Mike4 wrote:It IS a curious question though, isn't it? I notice there are often particular nationalities or races that dominate occupations or subjects. Why is it Polish people are good at building and plumbing? Chinese at building electronics? Black people good at jazz music but not so much Bach and choral? Is it the same reason as white males are good at maths? I don't know, no matter how much I think about it.
But is it not a probable mistake to assume any set of people are inherently "good at" anything just on the evidence that quite a lot of them are involved in it (i.e. are "good" at it!)?
In the past, all train drivers were men. Does this prove men are
inherently better than driving trains than women? Well, in a way, "
Yes" - because only men got to be able to learn how to drive trains...
Mike4 wrote:Also there is the innate ability/enjoy doing it debate. If you are naturally good at something you probably enjoy doing it so do it more, and get even better at it. Or is it that when you enjoy doing something (e.g. maths or jazz) you do it more so get really good at it, which looks to an outsider like natural ability?
Yes, seems to make sense to me. But then not everyone in society gets the chance to pursue what they might otherwise like to pursue - particularly in the past, with more rigidly defined roles and expectations etc. Then again, this itself could 'force' some groups of people into particular roles in society that are the only ones open to them.
Are women inherently better at folding linen than men? Possibly...
P.S. For some reason this has brought Florence Nightingale to mind - '
The lady (nurse!)
with the lamp'. Actually an early statistician (and much more)...