Should you hold everyone to the same standards?

Perchperkins

Greetings all!

Ive recently been doing some thinking and I realize I always hold everyone to the same standards that I hold myself to. (im a broke college student for context)

For example, if one of my professors brings up the fact that African Americans make significantly less than most caucasian and have a net worth that is significantly less, people and that it is a result of systematic racism, I would simply say something like,

"it all really depends on your character, work ethic, and how you spend. You don't have to make 100k a year to be a millionaire, people make 40k a year and live frugally for years and save and invest and become multimillionaires. its all about what you do with your money and it seems that African Americans like to spend money on things that don't have any real return on their investment like "supreme clothing" or expensive cars. I think it is more of cultural thing"

The problem with this is that I am holding a group of general people to my own standards. I try to live frugally, and I save 20% of my paycheck, invest in index funds etc... and I don't really buy dumb fashion things and I drive a 2013 Hyundai Elantra and maintain it as well as I can because its cheap and reliable. I have no problem driving a beater car if it works and is cheap.

The problem comes when the argument that "they don't have anyone to teach them this" comes into play. This is true. Most poorer people don't have financially responsible parents who can teach them these things. However my parents didn't teach me anything. I just learned it via youtube and by talking to people.

I did this because I am high in conscientiousness and seek to improve all the time. Lots of poorer people aren't incredibly conscientious and won't naturally seek financial improvement, and the way I see it, it is inherently their fault, but at the same time it isn't.

Im very analytical and see life as simply actions and results. If you aren't getting the results you want, take different actions. People don't become wealthy by sticking to poor financial habits. in a nutshell, poorer people are not taking the right actions, and aren't going to get the right results. Whereas someone who is wealthy IS taking different actions and getting better results.

It is simply choice. The game of life is not personal and does not care about your situation. You take different actions, you get different results.

I already realize that life can be unexpected and difficult and I have an emergency fund of $360 saved up (adding $200-300 a month to it) and I save 20% of my paycheck. If life tries hit me with unexpected financial burdens I am prepared to deal with them. Im not at any advantage, I just realize what can happen in life and prepare for it.

So the question is, is it fair to judge everyone by your own standards even though everyone is different and has different situations?

Echarmion

So the question is, is it fair to judge everyone by your own standards even though everyone is different and has different situations? — Perchperkins

The answer depends on exactly what you mean when you say "judge". The first question is whether or not we are actually judging people, in their entirety, or actions of these people. The second question is whether we are judging according to moral or legal norms, or whether your judgement is instrumental towards some goal (like an effective distribution of resources). We usually try to judge everyone's actions to a single standard in legal questions, for example. But when we want to distribute resources effectively, it'd be a pretty terrible idea to ignore the differences.

I don't want to personally attack you, but to me it kinda sounds like you're asking whether or not your personal feeling of superiority towards other people is justified, and the answer to that is pretty much always going to be "no".

Some notes about individual points you make:

You don't have to make 100k a year to be a millionaire, people make 40k a year and live frugally for years and save and invest and become multimillionaires. — Perchperkins

"People" also win the lottery. It's generally a bad idea to extrapolate from outliers. Most people who make 40K a year and live frugally don't become millionaires. Focusing on the ones that do will expose you to survivorship bias.

I did this because I am high in conscientiousness and seek to improve all the time. Lots of poorer people aren't incredibly conscientious and won't naturally seek financial improvement, and the way I see it, it is inherently their fault, but at the same time it isn't. — Perchperkins

I think you've hit on an important notion here. The notion of "character traits" isn't exactly well defined. If someone is born with bad vision, we treat that as a disability that they can't be blamed for. If someone is born with a lazy disposition, we treat that as a "character flaw" and we do blame people for that. At the end of the day, the distinction is somewhat arbitrary.

Im very analytical and see life as simply actions and results. If you aren't getting the results you want, take different actions. People don't become wealthy by sticking to poor financial habits. in a nutshell, poorer people are not taking the right actions, and aren't going to get the right results. Whereas someone who is wealthy IS taking different actions and getting better results. — Perchperkins

Two things here. You're now talking about judging individual actions, not people in their entirety. Saying "this action is a poor choice" and "you are simply a person that makes poor choices" sends very different messages.

Secondly, good financial habits are neither a sufficient nor a necessary condition for getting rich. And the same is true for the inverse.

It is simply choice. The game of life is not personal and does not care about your situation. You take different actions, you get different results. — Perchperkins

Life does have no-win scenarios though. And, assuming that we could give everyone a guide to making the right decision (according to some pre-formulated goal), do we really want to live in a world where such conformity is enforced by, say, withholding aid to people who deviate?

Terrapin Station

I don't hold everyone to the same standards, no. I adjust my expectations and assessments based on capabilities, history, context and so on.

fdrake

It's a noble gesture to hold everyone to the same standards.

It matters what the standards are and where they come from, though. They're usually not derived from reason, they come from socialisation and life experience; and very rarely, study.

Think of all those arguments you've been in, usually with a lover, where neither of you could understand what the other was saying; what you thought was normal was not what they thought was normal. Follow the resulting intuition about the contextual fungibility of standards to differences in life experiences and socialisation, then notice there are trends in life experience and socialisation based on your circumstances of birth and life events after.

deletedusercb

So the question is, is it fair to judge everyone by your own standards even though everyone is different and has different situations? — Perchperkins

If you somehow know what you would be like if you grew up in a poor environment with all that entails in terms of parental stress and possible absence, poor nutrition (often), low expectations from teachers and peers, highly stressed environtments with greater crime, for example, and with fewer, if any role models within and near you family for what sucessful is.....and so on, and you are to say

If I were in that situation I would achieve X, so they should achieve X

then sure, you can hold people to that standard.

But the problem is

how could you possibly know?

NOS4A2

It depends on the standards. Some are universal and some pertain to particular contexts. The universal ones should be held to everyone.

Banno

it seems that African Americans like to spend money on things that don't have any real return on their investment like "supreme clothing" or expensive cars. — Perchperkins

Not at all racist.

Perchperkins

↪Banno

Its not racist, its a observation. There are plenty of examples of the differences of their culture compared to other cultures.

unenlightened

If he had type 2 because he had been super-sizing for years like most Americans, I'd have no sympathy, but this guy had type 1 so it ain't his fault but that of the foully inadequate social system of the US.
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/alex-smith-died-couldnt-afford-insulin/

Don't die of third-rate standards.

Pfhorrest

You should hold everyone to the same standards, but the formulation of those standards should include variables for variable circumstances etc. Treat all like people in all like circumstances alike.

Banno

Its not racist, its a observation. — Perchperkins

:rofl:

Judaka

↪Perchperkins

Endeavour to be "hard on yourself and easy on others", hold high standards for yourself but do not apply them to others. If you consider yourself wise or fortunate to have learned about the value of saving your money then don't blame others for not being as wise or fortunate as you. Rather, be generous and not conceited.

Philosophy is often about finding the answer that would work for the most people. I give you that answer with that in consideration. Be conceited if you want, after all, I am.

As for applying standards equally to everyone, there is not much point in your "standard" of saving money and being financially responsible. You've phrased your question as if it's about standards but it just seems to me that you're making a case for poverty being more of a character flaw because you believe it's caused by bad financial practices, laziness, vanity, shortsightedness or whatever else.

You're already aware that people are different, with different lives, different priorities, different circumstances and that life is unfair. I would advise you to forget about trying to find out whether poverty is a character flaw, adopt an "innocent until proven guilty" approach and refuse to come to a judgement on anything but a case-by-case basis.

If you can be generous in your assumptions about people, I believe it will help you in many contexts across life and it may help improve you in the estimation of others. There is no value in being prejudicial against poor people, what can you know about someone because they're poor? Nothing really. I advise reserving judgement until you've got the facts.

As for the general concept of holding everyone to the same standards, I think that it depends on many variables and I have some standards I hold everyone to and some standards that I am willing to make exceptions for and some which are specific to certain people and I think that's the same for everyone.

Should you hold everyone to the same standards?

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Categories

More Discussions