Social classes

[Armatus]

What are your thoughts on social classes or social castes?

In America do you think there are actually poor people or just ghetto dwellers?

(disclaimer I understand there are those who are destitute, I'm talking about the many that aren't)

[Ancient Aliens]

What are your thoughts on social classes or social castes?

In America do you think there are actually poor people or just ghetto dwellers?

(disclaimer I understand there are those who are destitute, I'm talking about the many that aren't)

I believe that social castes are manifestations of defunct human instinct. They derive from the human need to categorize and the hormones that distinguish alphas from regular tribal members. With regards to modern times, I think they are unproductive, limit creativity, weaken competition and the ability for advancement.

Social classes are representative of our aristocratical principals and the familiar extension of wealth. If heirs were to recieve no money at all, there would be a much larger middle class bracket.

In the United States there are poor people (lower class people), and there are 'ghetto dwellers'. 'Ghetto dwellers', or welfare recipients, fall into their own distinct social category as they do not work for their social position.

As far as poor people, there are people who work hard and legitimately cannot afford to put food on the table every night, and struggle to keep their utilities on. I for one have been one of these people. It is restricting, and it turns life into a struggle for survival. Advancement is hard when you are stuck in such a rut, as I had found myself unable to further my education. I would say that I am a thoughtful, intelligent person, and I do not have any mental handicaps or disabilities; my position was simply preordained by my lack of resources at birth. If the United States was a pure meritocracy I would have had my IQ tested and be placed into a training facility at birth, but it obviously isn't that way.

However (and this is the wonderful thing about living in the modern era in a capitalistic, entrepreneurial society), I was able to advance and prove my worth and I am now out of the lower class bracket. There are most definately lower class people, but there is also most definately a way to advance.

[Claudius Gothicus]

Too big of a subject to actually make some judgments and arguments without actually starting to define it.

Classes are the product of social conditions, they are external to individuals(though subjected to the actions of them, therefore classes are like ''systems'' that try to impose a certain behavior to the individual to allow for their continued existence) and have their own ever-changing and non-mechanical dynamic.

Yes, there are social classes and those do not arise of Individual Aggregates but of wholes that acquire distinct natures(and work as ''set of rules and regulations'' on the individuals minds).

[Armatus]

However (and this is the wonderful thing about living in the modern era in a capitalistic, entrepreneurial society), I was able to advance and prove my worth and I am now out of the lower class bracket.

Oh stop being so humble... we know you're the author of Legendary Times!

[Panic]

There have always been and will be social classes and social castes whether we admit it or not.
The following does not go for the all poor people but for most of them cuz there are exceptions.
Poor people are poor because they are poor in their thinking.I don`t blame rich people for being rich cause they have simply more skills to make money.
Giving money to poor people is not the solution cause in my own experience i can tell that more money don`t work for them.
Most of people like money ,but the problem with poor and mid-class is that they do not want to invest time to learn how to make more money or where to invest ,how to protect assests.
They simply just wait someone else to do it for them or someone else to tell them what to do,where to invest and so on....

I stop this post now cuz frustration is taking over

[Ancient Aliens]

Oh stop being so humble... we know you're the author of Legendary Times!

[Armatus]

I do agree 'poor' is a state of mind, though a little money doesn't hurt especially if it is earned. Now of course that's my own thought.

[removeduser_4536284751384]

There's nothing wrong with social classes. We like to associate with people similar to ourselves. Intelligent people like other intelligent people, professionals like other professionals, people interested in politics like to associate with others interested in politics.

And how intelligent, funny and attractive you are strongly influences how much you earn.

If the United States was a pure meritocracy I would have had my IQ tested and be placed into a training facility at birth, but it obviously isn't that way.

Not only can IQ change, it never stops changing throughout your life. For example if a young student were to take an IQ test during term they would do better than during the holidays. If they spend their holidays playing computer games or sports they would be better at the spatial parts of the test.

The most important determinant in how successful someone will be is how strong their willpower is. There is really nothing they can't do or change with strong enough willpower. Studies have shown that children who are better at rejecting something now for something better later tend to be more successful and happier in life.

[Armatus]

How do you feel about cross class interaction and superiority/inferiority?

[Ancient Aliens]

Not only can IQ change, it never stops changing throughout your life. For example if a young student were to take an IQ test during term they would do better than during the holidays. If they spend their holidays playing computer games or sports they would be better at the spatial parts of the test.

The most important determinant in how successful someone will be is how strong their willpower is. There is really nothing they can't do or change with strong enough willpower. Studies have shown that children who are better at rejecting something now for something better later tend to be more successful and happier in life

Yeah I was being incredibly general with that example

I too believe that there are many more important factors other than IQ, and I am aware of the fact that IQ is malleable.

[Armatus]

Don't forgot that social class changes with age for some people, others with income and others through expression of their natural talents.

[molonthegreat]

Social classes is something that has always existed and will always exist, since not everyone can be successful and there will always be different classes in society even though naive utopian communists never will accept it since a society where everyone is equal doesn't work.

[Armatus]

That's more of a political belief, than a philosophical one. You can certainly discuss the merits of treating people with equality. Though equality doesn't really mean the same thing for politics as it does for face to face interaction.

[Kjertesvein]

If there is force - there is a class? If there is no force, there are just people?

@OP
Please let's define what makes people into a certian class.

I do agree 'poor' is a state of mind, though a little money doesn't hurt especially if it is earned.

What if it's not earned - Does money alone help? Like giving your friend a prostitute, in order to find love.

~Wille

[Denny Crane!]

Ultimately it is about education and access. In this day and age class merely describes cultural commonalities, income brackets and education levels but there is so much breaking that beyond it being anything but a broad occasionally gross generalisation it is an almost useless phrase.

Go back 200 years and classes were distinct and defined with little in the way of examples that break the mold and it became more important. This is why I have a beef with marxists always drawing everything back to class.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Caste and class are necessary outcomes of the perpetual face of human inequality. Their existence is natural, their purpose as clear as day. What matters is their essence: how, and to what purpose, they should exist?

It is true, though, that the current model of social classes, based merely on income differences, is the most defective and ridiculous one.

[Denny Crane!]

Caste and class are necessary outcomes of the perpetual face of human inequality. Their existence is natural, their purpose as clear as day. What matters is their essence: how, and to what purpose, they should exist?

It is true, though, that the current model of social classes, based merely on income differences, is the most defective and ridiculous one.

It is the only possible one it can be though because what else is there? You can be highly educated and poor, you can be dumb and poor or dumb and rich, interests promulgate despite income status not because of it. The internet being one of the great levellers.

It is a complicated mess and that tends to be where I leave it!

[Claudius Gothicus]

Ultimately it is about education and access. In this day and age class merely describes cultural commonalities, income brackets and education levels but there is so much breaking that beyond it being anything but a broad occasionally gross generalisation it is an almost useless phrase.

Go back 200 years and classes were distinct and defined with little in the way of examples that break the mold and it became more important. This is why I have a beef with marxists always drawing everything back to class.

The magic about social classes(and every other social subject for that matter) is that once Social Scientist start operating over them they start changing and reformulating themselves. That's why Marxism failed to explain reality on a coherent scale, because classes are not inherently inert things they are at a constant change and the operations made by social scientist influence them.

[Denny Crane!]

The magic about social classes(and every other social subject for that matter) is that once Social Scientist start operating over them they start changing and reformulating themselves. That's why Marxism failed to explain reality on a coherent scale, because classes are not inherently inert things they are at a constant change and the operations made by social scientist influence them.

So does that mean a lot of social science is as bollocks as I've always suspected it to be

[Claudius Gothicus]

So does that mean a lot of social science is as bollocks as I've always suspected it to be

Well... maybe. Its just that a theroy that aims at cristallizing reality on a '' A vs B'' basis is sooner or later stopping to be a theory and start becoming fairy tale.