Social mobility was just as high in medieval England as it is in the US today

By -
"In terms of social mobility, then, what did the Scientific Revolution, the Enlightenment, and the Industrial Revolution achieve? Very little." -- Gregory Clark, The Son Also Rises, p. 75

Or in modern Sweden, or modern England.

Comments

  1. Samson Corwell12:16 AM

    Well that sucks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. gcallah2:10 PM

      It is not the social mobility is low in the US: it is the same here as in Sweden. Or is it is anywhere.

      Delete
  2. KPres2:21 AM

    He also notes that the persistent stratification is largely a result of genetic factors. Seems the egalitarian/blank slate assumption is the big mistake of modern social philosophy.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Samson Corwell11:16 PM

      That's even more depressing?

      Delete
    2. gcallah11:28 PM

      On the positive side, social mobility is real, and seemingly can't be snuffed out.

      Delete
    3. gcallah11:29 PM

      Although the caste system in India came close to doing so!

      Delete
    4. Samson Corwell12:42 AM

      I remember learning about the Hindu caste system in high school. Thankfully it itself has nearly been snuffed out.

      Delete
    5. gcallah12:51 AM

      Clark's study shows that it persists: if your ancestors were upper caste a century ago, you are much more likely to be in the elite today than if they were not, despite extensive government programs attempting to "snuff it out."

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose
Read more