if one must start a skill @ a later age for u 2 b equal talented, ur not good as them
Let's take an example of two kids.
Kid 1 is privileged because teachers want him to study martial arts from a young age because he's an appropriate character for school.
Kid 2 is unprivileged because teachers don't want him studying martial arts because him beating someone else in a fight, even in self-defense, is not within political correctness.
Kid 1 starts Krav Maga from the time he's a kid but isn't very talented.
Kid 2 is very talented but has to start at age 18 because his school lies to his parents to try and stop him from getting equally good at martial arts.
If this is what's required for Kid 1 to be equal to or better than Kid 2 than Kid 1 isn't really better at any martial art than Kid 2, at least in terms of talent. Maybe you would say he's more skilled, but that's not a fair distribution of skills.
Do you agree?
Kid 1 is privileged because teachers want him to study martial arts from a young age because he's an appropriate character for school.
Kid 2 is unprivileged because teachers don't want him studying martial arts because him beating someone else in a fight, even in self-defense, is not within political correctness.
Kid 1 starts Krav Maga from the time he's a kid but isn't very talented.
Kid 2 is very talented but has to start at age 18 because his school lies to his parents to try and stop him from getting equally good at martial arts.
If this is what's required for Kid 1 to be equal to or better than Kid 2 than Kid 1 isn't really better at any martial art than Kid 2, at least in terms of talent. Maybe you would say he's more skilled, but that's not a fair distribution of skills.
Do you agree?
yes
Side Score: 2
|
 |
no
Side Score: 0
|
|
|
|
|
1
point
1
point
|
No arguments found. Add one!
|
