Originally posted by Desolate Cancer
Let me ask you something else then what do you have to say to the notion that there are more black professional sports players than there are Jewish
ones? Would it be such a crime against humanity to make the argument that blacks as a people PRODUCE more exceptional athletes than Jews?
I would say the exact same thing I am saying about genius. What sport? There are not more black professional swimmers are there? Or gymnasts? When
you say there are more black professional athletes you are making a comment on our CULTURE, not the inherent athleticism of a particular race as a
whole. Gymnastics, for instance, is a sport you have to train from childhood to be competitive in. Not as many black families as white ones have the
resources to spend to train their children from a young age in gymnastics. Were the playing field in terms of finances leveled, can we be certain
blacks would still be under represented?
European women dominate swimming, but in part, this is because swimming changes the appearance of the body. In Brazil, (from an anthropology textbook)
narrow shoulders and a larger butt have been considered more attractive. Many women there do not take up the sport because they do not want to make
their shoulders large and "manlike." There, personal ambition causes them to choose against the pursuit. European women dont mind broader
shoulders, and do not self exclude. Again culture. Perhaps Saudi Arabian women would be the worlds best swimmers. But who will ever know? They
arent allowed to compete at all. Culture.
For the sports I know you meant, football, basketball, these sports are popular, but they are not the be all and end all of athleticism. Have you not
seen a linebacker? Hardly the epitome of fitness. Popularity of a particular sport is also is not the definer of athleticism. It happens to be a
sport where poor people are not disadvantaged in reaching professional status. Is it any wonder that while Caucasian athletes are spread out over
more sports blacks tend to congregate in the ones they have access to?
Who is to say that there could not be as many Jewish athletes IF Jewish parents valued that in their children and encouraged it? But, in general,
Jewish parents want their children to do white collar jobs. And encourage that.
Originally posted by Desolate Cancer
Why cant the reverse argument be made that Jews as a people PRODUCE more scientific, and business leaders (for better or worse ie: madoff, milken,
bosky) than blacks do?
Because it simply isnt true as it applies to science for certain. At least not when ALL of history is taken into account. Like I said, what will you
do with the Greeks? (and even the term "Greek" has to be looked at carefully because Greece once encompassed land that is now in the hands of other
countries, Italy for instance) At best you could say that in X time frame, there were more Jewish scientists and mathematicians that gained acclaim.
You cant say that for all times, in all cultural circumstances. It ceases to be true when applied everywhere all the time. And, gaining fame and
prominence in a field, is a function of many different variables. Opportunity, cultural acceptance for pursuing that, ability, luck, personal
ambition, etc. In my family, for instance, there is a long tradition of valuing highly education, and the arts. But, my recent ancestors were highly
religious. And they loathed the idea of money lending. Although the vast majority of the people in my family have high IQs, very few of us pursued
wealth. Even those of us, (like me) who were raised agnostic and have no religious reason for being opposed to gaining wealth at another expense,
still carry a moral dislike of it. The values your parents instill in you, and their parents instilled in them, has a lot to do with how you view
In terms of business, success in the modern world requires more than intelligence. My initial major was business, finance and accounting to be
precise. I was always at the top of my class. I only got four B's in college. One in Drama, (my fine art requirement) one in Medieval philosophy,
(didnt like the Christian philosophers) one in Evolutionary Anthropology, (refused to accept stone tools would have been first, argued wood would
have been) and the other in Marketing. Everything else was an A or above. My managerial accounting teacher said I was his most brilliant student and
offered me a job. I left business school in my senior year of that program and moved to philosophy. Why? Because I loathe the ethics of money
making. I was appalled to the point of feeling ill at the values of some of my classmates. I am not less able. I am perfectly able. I dont lack the
intelligence to do it. I lack the heart for it. It conflicts with my own sense of the right way to live. The game of "wealth" was not the right
sport for me. But I am no less a fine athlete. I just needed a sport that fit my values.
Originally posted by Desolate Cancer
But it does not mean that Jews have not produced more people who are game changers in the arts, sciences and business. It also doe not discount that
there has not been a concerted effort to bring about some of the undeserving ones through nepotistic means.
There is no question in my mind that nepotism has played a role in the differential success of some individuals over others in the game of
"success." And the Jews are not alone in that, as the other poster pointed out. As I have said, women have across the board been locked out of many
pursuits, with any man being preferable to even a highly qualified women. People tend to favor their own, unless their ethics prohibit it. Mine do.
Not many people agree with me on that.
However, one also has to consider what I mentioned above. The personal, moral feelings some have about certain pursuits. Until very recently, it was
considered "un-Christian" to lend money at interest. It wasnt "un-Jewish," and so Jews dominated banking at least for a while. The relative
success of Jews in the money lending business had far more to do with their cultural attitudes and acceptance of that practice as moral than innate
intelligence. In modern times, many of these practices have been embraced by the population at large. At least in theory. However there are more
than a few like myself out there that harbor lingering moral resistance to the idea of profit at all costs.
If someone happens to grow up in a family that does not see these practices as immoral, and in fact views them as highly positive, they are more
likely to pursue them. And succeed in that sport. In modern times, this is regardless of ethnicity. But again I would argue that this says more
about your culture than your IQ.
Some of us disagree that the game of "wealth and fame at all costs" is the game humanity should be playing. Some of us have very intelligent
reasons for feeling this way. Regardless how "dumb" this may look to someone viewing the world through their own cultural lens. It doesnt mean we
are objectively right. Perhaps the game of wealth and fame at all costs IS the objectively better game to play. But our choice not to pursue that
isnt based on our IQ or lack thereof, it is based on a differing set of personal, moral assumptions. Even for those like me who have no set relgion.
When you say Jews are more successful, you are using a Jewish template to make that assumption. You arent seeing it from the perspective of someone
who is less competitive. From my perspective, I am quite successful. I live a life that I am proud of, I dont violate my own ethical code, and I have
enough to live comfortably. I am sure many people who are more competitive, Jewish or otherwise, are equally satisfied with their lives. I am not
saying my way is the right way. But I would only look like a failure to someone who did not share my values. To someone who shared my values I would
seem, and do seem, successful.
Success, as it is defined by modern standards, is simply incorrect in my opinion. Success is not having fame, or money, or any item. There are rich
people who are obvious failures. Their personal lives are a ruin, they abuse substances, need therapy just to get by, etc. Thats not success.
Success is being satisfied with the life you live. With yourself. Whatever route that happens to take you on in life. If that happens to be the
route of wealth acquisition, so be it. But wealth acquisition should not be confused as being the very definition of success. Thats a cultural
assumption, and one I dont share.
[edit on 12-2-2009 by Illusionsaregrander]