Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I think I see. However, I believe your point is more of a "we cannot judge through status whether a person is equal to another, as it may just be pot luck" more than a "People are created equal". By that same token, I would argue that people cannot be judged without bias, as equals, unless they are identical, otherwise it simply becomes a matter of perspective. Therefore, people are not created identical.

I agree with you completely on that. I dont think people really are created equal personally. If we really were, this world most likely wouldnt be in the state it is. I was just saying, if you wanted to prove or say people ARE equal, you have a lot of things youd have to look at and discount to make them equal.
I also think natural selection is harsh, but the only real way around this problem. We humans have survived this long because we are smart enough to out smart, and out last natural selection. But some day the world as we know it will indeed fall apart. Thats just the way it works. Then itll be man vs man, and that will get nasty. Do some research on "zombie apocalypse" itll give an idea

Natural selection is harsh, so much as breaking an arm (something considered quite trivial these days) can result in your death as could having any form of disability depending on your situation (something like autism could be usefull if your role was that of a lone nimble herbivore living in a rainforest, particularly the attention to detail aspect).

Are people all physically and mentally equal? No. People have inherent ssuperiorities and inferiorities re: other people. I can't win 7 Tours de France, but Lance Armstrong, being physiologically different, can.

From a moral perspective, all humans must be treated equally by others if they wish the same treatment. We can't be amoral egoists.

Iron_Chaos_Brute wrote:We can't be amoral egoists.

Well, we can, it simply doesn't lead to a terribly pleasant society. Unless your idea of pleasantry revolves around association due to advantageous position. Though there do exist arguments which suppose that morality is simply an evolutionary outgrowth of just such a system.

For my part, I believe that all people are created equal from any standpoint that we can currently perceive, and prove, at a social level. However, this ephemeral notion of equality is immediately forfeit upon the achievement of agency; whereby, under narrow circumstances, individuals can be gauged as either superior or inferior. For example, person X can regarded as superior to person Y insofar as the metric by which quality is judged is limited to the game of cricket, football, basketball, etc.

To generalize that point: All people are created equal outside of any conceivable context of sufficiently narrow focus; denying any notion of general worth.

Warboss Gutrip wrote:Therefore, people are not created identical.

Identical does not equate with equal in the colloquial, or philosophical sense. Identical implies a sort of equivalence that extends beyond results (ie. not just a good person, but a good person with blond hair), whereas equality does not.

I was contemplating life the other day, and a stunning revelation hit me; the vast majority of people who play Warhammer are intellectuals, myself among them.

No.

The only way in which humans are 'created' is by sexual reproduction. We are not equal even at that point, as our mothers could choose to terminate our lives before birth. Humans are not even really equal before the law, as children are legally denied the ability to do certain things such as voting, working, having sex, consuming alchohol etc.

All humans are NOT equal and neither should they be - that's not the same as saying that people should be discriminated against on the grounds of skin colour, sexual alignment etc., but some discrimination is beneficial to society.

ShumaGorath wrote:


No.

You continue to say what I normally want to.

Albatross wrote:
All humans are NOT equal and neither should they be - that's not the same as saying that people should be discriminated against on the grounds of skin colour, sexual alignment etc., but some discrimination is beneficial to society.

I see you're a man of discriminating tastes.

Perhaps (foul language warning) I could interest you in a fine 18th century brandy?

All taste is discriminatory.

And yes. Yes you could.

Carl Sagan wrote:Look again at that dot. That's here. That's home. That's us. On it everyone you love, everyone you know, everyone you ever heard of, every human being who ever was, lived out their lives. The aggregate of our joy and suffering, thousands of confident religions, ideologies, and economic doctrines, every hunter and forager, every hero and coward, every creator and destroyer of civilization, every king and peasant, every young couple in love, every mother and father, hopeful child, inventor and explorer, every teacher of morals, every corrupt politician, every "superstar," every "supreme leader," every saint and sinner in the history of our species lived there--on a mote of dust suspended in a sunbeam.

Did Carl Saigen(sp?) say that? I know he said something about compairing Earth as a dot.

This is your debate topic? How the hell would a debate around this even work? I mean, is there any actual evidence that you could use to support these arguments or would it be entirely based on reasoning?

KingCracker wrote:Did Carl Saigen(sp?) say that? I know he said something about compairing Earth as a dot.

It was indeed. In my hurry forgot yo cite him, but I fixed that now.

RustyKnight wrote:This is your debate topic? How the hell would a debate around this even work? I mean, is there any actual evidence that you could use to support these arguments or would it be entirely based on reasoning?

Uhm, many debate topics are ones that have no absolutes one way or the other, where there is no right or wrong so it is all in how you argue it to determine your ability to convince.

I just think it is peachy we are all doing OP's homework for him.

No. I do not agree. Look at it this way.
The obamas have another kid.
Some random hooker has a kid.
Who has the better chance to go to college?

Of course people are not all equal. If they were, who would work at McDonalds, Wal-Mart and the Dollar store?

In my opinion, everyone is created/born equal - to an extent.

I believe that everyone has the same chances and opportunities. Some people might have to work harder than others to get to the same place, but essentially it is possible as far as I see it. Two children from drastically different social-economic upbringings could end up in identical positions in the pecking order as adults. As far as genders go, there are both male and female CEOs, Executives, Senators, Managers, etc... because they worked harder than someone else to get there. There're plenty of stories of the most unlikely people becoming successes more because of the effort they put in and the choices they made than the resources at their disposal.

So I think that people are... somewhat created equal. They're all given the same layout for life. It's how they utilize it that really matters. The rich kid could become a stoned dropout while the poor kid could end up running the country. Obviously if you're born with FAS or any number of other mental impairments, the odds against you will be greater, but for the most part the chances are still there.

I don't know if anyone has said this yet but, I think that before you can answer the title question you must first ask, "Are humans created?"

Emperors Faithful wrote:But unfortunately, while mattyrm is gifted in awesomeness, he is sadly lacking the brains department. Is this, perhaps, a form of quality in itself?

I lack many things mate... patience, tolerance, subtlety, religious conviction...

I dont think i lack brains however, it may sound rather conceited to say it, but i certainly consider myself above average intelligence.. does my frequent use of foul language make me look foolish?

Good sir,

In my haste it seems that I had not the foresight to divine that one such as yourself may not interperet this silly jest as such and take offence. I humbly apologise for my inability to realise that your good self would take offence. There is clearly some hidden message written within my post of a somewhat serious nature, which only your supreme intellect can detect.

RustyKnight wrote:This is your debate topic? How the hell would a debate around this even work? I mean, is there any actual evidence that you could use to support these arguments or would it be entirely based on reasoning?

Reasoning must be used as evidence, when no evidence is evident.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

warpcrafter wrote:Of course people are not all equal. If they were, who would work at McDonalds, Wal-Mart and the Dollar store?

However, I'd like to think that humans are created equal. Perhaps we don't all have equal skills, but we all have something someone else doesn't have. In general, people growing up in third-world countries have a lot of faith in religion, for example, while in developed countries people don't always appreciate the good fortune they have. On the other hand, citizens of developed countries have good fortune. Depending on your view, either one could be seen as equally or more important.
Just going to drop the created-bomb now. Don't take offense. I believe humans are created at conception. If you think birth, there's too many similarities between the child as he is, born, and the child as he was, just an hour ago, in his mother's womb. And the child is so similar, all the way back to 9 months before. It's too hard to determine. My reasoning: when sperm meets egg is when the human is created. The next 9 months are briefing for the mission at hand: life.

Just because everyone is born equal, doesn't mean they are equal. Of course, everyone has flaws, and can make up for them in other ways.

Snikkyd wrote:Just because everyone is born equal, doesn't mean they are equal. Of course, everyone has flaws, and can make up for them in other ways.

like making the farting noise through their armpit.

I can make the farting noise with my hands, but not my armpits. I must be a freak or something

I will have to agree with the earlier post saying that people are not created equally physically or mentally, but all humans should have the same set of rights from birth. Of course it is entirely possible to lose these rights after birth, but that would be a different debate.

The basic message that is there(IMHO) is that a person should not be enslaved or treated less just because they are born differently.

You can't debate this unless you narrow the question down. How do you even define equal? Equal in terms of what? Equal in the eyes of the law? In the eyes of god? In terms of their physical and mental gifts?

In the eyes of the law - theoretically yes.

In the eyes of god - depends on your religion, lets say yes.

In terms of mental/physical state? of course not.

halonachos wrote:I will have to agree with the earlier post saying that people are not created equally physically or mentally, but all humans should have the same set of rights from birth. Of course it is entirely possible to lose these rights after birth, but that would be a different debate.

The basic message that is there(IMHO) is that a person should not be enslaved or treated less just because they are born differently.

So basically, people aren't created equally, but should be treated equally? That sounds about right.

In the strictest possible sense yes, as well as the fact that you are equal to the keyboard you typed this on. We are all bundles of protons, neutrons, electrons, and energy constantly going up and down in very careful ways. One proton is exactly the same in every way to another, same with neutrons same with electrons.

Metallifan hit on a point I was going to make. If two men are equal before being given a chance of bettering themselves and one of the two takes it while the other doesn't, are they equal now. And were they ever equal if one will not grab a chance.

This is one of the profound questions that have so many options to follow. Religious, lawful, moral, philosophical, endless ways. I have one thing that hits me. Is there a difference, and if so which difference will give you the better option. To illustrate my point take The Roman Empire, and take the United States of America. Both are republics based around ideals that everyone should be represented equally. Now consider this. The United States claims that all are equal, and is a world power, one of the largest economic and military powers in the world. The same is true of Rome, it is the dominant force over Europe. Rome on the other hand is a slave holding nation. Now admittedly they treated their slaves better than anyone else in history, but they are still slaves. Now consider this, both are equally successful (relatively speaking) but one has a society based on equality while the other is based on inequality. So does it matter. Personally I say yes, because the terms of inequality open up a conspiracy vortex of who decides that. Is the metaphor to broad, maybe it is to big to apply to a question like this. I don't know. This question is broad in itself and can and will go many places in a room like dakka filled with smart nerds (better term for intellectuals don't ya think).

Try Again Bragg wrote:One proton is exactly the same in every way to another, same with neutrons same with electrons.

And yet they don't move in exactly the same places.

Try Again Bragg wrote:
...take The Roman Empire, and take the United States of America. Both are republics based around ideals that everyone should be represented equally....

Not true, but continue.

Try Again Bragg wrote:
Now consider this. The United States claims that all are equal, and is a world power, one of the largest economic and military powers in the world. The same is true of Rome, it is the dominant force over Europe. Rome on the other hand is a slave holding nation. Now admittedly they treated their slaves better than anyone else in history, but they are still slaves.

The question should be: What makes a slave?

Try Again Bragg wrote:
Now consider this, both are equally successful (relatively speaking) but one has a society based on equality while the other is based on inequality.

Yes, that's a nice illusion.

Try Again Bragg wrote:
So does it matter. Personally I say yes, because the terms of inequality open up a conspiracy vortex of who decides that. Is the metaphor to broad, maybe it is to big to apply to a question like this. I don't know. This question is broad in itself and can and will go many places in a room like dakka filled with smart nerds (better term for intellectuals don't ya think).

It matters because you want it to. If you didn't, it wouldn't. Welcome to the human race.

lambadomy wrote:You can't debate this unless you narrow the question down. How do you even define equal? Equal in terms of what? Equal in the eyes of the law? In the eyes of god? In terms of their physical and mental gifts?

In the eyes of the law - theoretically yes.

In the eyes of god - depends on your religion, lets say yes.

In terms of mental/physical state? of course not.

lambadomy hit the nail of the argument right here.

In light of lambadomy's very clear analysis of the question, I propose further extrapolation on the subject.

in the eyes of the law: Bias is inevitable. Whilst we would all like to believe that the law is sound, bias always occurs. Not through some grand vendetta, but rather through a large amount of small factors, errors in communication and the like, can lead to humans making the wrong decisions.

In the eyes of god: In most religions, yes. God sees the soul inside, without tarnished skin, and, as the creator, would have theoretically created us all as equals.

In a mental/physical state: It is impossible to decide the superiority of a colossal glacier vs. a mighty volcano, in the same way that two humans are too different to be judged. One is superior, but it varies as a matter of personal opinion. Compare Rodger Federah and a paraplegic child, or Shakespeare and Leonardo Da Vinci.

Unless they are identical, superiority and equality are a matter of personal opinion.