Yeah, as I foreshadowed in the previous comment, people don't actually have equal capabilities, so "universal equal capability" as an underpinning of egalitarian thinking is a flawed idea.
As you point out capability is neither defined by the human sorting baskets that delimit prejudicial thinking, nor is it intrinsic to the individual, instead it's a derivative of the person and their environment Since their environment includes their sociopolitical environment, we have a situation in which the capability of the individual is, in part, imposed by society.
The intersection between capability and prejudice is extremely interesting because of the way false dogma about capability is used to justify unequal power structures. "The Bell Curve".
That link between notional capability and social status is why there is a frisson of transgressive excitement around transhumanism: think of the controversy around Oscar Pistorius ...
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
As you point out capability is neither defined by the human sorting baskets that delimit prejudicial thinking, nor is it intrinsic to the individual, instead it's a derivative of the person and their environment Since their environment includes their sociopolitical environment, we have a situation in which the capability of the individual is, in part, imposed by society.
The intersection between capability and prejudice is extremely interesting because of the way false dogma about capability is used to justify unequal power structures. "The Bell Curve".
That link between notional capability and social status is why there is a frisson of transgressive excitement around transhumanism: think of the controversy around Oscar Pistorius ...