- Thu Jan 19, 2006 4:06 pm
I remeber I've read somewhere Isaac Asimov telling a little story. He was contacted by a *newpaper* to write a paper about some *scientific* discoveries about the intellectual - I suppose - superiority of white people on blacks. He told to the editor that it should be better for both that he tried to resume what he should write on this topic, as he was sure his paper will be refused. He suppose that the editor expected something supporting the segregation - what implied that he did not know much about Isaac. So he began to explain what should have been his paper if any. First, he would have write that he was very surprised by such discoveries, as his scientific and philosophical culture, as his personal opinion and observations, do not make he think that there is something like a superiority of white people. Second, well, if it is a real fact, as some more studies may prove it, so we may do what it implies: make separate and better restrooms for whites, better seats everywhere for whites and so on. Isaac will regret that, but what can he do against facts? He is not God. Third, if there is a real superiority of whites, why shouldn't we look if, in the white people, we cannot found another group of people that are superior -genetically, I suppose, and make for them even best restrooms, seats and so on. Then the redactor stoped him, and say that, yes, Isaac was right and that he will never published such story in his newspaper.
So, why boring you with this story. Because I think that, following Isaac's idear, you may improve your improved democraty. Why just 4 questions? You could use many, and make each vote weigh as heavy as the reponses correct. So smart people will count more that silly ones. But is that right?
And do you really think that intellegent cannot be stupid? Many educated people do not vote with their brains, but with their hearth or worst, their stomach...