25 March 2009
Much has been made lately of a growing gap between "the rich" and "the poor" or an income gap. I suggest there are several reasons for this; one is the larger amount of wealth available, another is a growing gap in real education, or knowledge (also fed by a rapidly growing body available). But the real gap is one of motivation, which I contend is the centerpiece of intelligence, although one cannot deny there are many enough whose learning ability is limited, for lots of reasons.
That flies in the face of the lip service we give to education; there is a growing tendency to use education level as a discriminator for selection of any number of things, but particularly jobs, that is, either a high school or college diploma. But is it education we want or earning capacity? Which comes first? We like to believe that the answer is obvious, and there is no doubt that some level of basic education is becoming more and more important to success in the United States and most of the developed world. But how much?
Texas has recently expanded its math and science requirement to four years, despite the fact that a significant number of students have difficulty with one or two, and that difficulty surely has an influence on high school drop out rates. Why do all students need four years of math and science? Are they likely to use it? I think not, but I also think I know why we develop unreasonable - and unneccesary - requirements for learning. Internationally it is for prestige - we're number one. Domestically it is for egalitarian reasons. The two are not compatible since many countries deliberately limit higher education for those that show little aptitude for it; but in America to impose such limits would be discriminatory. Interestingly for the most challenging occupations the requirement for more and more, and more and more challenging education, is an uncontestable fact. For many, however, though perhaps greater than in the past, that is not so evident. Another view of the same gap.
This highlights a contention I have long held: American levels of hypocricy are just incredibly amazing: if we wish something to be it will be; and once we wish it so we expect it. Why would there not be an income gap when there is an intelligence gap (strongly influenced by motivation) accompanied by a knowledge requirement gap? Because we wish it so. Communism? No, no; we value our individuality and right to choose. But we should still be able to enjoy similar levels of living standard, shouldn't we? Envy is palpable, but its motivational power is limited because of the hype we buy into. And we worship wealth, but detest the wealthy. Another view of the same gap.
What do a majority of students seek to take away from school? A diploma that they expect will buy them a better salary. What do they expect to get from school? We hear only silence. And this is becoming greater, not less, as the disease of expectation spreads among us. Who needs learning? We already know enough once we learn the basics. Which are? Whatever.
Populist politics encourages this kind of thinking; of course it doesn't produce the "expected" results, but it attracts votes, and after that we can just pretend, can't we? I would call that hypocricy; others would call that heresy. Of course in our political correct world, I am wrong. Am I not?
