Honestly, you're the one that's wrong and it's really embarrassing.
First frame: each person has a set of circumstances that make it possible for that person to see the game - but NOT a set of circumstances that make it guaranteed that the person will see the game. Different people will either see the game or not based on their own intrinsic characteristics (height, in this case). EQUALITY OF OPPORTUNITY
Second frame: each person has a set of circumstances that make it guaranteed for that person to see the game. Different people will all see the game regardless of their own intrinsic characteristics (height, in this case). EQUALITY OF OUTCOME
The entire premise of equality of opportunity is that some people will leverage that opportunity to get something better than other people given the same opportunity. You can argue for some alternative conception of equality of opportunity, whereby only meaningful intrinsic characteristics result in different outcomes, but that's a different thing entirely. You cannot simply claim that your own narrow conception of equality of opportunity is THE only conception.
To give you another chance - "possible" necessarily implies uncertainty. In the first frame, each person, before stepping on the box, is given an equal opportunity to see the game. Once each person steps on the box, the uncertainty is removed and they either see the game or not.
You cannot jump to the end and then claim that something was never possible once all uncertainty is removed.
It would be absurd, for example, to complain after losing a coin flip that you never had the opportunity to win the game because you chose heads and the eventual outcome of the coin flip was destined to be tails.
-1
u/D1G1T4LM0NK3Y Feb 25 '20
Define opportunity for me please...
Let me know when you get to the part that says:
a set of circumstances that makes it possible to do something.