Stanford experiment showed very vividly the difference between inferior and superior.
People given power are very prone to misuse it. The reason for this can be anything – usually physiological difference (even nowadays the “race” issue) – to make difference between dark and light skin, between blue and brown eyes. The issue at stake is not the inner-given difference between people, but how they cooperate with such issues. Saying that the difference which is given (inherent) makes someone more/less important is from its core a stupid one. Assets of human life which are given should never serve as a basis for distingushing people from one another (as M.L. King says in his I have a dream speech: “I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.” Opposite view leads to saying that man/woman are better, dark/light skin is beautiful and the other not, blue/brown-eyed people have pure blood, Jews/Germans etc – we have seen to what this has led. What makes human life worth living is not which asset is one born with, but how one uses these gifts in order to make the world a better place. What should be admired is not the “given” – beauty, strength, inteligence, color etc., but on the opposite – how is one capable of using these gifts and making good use of them. What makes human a human is not what and how he or she is born, but what he makes of him/herself. This shows that people formerly and even nowadays seen as inferior can and are capable of same aims and results as the ones formerly seen as superior – the issue at stake is not with what is one born, but what one makes of himself – matter of choice.