“There is always going to be someone who is bigger and better than you.” This phrase that many children are told is true; however, does it have to control the way society acknowledges each person? As civilizations grew, social hierarchies became more prevalent. Critics like Jean-Jacques Rousseau started to point out how society has created “moral” inequalities which is not natural to man’s state. In Rousseau’s essay, The Discourse of Inequality, he points out how society has caused men to put each other in an unjustifiable category of inequality. Rousseau does give examples of what the government should strive to be; yet, he does not give a concrete example of what the government should be doing to achieve equality. About 97 years later, Karl
…show more content…
Marx believes that as long as man works according to his ability, he should earn the same as those who are more able than he is. I do not agree with Marx’s beliefs that when man works according to his ability he will earn as much as those who are more skilled than him. Just because a person may work the same amount as their fellow co-workers does not mean that worker produces the same results as his peers. When Marx thinks that “a worker should not only earn the same as her colleagues, if she works according to her ability, but also earn according to her needs” (Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich. “The Communist Manifesto”. Course Document). This idea does not make sense when considering jobs that requires skill and talent. For example when a surgeon performs open heart surgery on a loved one, do you want the doctor who works hard or the doctor who has the superior talent in performing open heart surgery? Does it make sense to reward those who try hard or those who product results? This answer is easy to answer, for me. You reward those who produce the best results. The best results do not always come from giving people the same amount of reinforcement, rather it takes a competitive atmosphere, like …show more content…
In the American dream it is the very idea that you do not have to be pigeon holed in your social class; rather with hard work, determination, and the right opportunities one can change their social standing the world. However, many times Rousseau is correct where the “moral” inequalities imposed by society have caused people to not make their “American dream” come true. For example, the funding model for school districts. Schools receive funding from the government depending on how well the school’s students test on the standardized tests. However, the schools’ districts are formed by the social-economic standings of the area. Due to how the districts are drawn and how the funding model is structured in America’s educational system many kids are left behind. People’s intellect is important for a person to thrive in American society; and the way that intelligence is measured is through standardized testing. Intelligence is a “moral” inequality that society has imposed on mankind. According to Rousseau, natural inequality is not developed if not educated; therefore, inequality increases with more education. In places like America, education is the key to having a greater opportunity to achieving greatness. So when certain kids do not have the same access to education inequalities become more prevalent in the same communities that have low socio-economic
Marx believes that as long as man works according to his ability, he should earn the same as those who are more able than he is. I do not agree with Marx’s beliefs that when man works according to his ability he will earn as much as those who are more skilled than him. Just because a person may work the same amount as their fellow co-workers does not mean that worker produces the same results as his peers. When Marx thinks that “a worker should not only earn the same as her colleagues, if she works according to her ability, but also earn according to her needs” (Marx, Karl and Engels, Friedrich. “The Communist Manifesto”. Course Document). This idea does not make sense when considering jobs that requires skill and talent. For example when a surgeon performs open heart surgery on a loved one, do you want the doctor who works hard or the doctor who has the superior talent in performing open heart surgery? Does it make sense to reward those who try hard or those who product results? This answer is easy to answer, for me. You reward those who produce the best results. The best results do not always come from giving people the same amount of reinforcement, rather it takes a competitive atmosphere, like …show more content…
In the American dream it is the very idea that you do not have to be pigeon holed in your social class; rather with hard work, determination, and the right opportunities one can change their social standing the world. However, many times Rousseau is correct where the “moral” inequalities imposed by society have caused people to not make their “American dream” come true. For example, the funding model for school districts. Schools receive funding from the government depending on how well the school’s students test on the standardized tests. However, the schools’ districts are formed by the social-economic standings of the area. Due to how the districts are drawn and how the funding model is structured in America’s educational system many kids are left behind. People’s intellect is important for a person to thrive in American society; and the way that intelligence is measured is through standardized testing. Intelligence is a “moral” inequality that society has imposed on mankind. According to Rousseau, natural inequality is not developed if not educated; therefore, inequality increases with more education. In places like America, education is the key to having a greater opportunity to achieving greatness. So when certain kids do not have the same access to education inequalities become more prevalent in the same communities that have low socio-economic