Chapter 1: “Equal Chances” Fallacies
18th Century: Jean-Jacques Rousseau
-expressed the essence of the social justice vision
“The equality which nature established among men and the inequality which they have instituted among themselves.”
-he envisioned a world where all classes, races, and other subdivisions of the human species would have equal chances in all endeavors–other things being equal
Problem:
-the more other things there are, influencing outcomes, the lower the chances of all those other things being equal
-in the real world, there is seldom anything resembling the equal outcomes that might be expected if all factors affecting outcomes were the same for everyone
Examples:
1-American sports
-blacks are very over-represented in professional basketball
-whites in professional tennis
-Hispanics in Major League Baseball
-there are more Canadians than Americans in hockey
**even though America’s population is eight times the population of Canada
-there are more Sweden hockey players even though California is four times in population
2-Climate
-in older climates there are more opportunities to develop ice skating skills
-climate differences are among the numerous differences that facilitate the development of capabilities in particular people
“At the heart of the social justice vision is the assumption that, because economic and other disparities among human beings greatly exceed and differences in their innate capacities, these disparities are evidence or proof of the effects of such human vices as exploitation and discrimination.”
-these vices are in fact among the many influences that prevent different groups of people
-human vices have no monopoly as causes of economic and other disparities
-it is difficult to make the case that inequalities of outcomes can be automatically assumed to have been caused by discrimination by dominant majorities against subordinate minorities
-in fact many subordinate minorities have economically outperformed dominant majorities in many countries around the world and in many periods of history
Ex. Ottoman Empire-racial and ethnic minorities owned or operated more than half of the whole industries
-other nations included are: Chinese in Malaysia, Germans in Brazil, Lebanese in West Africa, Jews in Poland, Italians in Argentina, Indians in East Africa, Scots in Britain, Ibos in Nigeria, and Marwaris in India
***By contrast, we read reams of social justice literature without encountering a single example of the proportional representation of different groups in endeavors open to competition– in any country in the world today, or at any time over thousands of years of recorded history
Problems:
-among many factors that can prevent equal human potentialities from producing equally developed capabilities are factors over which humans have very little control
-there are innumerable things that can create unequal chances
Ex. Geography
-demonstrable inequality of capabilities, most leading to the different brands of beers in the United States can be traced back to German ancestry
-Germans were producing beer back in the day of the Roman Empire
***developed capabilities vs. innate potential for achievements
-Germans had the combination of circumstances and the skills they developed over many centuries since then are a fact of life today
-the same is true of other groups that developed particular skills in other particular endeavors in the past
-Germans are by no means unique in having particular things that they do better than many other peoples
-there are other people groups that do have things they do better than Germans
Ex. French Cuisine and Italian Cuisine; there is no specialization for German Cuisine or English Cuisine
***No individual, no institution, and no society has any control over the past
“We do not live in the past, but the past is in us.”
Point:
-what might seem like very similar circumstances, there can be different histories, cultures, and outcomes in particular endeavors
-particular groups having particular skills in particular kinds of endeavors have been a common fact of life over centuries and in countries all around the world
“Neither race nor racism, nor any other form of discrimination, is necessary to account for such reciprocal inequalities. Nor have those who automatically invoke discriminatory biases, as explanations for unequal outcomes, been able to cite any country, anywhere in the world, that has had the proportional demographic representation which they have made a criterion for.”
Reciprocal Inequalities:
-group equalities in the same endeavors are by no means common, what is common are reciprocal inequalities among groups in different endeavors
-equality among different groups of human beings is presupposed that disparities in outcomes is evidence or proof of discriminatory bias
***people are not hired or paid for their innate potentialities
-they are hired, paid, admitted into colleges or accepted into other desired positions on the basis of their developed capabilities relevant to the particular endeavor
“In these terms, reciprocal inequalities might suggest equal potentialities, without providing any basis for expecting equal outcomes.”
-personal and dedication are key factors
-reciprocal inequalities abound even when equality does not
Ex. different ethnic groups dominate different American sports
Ex. Professions
-Jews were more widely represented among historic leaders in retailing, finance, and garment production
-Jews are not known for the steel industry, automobile production, or coal mining
-American professionals are not concentrated in exactly the same professions as Irish American professionals
-there are different representations in particular professions like engineering, medicine, and law
-Asian American professionals are also not concentrated in exactly the same professions as Irish American professionals
“Because of reciprocal inequalities, the more narrowly defined the endeavor, the less likely are different groups to be comparably represented.”
-crusaders of social justice often decry uneven representation of groups in an individual company, as evidence or proof of employer discrimination in that particular company
“People evolve differently in different settings and conditions they develop different talents that create reciprocal inequalities of achievements in a wide range of endeavors, without necessarily creating equality, or even comparability, in any of those endeavors.”
***such reciprocal inequalities lend no support to theories of either genetic determinism or discriminatory biases as automatic explanations of inequalities
Assumptions and Phrases in Social Justice Literature:
-repeated endlessly without any empirical test
Ex. women are statistically “under-represented” in Silicon Valley
-it is automatically assumed that is due to sex discrimination by the employers
-the fact is that most work done in Silicon Valley is based on an application of engineering skills including computer software engineering
-American women receive less than 30 percent of the degrees in engineering
On the flip side:
-American men receive less than 20 percent of undergraduate degrees in education and only 22 percent of the master’s and doctoral degrees in this same profession
-American men are “under-represented” in the education profession
**comparing these two professions is like comparing apples to oranges
-education specialized decisions are made by the individual years before ever becoming an employee of that profession
-Social Justice flaw is when the incomes of women as a whole are compared to the incomes of men as a whole
-Social Justice flaw leaves out the many specific differences in the life patterns of women and men
-Social Justice flaw leaves out the work patterns of women and men
Ex. Family: men is in the labor-force year around, women partially in labor-force or not at all if staying home to take care of children
Ex. Family: since 1971, single women in their thirties who had worked continuously since leaving school were earning slightly more than men of the same description
-Social Justice flaw is when there are statistical differences in the representation of various ethnic groups, different patterns within these groups themselves are likewise overlooked
-Social Justice flaw is equating differences in demographic representation with employer discrimination
Ex. San Francisco newspaper headline, “Why are Black and Latino people still kept out of the tech industry?”
-Are Asians “kept-out” of professional basketball
-are Californians “kept-out” of the National Hockey League
-Asian Americans have more college degrees in engineering than blacks or Hispanics
-Asian Americans’ engineering degrees outnumber the engineering Ph.D.s of blacks and Hispanics put together
**when comparing different ethnic groups in a given endeavor, we are again comparing apples and oranges in terms of specialized education or other specialized preparations
***applying the same standards to everyone–does not produce equal outcomes, even if no one is “kept-out”
“In no society have all regions and all parts of the population developed equally.”
-the “disparate impact” standard used by courts of law for determining employer discrimination, implicitly assumes something that no one can seem to find anywhere
=equal demographic representation of different groups
-some Justices of the U.S. Supreme court have accepted “disparate impact” statistics as evidence or proof of employer discrimination
-the Supreme Court itself has had statistical disparities more extreme than the disparities used to charge employers with discrimination
Ex. from 2010-2017 all Supreme Court Justices were either Catholics or Jews in a country where Protestants outnumber Catholics and Jews combined
-Yet no conspiracy of negative intentions of these appointed Justices
***human biases have no monopoly among the many things that prevent “equal changes”
Origins of Inequalities:
-the question whether different social groups have equal or unequal capabilities in various endeavors is very different from the question whether racial or sexual differences create inherently different mental potential determined by genes
-the genetic determinism assumption that reigned among American intellectuals of the Progressive era in the early 20th century is irrelevant
For the sake of an argument:
-let’s assume that every social group or even every individual has equal mental potential at the moment of conception
-this would still not be enough to guarantee even equal “native intelligence” at birth, much less equally developed capabilities after growing up in unequal circumstances and/or being culturally oriented toward different goals in different fields
Inequalities Among Individuals:
-unequal circumstances begin in the womb
-nutrition differences among pregnant women reflected later in IQ differences among their children
-a mother’s intake of various substances can have positive and negative effects on a child’s IQ and general well-being
-we might expect to find the greatest equality of developed capabilities among children born to the same parents and raised in the same house
-research has proven that there are distinct mental qualities between siblings
Ex. 1st born in the family tend to have a higher average IQ, higher rate of college completion, and over-represented among high achievers in a variety of endeavors
Ex. In the U.S., a study found that half of the National Merit Scholarship finalists were first-born children
-take into account not just birth but the first-born or only child received the undivided attention during the child’s crucial earliest development
-studies of boys raised without a father present have found them very much over-represented among people with pathologies ranging from truancy to murder
-pathologies were more highly correlated with fatherlessness than with any other factor “surpassing even race and poverty”
-fatherless boys had a higher than average rate of incarceration, whether they were black or white
***not all differences between races are due to race–either in the sense of genetics or in the sense of racial discrimination
-girls had a higher rate of teen pregnancy when raised by one parent
“When American children are raised in different social classes, with different child-rearing practices, the chances of these children growing up with equal capabilities in adulthood can be seriously reduced.”
-social patterns are different when looking at professional parents vs. parents on welfare
-social patterns can be seen as positive or negative in professional parents who encourage or discourage their children
-social patterns may mimic the professional parents who are supportive and loving
-social patterns of the child alters to rebel and no longer desire to be a professional like the parents if the parents are consistently critical and unloving
-social patterns can be seen as positive or negative in parents on welfare
-social patterns of the child alters depending on the parents ensuring the child that overcoming poverty is accessible and guides the child to believe in himself to make a better life
-social patterns of the child alters depending on the parents who only tell the child he will never overcome, will always be a loser, and can never make a better life
**All of these social patterns converge in our schools, jobs, and communities all with no guarantee for equal outcomes
-in putting assumptions to the test of facts, a clear distinction must be maintained between equal potentialities at the beginning of life and equally developed capabilities later on
-social justice advocates may implicitly assume that various groups have similar developed capabilities, so that different outcomes appear puzzling
-when it comes to actual performance capabilities, a man is not even equal to himself either physically or mentally at different stages of his life, much less equal to all other people in their varying stages in life
Inequalities Among Groups:
Fallacy:
“at the heart of social justice vision is that large categories of people–classes, races, nations– would tend to be either equal, or at least comparable, in their outcomes in various endeavors, if it were not for some discriminatory bias that has intervened to produce the large disparities we see around us.”
-different groups, with different median ages–varying by a decade or two–are unlikely to be equal in endeavors requiring either the physical vitality of youth or the experience that comes with age
-there is different representation in different occupations and at different income levels
-two groups were identical in every other respect, age differences alone would still be enough to make them differ in incomes
-middle aged Americans have higher median incomes than Americans in their twenties
-classes, races, or ethnic groups–age differences alone are enough to make equal economic or other outcomes very unlikely
-why should anyone expect a nation where half the population are infants, young children and teenagers to have the same work experience and education
-different nations are also located in different geographic, climatic and other settings with different advantages and disadvantages
-their populations had identical potential, they could hardly be expected to have equally developed capabilities
-the task of surviving and evolving in a very different settings around the world
-whole continents differ greatly from one another
Climate:
-is another aspect of nature that can influence the economic and social development of human beings
-urbanization depends on food supplied from outside urban communities
-there have been advances in science, technology and other endeavors have originated in urban communities
-neither with geographic factors nor other aspects of nature can we automatically assume either equal or ransom outcomes among human beings
“Nature–geographic influences, varying from place to place, do not imply geographic determinism. These and other factors interact with human knowledge and human errors, as these have developed in different eras.”
-the supply of natural resources is not fixed, because what is a natural resource depends on what human beings know how to use, and that changes with changes in human knowledge from one era to the next
***Nature has been no more fair between the sexes than in its treatment of other social groups, societies or nations
-human double standards of sexual behavior for women and men have been a pale reflection of nature’s more fundamental double standards
-no matter how reckless, selfish, stupid, or irresponsible a man may be, he will never become pregnant
-the plain and simple fact that women have babies
-these biological differences even if societies equal opportunities the biological capabilities are there
Fallacy:
“The seemingly invincible fallacy that only human bias can explain different economic and social outcomes among peoples is belied repeatedly by hard facts in societies around the world.”
-whatever the human condition of human beings at the beginning of the species, scores of millennia had already come and gone before anyone coined the phrase “social justice”
-in the expanses of time, different peoples evolved differently in very different settings around the world
-developing different talents that created reciprocal inequalities of achievements in different endeavors, without necessarily creating equality, or even comparability, in any of those endeavors
Environment and Human Capital:
-environment cannot be defined as simply the current tangible surroundings
-nor can human capital be defined as simply education or skills
-qualities such as honesty are not only moral virtues and their economics
-people living for centuries in small, poor and isolated communities, with neither police forces nor fire departments, know that any emergency can become catastrophe, so they stick together and come to each other’s rescue
-circumstances and geography promote honesty and cooperation more than any preaching or laws
-honesty is one of many factors that cannot be assumed to be equally present in all places or among all people
-nor does empirical evidence suggest an equality in this factor, any more than in many other factors
Ex. a simple test to assess honesty of various peoples and places: leave a wallet containing both money and personal identification in public places in various cities around the world
-honesty and dishonesty in a society is a major factor in the development of its economy
Ex. Industrial revolution in England was aided by investments from foreign countries, whose investors were able to rely on the reputation of British law for honesty and impartiality
***there is no reason to expect all individuals, groups or nations to be equally honest than there is to expect them to have the same skills, the same wealth or the same IQs
-particular groups who have sufficient trust among themselves that they can conduct business on the basis of verbal agreements, without recourse to unreliable legal systems
-competitive economic advantages in countries with unreliable legal and political institutions need more caution about economic transactions
***whatever the level of honesty in a given society, there is no reason to expect existing disparities in these respects to remain the same forever, when so many other things have changed over the centuries
***at any given time, honesty is one of many factors that vary, making equal chances for all very unlikely
-you can’t expect all individuals, groups, or nations to be equally hones
Episodic Factors:
-on-going differences among peoples, there have been unpredictable episodic events-wars, famines, and epidemics
-these factors can disrupt the development path of particular peoples
-outcomes of military conflicts can be a matter of chances that are incalculable
-inability to determine the fate of whole societies or nations for subsequent generations or centuries
Ex. had the earlier battle against invading Islamic forces at Tours in 732 or at the siege of Vienna in 1529 gon the other way, Europe would be culturally a very different place today
-Europe has been far from being a culturally, economically, or otherwise homogeneous civilization, with its peoples having the same quantity and kind of human capital across the continent
-languages in Western Europe acquired written versions centuries before the languages of Eastern Europe so this has major implications for the education of the peoples in these two regions
-differences in regions had little chance to be equal in endeavors requiring the kinds of knowledge, and skills taught from books in schools and colleges
***this is not simply an inequality confined to the past, for the evolution to the present began from very different pasts in different places and times
-there are technological development in different regions all over the world
-leading figures of the arts and sciences come from different regions all over the world
-different circumstances leads to different groups to different levels of literacy and school attendance
-in centuries past, people were far poorer
-peoples working in agriculture had little need for literacy, but often had great need for the work of children in order to keep families fed
-in these circumstances, children’s education was often sacrificed
Differences in human capital:
***Equal Standards Applied = Open Competition For All
-this includes honesty, languages, occupational skills, and industrial and commercial talents
“There was no way that people on the short end of these circumstantial disparities has ‘equal chances’ of developing their capabilities, even in a society with equal opportunity, in the sense of open competition for all, and equal standards applied to all.”
-we agree that “equal chances for all” would be desirable
-but that in no way guarantees that we have either the knowledge or the power required to make that goal attainable
-Do we only want the same exact mixture of students to represent the medical field? Equally divided by race?
-Or do we want the make-up to be from the population as a whole?
-Is indulging ideological visions more important than ending cancer or Alzheimer’s?
-Do we want airlines to have pilots chosen for demographic representation of various groups, or would you prefer to fly on planes whose pilots were chosen for their mastery of all the complex things that increase your chances of arriving safely at your destination?
***Endeavors have purposes
***Consequences matter
-once we recognize the many factors that can create different developed capabilities, “equal chances for all” becomes very different in its consequences from “equal opportunity”
***today, babies are born into the world as heirs of pre-packaged grievances against other babies born on the same day
-we should give them all the opportunity to work things out better in their lives then we have in ours