Are upper middle class kids innately smarter and more talented than other children?
Earlier, I made a case for banning private schools (see “ban private schools” link to the left), and also responded to various objections that you raised.
My case for banning was really on two fronts:
A practical case – we’re wasting enormous amounts of native talent – and perhaps even missing out on that cure for cancer – because second-raters are, in effect, being bought a place at the front of the high-status jobs queue.
A moral case – it is unjust that the children of a small minority should so dramatically dominate the high status professions because their parents bought them a “superior” private education. For by buying their own children a leg up in this way, they dramatically restrict the life chances and opportunities available to other, innately more gifted and talented individuals.
However, my objection did, in both cases, rest on an assumption – that the children of those 7 percent who dominate the high status professions do not, in fact, have greater native wit and talent. I’ve been assuming that native wit and talent is distributed fairly evenly across the social classes. But perhaps it isn’t. It’s this suggestion that I now want to explore.
Could the children of that top 7%, who so effectively hand on power and privilege from generation to generation, actually be innately smarter and more gifted than the rest? Could this be the real reason why they dominate those high status professions?