While attempting not to rise to the discussion of "rights to equality
of access and opportunity" , there is an historical (economic)
principle and a more contemporary (complex adaptive systems)
principle that suggests there isn't even a conundrum here.
The historical economic principle is the "law of comparative
advantage". I interpret this principle to be saying that even in a
society of unevenly distribution of advantage (intelligence?) where
there are some agents which are better in ALL respects, there is
still a valid, viable, useful place for those who are less in all
respects to participate and provide valuable contribution. (In the
economic law sense, this is done by doing what is least effective of
what the "best" could do given that no single agent can do
everything.)
The complexity/emergence approach is far more attractive and viable
principle in my opinion. That is, it is the diversity that is the
source of emergence and that there is a major (potentially even more
important) place for the "less favoured". As an anlogy, nature is
not trying to create more Einsteins because he is a particular
intelligent or superior example of humanity. It is mixing intent
(metaphorically speaking) on mixing Einstien genes with many other
genes and producing something new - not more of the same or merely
improving on a basic model.
The issue of interest to me is participation and contribution - not
"equality".
Michael McMaster : Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk
book cafe site : http://www.vision-nest.com/BTBookCafe
Intelligence is the underlying organisational principle
of the universe. Heraclitus
--Michael McMaster <Michael@kbddean.demon.co.uk>
Learning-org -- An Internet Dialog on Learning Organizations For info: <rkarash@karash.com> -or- <http://world.std.com/~lo/>