I agree with part of your statement. The point of this scenario is that it stipulates a flaw in the initial logic. I can guarantee that given N number of groups, the chances of the best bridge being build by group 1...N are 100%&#x2F;N.<p>I don&#x27;t however think that good ideas have been &#x27;ignored&#x27;. Even if so, the way the initial argument was presented seems to imply that the bridges cannot stand on it&#x27;s own and needs others to help it.<p>If I was a [unprivileged group] and a writer, bridge builder, or a general do-er I would be offended by that insinuation. It implies that [unprivileged group] people cannot succeed on their own ideas.<p>The reality is, we live in a market of ideas and the best ones are usually chosen.<p>If you think that is not the case, then I would like you to name at least 2 fields without a prominent [unprivileged group] person with leading theories and ideas. The thing is you cannot.<p>For instance, my love of literature not only centered around Poe but also Douglass, my life is filled with carbon-filament light-bulbs, and some of my long distance relatives had their lives saved by soy-based fire prevention systems in the navy during WWII.