4 ms·

What's the difference between "leveling up" and rising in a meritocracy? Ideally in any organization those talented enough to run it will rise to the top and "l

by matt1 17y ago

What's the difference between "leveling up" and rising in a meritocracy? Ideally in any organization those talented enough to run it will rise to the top and "level up". If education and training help you achieve that, what's the problem?

Alex3917 17y ago
Merit is continuous and not discrete. When you take a continuous function and try to make it look discrete, what you'll notice is that there is 'some extra' between the actual merit curve and the stepwise function that touches it. These so-called meritocracies are just a way to skim that extra off the top. Look at it this way, if you went in to take music lessons and your music teacher told you that in order to get to 'level 3' trumpet player you'd need to spend X years and Y thousands of dollars, you'd instantly see it was ridiculous. School is the same way, you just don't realize it because that's the way it's always been presented to you.
- starkfist 17y ago
  Look at it this way, if you went in to take music lessons and your music teacher told you that in order to get to 'level 3' trumpet player you'd need to spend X years and Y thousands of dollars, you'd instantly see it was ridiculous. There are widespread teaching systems for musical instruments that work exactly like this. Especially for piano and orchestral instruments. There are organized competitions for different "levels" and books of exercises and pieces also divided into levels. Even within orchestras, there is leveling - you're either violin 1 or violin 2, within those groupings you're first chair, second chair, and so forth. I always found the piano contests a bit ridiculous, but with an orchestra you do need some sort of leveling system to filter people into the various roles.
  - nostrademons 17y ago
    Having played violin 2 for most of college and violin 1 for most of high school, I'd like to believe that the difference between first and second violins is whether you enjoy playing in the high register, and not your level of ability. Certainly the principal second of an orchestra is usually a better player than all but the first few stands of first violins. Though you're right, there is a pecking order by stand number, and another one for outside vs. inside players. Curiously, when I was in MA All-States in 2000, the conductor did an experiment. He reversed the seating order, temporarily putting the worst players up front and the best ones behind. And the orchestra as a whole played a lot better. When they couldn't hide in the back, the weaker players played out and followed the conductor much better, yet the better players continued to do so regardless of where they were placed. Unfortunately, we couldn't do this for the concert (social conventions being what they were), but the hour or so devoted to the experiment certainly worked out. Make of this what you will.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  Thought experiment: if you ignore all the levels in these institutions, do they then become worthwhile? My high school did not have grades. It worked on a portfolio system, which is basically a recognition that achievement is continuous. And then I basically ignored my grades in college (and it showed ;-)). There's one semester (abroad) that I still don't know my grades for, because I didn't check for a year, it was in a separate computer system, and by then I'd forgotten my password for it. I don't particularly care about promotions at my current employer, because I figure I will eventually leave and then all that career advancement means nought. However, I think there is still value in college, and there is value in the work I do for my employer. I'm skeptical of claims like "Every system that allows you to level up is out to fuck you, take your money, or both" because it doesn't admit that a.) not everyone's value system is the same as yours or mine and b.) accomplishments done for the reward are still accomplishments. Say someone writes this neat new feature that improves the lives of hundreds of millions of people. They did it because they want a promotion. Their motive does not invalidate the fact that they've improved the lives of hundreds of millions of people.
mkramlich 17y ago
Will a very talented engineer rise to the top to become the CEO? Unlikely. He's likely stay an engineer, or, leave the company. Or will a very political, charming, shmoozer, sociopathic, do-whatever-it-takes, business-savvy, friends-in-high-places sort of person reach CEO? Much more likely. There's also randomness and "luck".

by matt1 17y ago

Alex3917 17y ago

Merit is continuous and not discrete. When you take a continuous function and try to make it look discrete, what you'll notice is that there is 'some extra' between the actual merit curve and the stepwise function that touches it. These so-called meritocracies are just a way to skim that extra off the top. Look at it this way, if you went in to take music lessons and your music teacher told you that in order to get to 'level 3' trumpet player you'd need to spend X years and Y thousands of dollars, you'd instantly see it was ridiculous. School is the same way, you just don't realize it because that's the way it's always been presented to you.

starkfist 17y ago
Look at it this way, if you went in to take music lessons and your music teacher told you that in order to get to 'level 3' trumpet player you'd need to spend X years and Y thousands of dollars, you'd instantly see it was ridiculous. There are widespread teaching systems for musical instruments that work exactly like this. Especially for piano and orchestral instruments. There are organized competitions for different "levels" and books of exercises and pieces also divided into levels. Even within orchestras, there is leveling - you're either violin 1 or violin 2, within those groupings you're first chair, second chair, and so forth. I always found the piano contests a bit ridiculous, but with an orchestra you do need some sort of leveling system to filter people into the various roles.
- nostrademons 17y ago
  Having played violin 2 for most of college and violin 1 for most of high school, I'd like to believe that the difference between first and second violins is whether you enjoy playing in the high register, and not your level of ability. Certainly the principal second of an orchestra is usually a better player than all but the first few stands of first violins. Though you're right, there is a pecking order by stand number, and another one for outside vs. inside players. Curiously, when I was in MA All-States in 2000, the conductor did an experiment. He reversed the seating order, temporarily putting the worst players up front and the best ones behind. And the orchestra as a whole played a lot better. When they couldn't hide in the back, the weaker players played out and followed the conductor much better, yet the better players continued to do so regardless of where they were placed. Unfortunately, we couldn't do this for the concert (social conventions being what they were), but the hour or so devoted to the experiment certainly worked out. Make of this what you will.
nostrademons 17y ago
Thought experiment: if you ignore all the levels in these institutions, do they then become worthwhile? My high school did not have grades. It worked on a portfolio system, which is basically a recognition that achievement is continuous. And then I basically ignored my grades in college (and it showed ;-)). There's one semester (abroad) that I still don't know my grades for, because I didn't check for a year, it was in a separate computer system, and by then I'd forgotten my password for it. I don't particularly care about promotions at my current employer, because I figure I will eventually leave and then all that career advancement means nought. However, I think there is still value in college, and there is value in the work I do for my employer. I'm skeptical of claims like "Every system that allows you to level up is out to fuck you, take your money, or both" because it doesn't admit that a.) not everyone's value system is the same as yours or mine and b.) accomplishments done for the reward are still accomplishments. Say someone writes this neat new feature that improves the lives of hundreds of millions of people. They did it because they want a promotion. Their motive does not invalidate the fact that they've improved the lives of hundreds of millions of people.

mkramlich 17y ago

Will a very talented engineer rise to the top to become the CEO? Unlikely. He's likely stay an engineer, or, leave the company. Or will a very political, charming, shmoozer, sociopathic, do-whatever-it-takes, business-savvy, friends-in-high-places sort of person reach CEO? Much more likely. There's also randomness and "luck".