Not sure of any of this, Keith. Is there really a self-renewing 'elite class' in the sense that the progeny of the very bright and well-to-do will become the leaders of the next generation and will in turn produce the next leaders? I don't think so. Perhaps that's how things happen in the most stagnant and unchanging societies, but surely not in societies in which change is continuous and positive and in which new opportunities continually arise. I look, for example, at the social history of Canada during the past century or so. To get away from the repressive conditions of their homeland, the poor and wretched of Europe came here during the early to mid years of the past century. They may not have done well, but their children did, and in many cases did far better than Canadians of Anglo origin who were the elite of the earlier part of the 20th C. I've known several people who came from very poor parents who migrated from eastern Europe but who became doctors, professors and business leaders in Canada. In a hierarchical society of strong class distinctions those people may never have gotten anywhere. But open things up and the results may be quite positively amazing.
Ed ----- Original Message ----- From: Keith Hudson To: RE-DESIGNING WORK, INCOME DISTRIBUTION, ,EDUCATION Sent: Tuesday, December 28, 2010 3:10 AM Subject: [Futurework] Two breeds (species?) of men It's likely that we will never have an egalitarian society for one simple reason -- the increasing complexity of our economy. The intellectual potential of any individual is largely fixed during the pre-puberty years. His or her social and economic potential is largely fixed during adolescence and very early adult years. For six million years of hominin existence this never used to be the case. All the children of a group, whatever the rank order of their father, experienced an almost identical environment around them. The massive culling of neurons and the shaping of mental networks that takes place in the rear cortex (perceptual and activity skills) would have been very similar. Today it's different. Because of totally different home environments there's an average gap of at least three or four years in the educability of children at puberty between those in private schools and those in state schools. During adolescence, when millions of new neurons are grown in the frontal cortex (social and future-planning skills) and new mental networks are created, life-long social associations are created and the previous skills gained by the rear cortex are developed and refined for adult use. By the age of about 30 this is mostly over. The creativity of new ideas, career specialization and social ranking (relative to the masses, but not yet within the elite) is largely fixed. Ever since we left hunter-gathering behind and became civilized we have become -- largely -- a two class society. In agricultural times the elite class was very small indeed. In modern industrial (post-industrial?) times the elite class is much larger -- about 25% I would estimate. This elite class ranges from the very rich down to the specialized professionals (increasingly that of scientists). Although very varied in composition, the elite class is cohesive and socially interactive because they all send their children to the same thin stream of private schools and the latter in turn tend to go to elite universities. Friendships and social "debts" made there tend to last for life. The Jesuits knew all about this. "Give us a child for seven years and he will be ours for life." Count von Bismark knew all about this when he was the first to institute free state schooling in Prussia for every child of poor parents in order to produce a conditioned population who would willingly follow him into warfare. England and other countries of Europe soon followed. So there we are. Unless nation-states can release education to the choice of parents and quality competition between schools -- as applies to most consumer goods and services -- then the present socio-economic gap in Western countries will only widen further in the coming years as jobs become even more complex. It seems unlikely, but one or two advanced nations are making feeble attempts and there are a few reformers such as Peter Lampl in this country, so I could be wrong. But, otherwise, two distinct breeds of men seem certain in the foreseeable future. And then, given that biologists are already adding to our genetic knowledge at a rate never known in science before, it might only take one or two genetic tricks . . . .? Keith Keith Hudson, Saltford, England http://allisstatus.wordpress.com/2010/12/ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ _______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
_______________________________________________ Futurework mailing list [email protected] https://lists.uwaterloo.ca/mailman/listinfo/futurework
