can't claim someone is better or worse then someone else is because we would need to be able create a point rating system to compare people with. Any attempt to do so would be extremely arbitrary because there is no absolute way to determine three things:
1) What qualities (of the millions abstract qualities of a human being there are) are ranked in what value sort order?
2) Within each abstract quality there is no way to un-arbitrarily (or absolutely) scientifically formulate exactly how many points a person should get for each quality at any given time.
3) What time frame range do we globally rate that person given that people are changing all the time from moment to moment.
Sure we know that some people are not equal in many specific ways like intelligence and ability to make a lot of money but these specific inequalities do not allow you to conclude that a person is better or worse as a person then another.
Lets start with the first problem. How do we absolutely know where love (giving and receiving) is on the human quality list? What about integrity, honesty, sense of humor (giving and receiving), intelligence, honor, beauty, charm, thrift, cleverness, creativity, imagination, ethics, social skill, 50 yard dash, various talents, various ages, various physical and mental abilities... the list goes into the millions. How do we know where these all rank?
Well we don't. Our qualities are just too abstract.
How could we ever all agree on a specific panel of judges that could make the decision for us? We never could. How could we agree to even use a panel of judges? How could we agree who gets nominated for the panel? We never could.
And even if we could judge what each abstract quality is worth, how are we going to figure out just how much of that quality a person has at any given time? What scientific method could can we all agree on or even have a majority agree on? How would we un-arbitrarily decide even that?
In addition to that people are changing from moment to moment... one day they do something good and another they do something bad. So for how long do we rate that person with our arbitrary rating?
People's behavior (or thinking) does not define their whole entire being forever. Any attempt to do so would be a gross overgeneralization.
But what about a person who murders another? Isn't THAT person BAD?
No. Because BAD is an overgeneralized global rating of a person's whole being which requires a comparison rating system of which makes no sense to have.
Ranking specific behaviors with specific goals in mind like how well you do a speech is fine and has utility.
Ranking people is irrational and has only one purpose... to justify selfishness, greed and the abuse of power.
I wrote this article because the powerful want to justify their greed and selfishness and power abuse by claiming that they are superior (as people) and that is why they got where they got and conversely the sick and poor are inferior people and that is why they are where they are. WRONG! It's because of better and worse circumstances that determine that.
For example our genetic code and our learned experiences (how are parents treat us and what our schools are like) are conditions we inherit and we have no choice in. These conditions determine how we think/feel/and behave. Anyone who thinks we can simply "will-power" fix all our adversities equally and without help is either stupid, obtuse or ignorant.
Ok I was just testingÉ there are no stupid, obtuse or ignorant peopleÉbecause those labels are defining the WHOLE person and are overgeneralizations. All labels on human beings are overgeneralizations. However there are people who have much ignorance, often think narrowly and there are people with low IQ's and people with combinations of all of these traits.
Having better or worse conditions does not make people better or worse as people. Having better or worse conditions then another does not make someone more of less deserving (as a person) then another.
I wrote this article because the rich and powerful are not superior people, they are people with more fortunate conditions. Many use their fortunateness (gotten from a broken system) to justify their continueing power grab which is at the expense of everyone else.