Quote:
Originally Posted by DiracSpike
To tie this back to Peterson I was watching a video of his where he talked about the pradeau (sp?) distribution of certain populations. According to him it's a distinct sociological phenomenon that in any group 10% of the population will produce 50% of the output. Doesn't matter if it's lawyers, geologists or farmers. That 10% is selected for by natural aptitude, and it benefits the whole population because without that 50% everyone would suffer.
|
Those 10 per cent used to be widely distributed in communities all over the place. The doctors, lawyers, and successful small business owners in a town or small city. They're make up the civic leadership, chair the local charities, head up the clubs and associations that used to knit communities together. They'd be the leaders, examples of high achievement. And their kids would be distributed across all the schools in a region. So every school would have a core of engaged students and parents.
Today, high achievers have abandoned smaller communities and declining neighbourhoods, and now cluster in much larger communities made up almost entirely of high-achievers. They've helped create vibrant pockets of innovation and affluence. But they've left declining communities bereft of leadership and energy. Now we have entire schools full of engaged and ambitious kids, and entire schools full of those left behind.
In that sense, the 10 per cent are no longer benefiting the rest of society the way they used to, at the grass roots level of engagement in economically diverse communities.