Many people in the thread seem to be talking past each other, I think because a meritocracy has different presumed purposes. Purpose #1 is to make society more

Many people in the thread seem to be talking past each other, I think because a meritocracy has different presumed purposes. Purpose #1 is to make society more fair, in that in principle anyone can rise to the top, and you're not held back by your position of birth as in an aristocracy. Even in a true meritocracy though, you may still be held back by innate talent or upbringing. Purpose #2 is to make society run better. This happens in two ways: More able people are selected for more responsible positions, so that hopefully decisions with more impact are made by more qualified people. Secondly, people have an incentive to try to become more qualified so that they can occupy these more responsible positions.