For at least a generation, the word "discrimination", despite being 14 letters long, has been a four-letter word. Its association with prejudice or thwarting the rights and dreams of those who are different from us has burdened the word with a solidly negative context. But does this mean that it's a bad word?
It used to be that discrimination was considered an essential faculty of every adult person. An undiscriminating person was a person without taste or judgment-------a person who could not distinguish between the good and the bad, between low quality and high quality, between what is acceptable and what is not. But in our new Alice in Wonderland world, discrimination has become the ultimate sin, and every politically correct person must declare himself free not only of the practice of discrimination but of any tendency or desire to discriminate.
In fact, discrimination is the ability to discern value-------to use our intellect for greater understanding, separating the imaginary from the real, the good from the bad. The dictionary tells us that ‘discrimination’ also means the process of "distinguishing accurately". It’s a tricky thing, being a discriminating person. Conventional wisdom says elitism has no place in American society. But if we as citizens have an obligation to pursue excellence, the incumbent responsibility to discriminate between great and mediocre cannot be underestimated.
In everyday life, we constantly exercise our judgment to discriminate between good and not-so-good, although in many situations decisions are rendered difficult when the choices are not clearly in black and white, but assume indeterminate shades of grey. How important is discrimination in the conduct of science and the management of institutions? The ability to discriminate between good science and bad science, performers and non-performers, is undoubtedly critical to the health of any organization. The hallmark of a discriminating person is his ability to distinguish between what is of value-------what is desirable and helpful, as opposed to that which is undesirable because it is adverse to his own self-interest.
When we shop for a specific product, we have a choice between a variety of brand-name and generic labels. We know that brand-name recognition is a valuable asset to the producer of goods, and that, other things being equal, the producer's efforts to maintain the quality associated with that brand is a more reliable indicator of product satisfaction. On the other hand, if we purchase a product with e generic label, we take a chance as to its merchantability and quality. Most of us can't afford the time and effort to examine the merits of a generic brand, if a name brand is readily available and produces desired results. (This qualification does not apply to generic and branded prescription drugs because the government certifies generic drugs to be as safe and effective as brand-name drugs.)
The same principle applies to social relationships. People have learned from experience that the members of some segments of society are inferior or superior, in their output of products and services. It is a natural human tendency to patronize members of those groups of persons that can consistently produce superior results.
To the detriment of American society, misinformed sociologists are now insisting that all people are born equal and that all differences in their performance are attributable to their environment. Politicians embrace this idea warmly because it enhances their appeal to a larger number of the voting public. Their bold pronouncement from the nation's sociological and political pulpits is rife with the promise of human equality in an idealized Jeffersonian sense. Their politically-oriented equality scheme has forced American society to jump through hoops and waste prodigious societal wealth on these demagogic ideals.
Aside from applying blanket attributes to different population groups, we face the undisputable fact that many Blacks received scholastic degrees, not based on their scholastic accomplishments, but by virtue of being "African-Americans", thus being entitled to preferential treatment in the educational process. Few persons want to deal with a doctor who may have obtained his diplomas based on his skin color.
By using preliminary, judgmental filters in our decision-making process, we are assured of superior results, fewer problems and greater satisfaction. Discrimination is the hallmark of every successful person. Our ability to discriminate, to separate the wheat from the chaff, keeps us from wasting time, effort and resources. Discrimination-------all discrimination-------is the sine qua non of a successful and happy life.
Sociologists in ivory towers and demagogic politicians favor the slogan: "We need to level the playing field", implying that once the field is level and all players and conditions are equal, general prosperity will prevail. To adopt such a policy would be nothing short of establishing the economics of a communist regime. One of the prerequisites for the success of the free market system is the fact that the playing field is not level, and must not be level. The uneven posture of the free market depends on the un-equality of participants and opportunities in order to adjust to changes immediately and without government intervention. In spite of the pronouncements of American politicians and sociologists, discrimination does not display bigotry but rational self-interest.
America's institutions of higher learning offer initial faculty appointments on ‘contract’; but there are almost no instances of contracts not being renewed-------the equivalent of not being granted tenure. In most institutions, the initial appointments are to ‘permanent’ positions (the mandatory ‘probationary periods’, merely an historical artifact), conjuring up visions of a comfortable sinecure that stretches all the way up to the age of retirement.
Permanence is a prize attribute of the workplace, the government bureaucracy and the public sector providing the gold standard of job security, irrespective of performance. But, academia is not far behind. In these days of privatization, more people are attracted to jobs in companies that apparently lack the guaranteed permanence of government employment; but the uncertainties are offset by higher salaries, better perks and sometimes even greater job satisfaction. Unfortunately, at the workplace we cannot have an impersonal evaluation system; it is necessary to exercise subjective judgment. Similarly, if our public institutions are to move to a higher level of performance, we must improve our ability to discriminate.
Most critically, as technology allows our species to unravel more and more puzzles of reality and thereby acquire greater control, discrimination allows us to develop and maintain ethical principles. Since very early history, we have considered whether the might of the Athenians compared to the people of Melos made right. We have pondered whether Epicurean enjoyment of life was superior to Stoic acceptance of fate, or whether it was the other way around.
Epicurus himself found pleasure to be the highest good, and although he rejected pain as an evil, he knew that some pain was necessary as a means to achieving pleasure. Contrary to the modern use of the term "epicurean" to signify a person given to indulgence in hedonistic pleasures, Epicurus advocated what the Victorians would think of as refinement or "taste". He taught that "just as [someone] does not unconditionally choose the largest amount of food but the most pleasant food, so he savors not the longest time but the most pleasant," and that "Self-sufficiency is a great good… being genuinely convinced that those who least need extravagance enjoy it the most." Hence, Dorian Gray's greatest sin is not surrounding himself with beautiful things; on the contrary, these objects foster pleasure, the supreme good, only insofar as they retain interest in life. "Prudence," the cornerstone of taste, "is the principle of all these things and is the greatest good," Epicurus admonished us. It is not opulence and materialism in themselves, but materialism substituted for valuism that is undesirable.
Instead of slavishly following prepared guidelines, we need to operate within the framework of our newly acquired knowledge. If we understand how religion works, it is not necessary to establish guidelines on how to avoid the pitfalls of religion. Instead, religion will become a non-issue. If we understand the principles of Evolutionary Psychology, we do not need guidelines in order to understand the motivations of other people: we will know precisely the principles that motivate people, including ourselves.
Survival in a hostile environment often relies on the ability to discern patterns in nature, to see beyond the randomized chaos of nature and to replace it with orderly symmetry. It is not coincidental that human beings appreciate symmetry and geometric patterns as pleasing attributes of their environment. This attempt to apply order and symmetry to nature is observable in the geometric patterns displayed in ancient and primitive pottery.
Symmetry, for example, has evolved as an innately desirable feature, greatly favored in the appearance of persons, including their physiognomy. When we allude to beauty in human beings, we often refer to the symmetry in facial or other physical appearances. A person with two arms and two eyes is more able to meet survival needs than a person with only one leg or with only one eye might be. It indicates superior human control over the natural environment and thus implies a superior ability to survive the competitive quest for shelter, food and sexual mates. This innate desire for order and beauty, as expressed by symmetry, is one of the innately desirable features in humans.
The philosopher Schopenhauer described man's attraction to esthetic value as a teleological principle of Nature: "The delusive ecstasy which seizes a man at the sight of a woman whose beauty is suited to him, and pictures to him a union with her as the highest good, is just the sense of the species, which, recognizing the distinct stamp of the same, desires to perpetuate it with this individual. ...Thus what guides man here is really an instinct which is directed to doing the best for the species, while man himself imagines that he only seeks the heightening of his own pleasure."
In addition to anatomical symmetry, esthetic values are reflected in the ability of art forms to convey emotions without explanatory comment. Art speaks for itself. A cave painting or drawing that recalls memories of a hunting scene or a fighting event can carry an emotional impact over many generations, affording the survival advantages of coherence and continuity to a tribe. An art rendering or a musical composition conveys the original emotions evoked by the underlying events as experienced by the artist. This aspect of esthetics has been refined and enhanced throughout millennia of human civilizations, from the cave paintings at Lascaux to Greek culture and the Renaissance.
Only in the 20th century were distortions introduced in this concept of art and esthetics. The concept of Modern Art came into being and distinguished itself from traditional esthetics by being so abstract as to make the communication of emotions difficult or impossible. Funded by grants involuntarily paid for by the public under such federal programs as The National Endowment for the Arts, Modern Art gave rise to the parody "Produced by incompetents, sold by charlatans and bought by ignoramuses". It is enlightening to juxtapose classical art to modern art and to examine the fallacy of the Emperor's New Clothes. Self-anointed art-cognoscenti create the illusion of monetary value in lieu of artistic value. They are more interested in promoting the commercially hyped value of Modern Art than the intrinsic beauty of Fine Art.
Fortunately, most people see beyond this sham. Museums of Modern Art are almost devoid of visitors, while the typical Museum of Fine Art, often next door, is filled with people, hungry for beauty and the esthetics that are an innate part of human nature. In defining esthetics and art, it may be useful to refer to traditional Art as Fine Art or Classical Art in order to distinguish it clearly from the many other art forms that are often misleadingly included in the hierarchical concept of art - ------Abstract Art, Modern Art, Primitive Art, Folk Art.
People often declare "happiness", or some particular version of it, as their ultimate goal. But most people would find it difficult to define precisely what they mean by happiness-------is it fulfillment of one’s major goals, a positive emotion, or optimized pleasure? Paradoxically, Buddhism teaches that the active pursuit of happiness is not likely to result in happiness. In any case, such eudemonism is not an absolute value. That is, we can in fact live without happiness, and most of us do. Nonetheless, we would naturally prefer to feel good than feel bad; and, within limits, this is often possible if one lives virtuously. Dignity and decency beget a measure of contentment.
The human capacity to see beyond family, tribe, and racial appearance did not make our species more intelligent than our primate cousins, but it did enable us to use our superior minds to create systems to improve our health, extend our lives, preserve our accomplishments for future generations, and appreciate the beauty and charm of lesser animals. The hidden tug of pseudo-ideologies which proclaim scientific and metaphysical "proof" of the equality of all life are themselves throwbacks to prehistory and perhaps even to proto-human dullness.
Hitler is the most notorious
example of a frightened creature yearning for the security of the bestial womb.
The radical Arabic form of Islam likewise views much of the world as "life
unworthy of life." The ranting and raving of Louis Farrakhan about white devils
created by space aliens is likewise so ridiculous that the abdication of
intelligent judgment is prerequisite for listening to these absurdities.
What is conspicuously absent from these perspectives on human existence is the
much maligned process of discrimination. While our power to discriminate has
become in modern parlance synonymous with bigotry, discrimination is actually a
high virtue which like any virtue may become at times a vice. A discriminating
mind can distinguish between the noble and the ignoble behavior of individuals
who are not part of the family or the tribe.
Although we have the capacity to develop an exquisite sense of values, we are never forced to act in accordance with them. All of us remain at all times free agents responsible for our final choices. Even when we develop a complex ethical system, we remain free to act or not act in accord with our beliefs. We may ignore them or even act against them. Our beliefs have causal power as influences, but no more. This is the autonomy of free will, without which no ethic or morality can be claimed.
Discrimination creates individuals whose values are sui generis. It empowers us to find areas of commonality which the sensory awareness of dolphins and primates cannot perceive. Through discrimination, we can analyze, compare and judge that vast record of past events which we call history, and dismiss species higher than ourselves as a product of science fiction.
--HP
____________________________________________________________________________________
ortions of this essay were adapted from Thoughts on Discrimination, a broadcast address presented in February,1997 by Dr. William L. Pierce, founder and Chairman of the National Alliance, and Walter Requadt's How Life Really Works: Happiness in an Unhappy World, the full text of which can be downloaded from The Happy Iconoclast website at http://www.rationality.net.P