> What offends the sensibility
>of equality (of outcome) is the idea or possibility that some people
>are better than a whole lot of others at things that matter greatly
>(in a particular scheme) and that a whole lot are good at nothing
>much (of value by that same scheme) at all.
>
One of the many reasons why I am offended by the rewards/honor thing is
that it is yet another brick in the edifice of the individual.
I, as an individual, was born bright to educated parents. My entire life -- in school, work -- I have been rewarded and honored for my intelligence. But the actual reality of my life is that without my grandmother -- a nearly illiterate peasant who would be dismissed as insignificant dirt by anyone who cares about rewards/honor, I would have probably killed myself when I was a teenager....or wound up in an institution. So how much of my achievement is MY achievement and how much is it hers? For her loving heart and great spirit?
Every achievement rests on teachers, friends, family, predecessors, etc. It is the basest lie to give the person who by force of circumstance was able to capitlalize on all that, all the recognition.
What sort of humanism is it that has only some of us matter? Clarice Lispector wrote a magnificent book about this called "Hour of the Star."
Joanna
>
>
>