3 ms·
> The key to remember is that a meritocracy is not fair. I think you've just completely upended the meaning of meritocracy to suite your argument. Next you'll
by lawlessone 9y ago
> The key to remember is that a meritocracy is not fair.
I think you've just completely upended the meaning of meritocracy to suite your argument.
Next you'll be arguing lootboxes make games more fair.
>Think of the movie Gattaca
Was literally a movie about unfair privilege. people in it were granted privileges and opportunities based on their genes whether they had accomplished something or not.
- neaden 9y agoCan you explain what you mean? This definition for meritocracy: "government or the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability." says nothing about fairness. If people are able to gain increased ability based on privilege than you have an unfair meritocracy. Since it is pretty clear that you can indeed do this, through parental involvement, tutoring, nutrition, better medical care, etc. than it follows that meritocracy is not fair.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agoThere's lots of definitions, I think this one is probably closer to what we think of when discussing meritocracy: an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent rather than on class privilege or wealth http://www.dictionary.com/browse/meritocracy http://www.dictionary.com/browse/meritocracy
- neaden 9y agoThere is still no conflict though, so long as class privilege and wealth can be transformed into ability and talent.
- frgtpsswrdlame 9y agoWell no because the definition is 'rather than class privilege or wealth.' Transforming wealth into ability and talent is class privilege.
- khedoros1 9y agoIf ability comes from wealth, it's still ability. I'd read "rather than class privilege or wealth" to mean that those things aren't considered merits in and of themselves, except to the degree that they can help someone achieve their full potential.
- sh33mp 9y agoMeritocracy is very much in conflict with equality. Meritocracy means you are judged on your merit. It is completely orthogonal to a nature-vs-nurture argument. For example, this is exactly the sort of debate we've been having in Singapore, which prides itself on being a highly 'meritocratic', which consequently people have criticized for exacerbating income/social inequality.
- abritinthebay 9y agoEquality vs equity. Most people intend the latter when they mean the former (at least from usage).