It’s true that we don’t like to think people better-off than us might be better than us. But two caveats:
Just because the cream is concentrated at the top, doesn’t mean that most of the cream (or the best cream) is at the top.
Causation probably runs both ways on this one. There is a lot of evidence that richer and more-respected people are happier and healthier. Various explanations have been tried to explain this, including the explanation that health causes career success. That explanation turned out to have serious problems, although I can’t now remember what they are, other than that I heard them summarized in a talk from a SAGE (anti-aging) conference circa 2004, which I can no longer find any information via Google on because there is now a different organization called SAGE that holds conferences on LGBT aging that totally dominates Google search results.
I think that, if we could measure the degree to which a culture is able to promote based on merit, it would turn out to be a powerful economic indicator—particularly for knowledge-based economies.
Causation probably runs both ways on this one. There is a lot of evidence that richer and more-respected people are happier and healthier. Various explanations have been tried to explain this, including the explanation that health causes career success.
What about a third factor being the crucial decider in both, such the ability to handle/minimize stress levels? As you rise nearer to the top, stress increases. Those most able to adapt to it continue to rise, because high stress levels have a negative effect on brain function, and eventually the people who can’t handle the stress are forced to fold. Stress also weakens the immune system and has other negative effects on health.
Logically it should hold that being able to effectively decrease stress would maximize both your chance to rise to the top and your health.
Not hard to find SAGE; ‘SAGE anti-aging conference’ combined with restricting Google search to 2003-2005 turned up a citation to its website as the fourth hit: http://www.sagecrossroads.net
It’s true that we don’t like to think people better-off than us might be better than us. But two caveats:
Just because the cream is concentrated at the top, doesn’t mean that most of the cream (or the best cream) is at the top.
Causation probably runs both ways on this one. There is a lot of evidence that richer and more-respected people are happier and healthier. Various explanations have been tried to explain this, including the explanation that health causes career success. That explanation turned out to have serious problems, although I can’t now remember what they are, other than that I heard them summarized in a talk from a SAGE (anti-aging) conference circa 2004, which I can no longer find any information via Google on because there is now a different organization called SAGE that holds conferences on LGBT aging that totally dominates Google search results.
I think that, if we could measure the degree to which a culture is able to promote based on merit, it would turn out to be a powerful economic indicator—particularly for knowledge-based economies.
What about a third factor being the crucial decider in both, such the ability to handle/minimize stress levels? As you rise nearer to the top, stress increases. Those most able to adapt to it continue to rise, because high stress levels have a negative effect on brain function, and eventually the people who can’t handle the stress are forced to fold. Stress also weakens the immune system and has other negative effects on health.
Logically it should hold that being able to effectively decrease stress would maximize both your chance to rise to the top and your health.
Not hard to find SAGE; ‘SAGE anti-aging conference’ combined with restricting Google search to 2003-2005 turned up a citation to its website as the fourth hit: http://www.sagecrossroads.net