| Chelman |
| Krijg de bloemetjes |
 |
 |
|
 Posted 22-09-2006 14:56 by Chelman |
 |
|
quote:
Op 22 september 2006 14:45 schreef Mikeee het volgende:
Vergeet niet straks ook recensies te posten erover, klinkt allemaal interessant.
quote:
Op 17 augustus 2005 14:01 schreef Chelman het volgende:
In Defense of Elitism door William A. Henry. Een geweldig boek. Heb hem net uit. Ik ga hem zelf niet beschrijven maar quote even een fijne review:
"America's vital lie is egalitarianism, claims William A. Henry III, and with a "rising tide of mediocrity" what we need is to call to excellence, as well as the renewed confidence to say that some ideas, people and things are simply better than others. In other words, we need more elitism. In this well reasoned (though not rigorously argued) treatise, Henry's unflinching conservative opinions will no doubt infuriate some, especially as he applies his central thesis to multiculturalists, feminists, affirmative activists, and others. But he provides some thought provoking arguments that I thought made the book worth reading.
Henry begins by outlining his views of elitism, which he believes has been unfairly derided. He believes that at its core, elitism embraces excellence, not snobbery. Realizing that, we should reclaim the confidence needed to sort out, rank, and decide between competing ideas and values. Elitist societies uphold objective standards, embrace rationalism, and respect accomplishment. They also believe that competition brings out the best in people more than coddling does, and that people who make the most of themselves and contribute the most should be rewarded for their achievements.
Those ideas aren't pervasive today as Henry would like. Instead, many embrace the notion that "everyone is pretty much alike, that self-fulfillment is more important than objective achievement, that the common man is always right & needs no interpreters or guides for his thinking, and that society should succoring its losers rather than honoring and encouraging its winners to achieve more and therefore benefit everyone." If we believe that everyone is equal, then success and failures are anomalies, and therefore luck determines our fate more than hard work, talent, intelligence, or initiative. Rugged individualism & self-reliance falls out of fashion, and is replaced by an "entitlement mentality." Objectivity & rationalism are viewed as cultural artifacts, no more valid than intuition or other more primal ways of viewing the world. We believe that
"all of the children are above average," much like in Garrison Keillor's fictional Lake Wobegon, despite that fact that our children's test scores are falling relative to children in other nations.
Although the Declaration of Independence proclaims that "All men are created equal," Henry believes it's been a grand folly to take that idea to the extreme, seeking not just equality in a legal sense, but also equality of outcomes in every field. People are not equal - some people are brilliant, some dim, some hearty, some handicapped, some slothful, some productive. And as a result, some of society's rewards are distributed unequally. But we don't know what to do with inherent inequalities in the egalitarian, democratic USA. We assume that "fair" competition would result in all groups sharing equally in society's rewards, and that any differences must be the result of an unfair system.
In the end, Henry's arguments are sound, and worth reading and considering. But this is by no means a balanced book, and that's why I didn't find his arguments more persuasive. He doesn't acknowledge the complexity of some of the issues he discusses, nor does he anticipate counter-arguments and refute them. For example, he believes in providing equal opportunity to pursue excellence, but ignores the historical (and sometimes legally sanctioned) lack of opportunity for women, blacks, immigrants, etc.
Society will always struggle with what to do with the successful, talented, or lucky versus the poor, short-changed, and unlucky. Ultimately, the extent to which we correct these discrepancies requires that we know how much of one's success is due to individual choices, and how much due to random chance, and how much due to society's help or hindrance. Separating these influences is a difficult if not impossible task, and thus the debate between egalitarianism and elitism will no doubt continue. "
Deze las ik al een jaar geleden maar heb hem nu zelf aangeschaft. Heerschboek in ieder geval. Het is een zeer uitvoerig onderzochte tirade tegen te ver doorgeschoten egalitarisme en cultuur-relativisme. Een aanradert!
KOSOVO JE SRBIJA! SVETA SRPSKA ZEMLJA !
|
