--- Bill Bartlett <billbartlett at aapt.net.au> wrote:
> What an odd conclusion. Not even consistent with
> your own arguments,
> let alone being at odds with the obvious reality
> that the ability to
> accumulate wealth varies widely between individuals.
> Different people
> have hugely differing natural advantages and
> disadvantages. I take
> it this must have been an attempt at humour?
[WS:] I do not understand your point. Assuming that status attainment is a natural phenomenon in social animals (including humans), it follows that attempts to eradicate status differences from social life are for the most part futile. Assuming, furthermore, that equal opportunity (if not strict egalitarianism) is an ethically desirable thing (an assumption that most of us here I believe share), it follows that that those ways of status attainment that give more people a chance are more ethically desirable than those that restrict status attainment to a select few "predestined" by birth or having certain in-born characteristics.
It is quite obvious that more people have an opportunity to achieve status by accumulating material possessions than by any other "natural" characteristics that I mentioned, so from that standpoint wealth accumulation is a more desirbale way of attining status than that based on birth, physical strength, sexual attractiveness, skin color, etc. What is so strange about this conclusion?
As a point of clarification, I am not proposing that status diffrences are ethically desirable. On the contrary, I consider them ethically undesirable, just like killing other living things. However, they are also unavoidable, a basic fact of life if you will, just like killing other living things is. Therefore, minimizing the negative consequences of status attainment (e.g. deprivation or suffering of others) is the best we can hope for. This is analogous to minimizing the negative consequences of killing living things by doing it in a "humane" way that minimizes pain and suffering - it is the best we can hope for without risking extinction.
Wojtek
____________________________________________________________________________________ Fussy? Opinionated? Impossible to please? Perfect. Join Yahoo!'s user panel and lay it on us. http://surveylink.yahoo.com/gmrs/yahoo_panel_invite.asp?a=7