I am surprised by what many Christians take to be thoughtful analysis of a subject. There is a video that I have seen posted by many of my friends on social media that is a perfect example of dreadful reasoning on an important topic. In no way do I intend this to be a smack down on anyone. I merely want to encourage discernment.
You can find the video here.
And you can find my logical analysis of the video below:
As a summation, I must dismiss the argument as ineffective on the grounds that it is among the worst analogies I've ever seen. It is in the same neighborhood as Judith Jarvis Thomson's argument from analogy for abortion. We should remember that arguments from analogy are meant to connect two relevantly similar states of affairs, and say that what is true of one therefore must be true of the other. So what is the comparison here? The comparison is between a fictional race for a $100 dollar bill and the "race of life," or life itself. How does the analogy fare? Here are several serious defects in the comparison between the race scenario and life:
Note well that the goal is some uniform commercial outcome (the $100 dollar bill… presumably undefined prosperity, probably something like suburban bliss). What if one of the runners said, "I don’t need to run that far because I can be content with $60 as a coach." And not only that, if the analogy is real to life, then one shouldn’t arbitrarily exclude athletic talent (or any other talent) that immediately catapults a person to the front for no other reason than they have a natural talent. And is that fair?
2. Note the title is “privilege” and not “white privilege,” but the editing means it to be an attack on “white privilege.” Obviously the people who made the video know that the term “white privilege” is going to be received as morally reprehensible by many, but the creators of the video still believe white privilege is the issue, and so they say the same thing visually and trim the word white from the privilege. Clever, but also predictable and pedantic. All of the shots of the advantaged are white kids; all the shots of the disadvantaged are people of color. At one point the lecturer calls everyone's attention to "some of the black kids" in the back who could "smoke" the rest in a race if the race were fair.
1. The analogy communicates a Marxist worldview. Envy and greed are palpable in the video. The envy of those without the head start is made to be understandable. And the winner is lectured to remember that he got there easily and many others are without his advantages.
Note well that the goal is some uniform commercial outcome (the $100 dollar bill… presumably undefined prosperity, probably something like suburban bliss). What if one of the runners said, "I don’t need to run that far because I can be content with $60 as a coach." And not only that, if the analogy is real to life, then one shouldn’t arbitrarily exclude athletic talent (or any other talent) that immediately catapults a person to the front for no other reason than they have a natural talent. And is that fair?
2. Note the title is “privilege” and not “white privilege,” but the editing means it to be an attack on “white privilege.” Obviously the people who made the video know that the term “white privilege” is going to be received as morally reprehensible by many, but the creators of the video still believe white privilege is the issue, and so they say the same thing visually and trim the word white from the privilege. Clever, but also predictable and pedantic. All of the shots of the advantaged are white kids; all the shots of the disadvantaged are people of color. At one point the lecturer calls everyone's attention to "some of the black kids" in the back who could "smoke" the rest in a race if the race were fair.
-
3. We know nothing about the sample chosen. Where do these kids come from? One could conceivably do this very exercise at a predominantly black school or Hispanic school and you will still have considerable disparities of advantage there.
3. We know nothing about the sample chosen. Where do these kids come from? One could conceivably do this very exercise at a predominantly black school or Hispanic school and you will still have considerable disparities of advantage there.
4. The assumption is that everyone should be equal. And if the pressure on the privileged works well, then the ultimate utopian vision of equality can be reached. But what if the video only shows us that we can expect inequality from the complexities of life. Is everyone born with equal intelligence, or equal physical stamina, or equal emotional or spiritual strength? Are the complexities of moral training and parental guidance ever going to be equal even in intact families? Again, people who make videos like this seem to be calling for what Thomas Sowell calls, “cosmic equality.” To illustrate, let’s assume I could forcefully take the $100 dollar bill from the winner of the race, then distribute it to everyone in the group so that equality was the outcome of the unfair race. Say everyone received two dollars as a result. Are we sure that after two years everyone will have an equal increase in their wealth? And then are those with more going to bequeath those advantages to their children?
5. Note also that he says, “you are here for nothing that you did…” That is true, but they are there for many things that their parents and grandparents did for them. Should those contributions be discounted? Why not conclude from this not that the privileged should feel guilty about that privilege, but instead that the people who put these young people in positions of disadvantage through miserable moral choices should feel all the guilt?
6. It makes the assumption that there is only one prize. In life, it is possible for me to get the $100 now and someone else to get a different $100 later.
7. Work can provide compensations for the advantages listed. The point here is that if this is meant to be an analogy to life, then it is silly to say that regardless of starting position, everyone runs at the same speed or even cares to run at all or runs in the same direction. Some will just sit there while others run. Some will run towards different goals. Also, it is meant to be an analogy to life, which means every person brings their whole life to the race, and others with them as well. What if the race started with a math puzzle? What if it starts like the Iditarod, with family providing our mush team ahead of us? What if it started with a person’s ability to form a team? The race of life is infinitely more complex than a 100 meter dash and arbitrary factors placing people in various positions of advantage all headed in the same arbitrary Marxian direction.
