It completely misses the underlying point.
Further nobody questions the legitimacy of "early risers" and blames it on lifestyle. In fact most consider it a positive and something to aspire to. When you go your whole life having to dispel the initial impression of laziness due to your natural sleep rythmn it becomes personal. I'm fortunate that I've come to a place in my career where I can simply live with my natural rythmn, but most people don't get the chance.
Because being an early riser is adaptive. We're not at all well adapted to operating at night given our sensory apparatus, we're quite well adapted to operate in daylight.
Furthermore, humans aren't genetically predetermined creatures, it's entirely possible to change virtually all of our behaviours and inclinations with the right environmental changes.
Even if being a nightowl were adaptive at one point, that doesn't mean it's adaptive now, and a maladaptive behaviour needs correcting if you want to function in modern society.
> When you go your whole life having to dispel the initial impression of laziness due to your natural sleep rythmn it becomes personal.
Don't go pushing your personal prejudice on a factual discussion. No one here called "nightowls" lazy.
Second sleeps used to be very common with people getting useful work and liesure done during the time between. Activity at night is normal.
"Maladapted" in this case literally means "poorly suited to functioning in typical jobs". Society's normal sleep schedule is exactly what makes night owls maladapted to most jobs.
Of course, you're incorrectly reading some sort of moral judgment in this classification, as you have with many other posts. You should try to be a little more impartial when discussing basic facts.
You are recounting society as it exists today which is abnormal in a historical context. I am speaking of a society that could exist. One where 1/5th the population is not needlessly forced through life exhausted and under performing. Not only would productivity be higher, but we'd get more use out of our otherwise vacant buildings at night. Rush hour would be greatly diminished if not everyone had to arrive at work exactly the same time.
Flex hours are a simple and mainstream solution that more companies should adopt. But it has to start with an appreciation that night owls are not "defective" or as you say, "maladapted".
It doesn't matter if it's arbitrary, what matters is whether a person's habits can easily conform or adapt to its environment. Those that do not, or that cause other problems are maladaptive by definition.
> But it has to start with an appreciation that night owls are not "defective" or as you say, "maladapted".
Defective and maladaptive are not synonyms.
The comment you replied to neither said or implied anything of the sort. He merely conveyed a personal anecdote of an environmental change that allowed a self-identified night owl to function well on a daylight schedule. What's so offensive about that?
I think people are naturally predisposed to certain behaviors but it's not a sealed fate. Diet, exercise and environment might even be more dominant factors.
What is terrible is that we don't accept that some people have different sleep schedules.
Bodies are different though so no doubt our experiences may be very different.
On the one hand our lives will be easier if we just got with the program. But things will never get better if we acquiesce.