4 ms·

Luck (and nepotism) play far too great a role in success for meritocracy to exist. https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I Then of course th

by ttfkam 5y ago

Luck (and nepotism) play far too great a role in success for meritocracy to exist. https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I https://youtu.be/3LopI4YeC4I Then of course there's the whole "the guy who first coined term considered it a joke." Too many people missed the satire and took it way too seriously. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rise_of_the_Meritocracy

deleted 5y ago
[deleted]
kiba 5y ago
Luck always play a role, especially genes, and so are parents' nurture. It's always an unequal playing field.
ThrowawayR2 5y ago
> "Then of course there's the whole "the guy who first coined term considered it a joke." It's worth noting that the Wikipedia page itself contains the following quote from the author: "It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others." In other words, the guy who first coined the term says meritocracy works. (Those who have read the book would know that it resulted in tremendous cultural and scientific achievements within its fictional world.) What the author is saying that a meritocratic system needs to be mindful of the hubris and arrogance of those given power just because they happened to be gifted with merit through an accident of birth and circumstance and to also show kindness and consideration to those less endowed with merit, lest they tear society apart.
- jl2718 5y ago
  Murray Gell-Mann effect applies here.
- ttfkam 5y ago
  He meant this new word as a warning: Modern societies would learn how to measure intelligence in children so exactly that they would be stratified in schools and jobs according to their natural ability. In Young’s satirical fantasy, this new form of inequality would be so rigid and oppressive that it would end in violent rebellion.

by ttfkam 5y ago

deleted 5y ago

[deleted]

kiba 5y ago

Luck always play a role, especially genes, and so are parents' nurture. It's always an unequal playing field.

ThrowawayR2 5y ago

> "Then of course there's the whole "the guy who first coined term considered it a joke." It's worth noting that the Wikipedia page itself contains the following quote from the author: "It is good sense to appoint individual people to jobs on their merit. It is the opposite when those who are judged to have merit of a particular kind harden into a new social class without room in it for others." In other words, the guy who first coined the term says meritocracy works. (Those who have read the book would know that it resulted in tremendous cultural and scientific achievements within its fictional world.) What the author is saying that a meritocratic system needs to be mindful of the hubris and arrogance of those given power just because they happened to be gifted with merit through an accident of birth and circumstance and to also show kindness and consideration to those less endowed with merit, lest they tear society apart.

jl2718 5y ago
Murray Gell-Mann effect applies here.
ttfkam 5y ago
He meant this new word as a warning: Modern societies would learn how to measure intelligence in children so exactly that they would be stratified in schools and jobs according to their natural ability. In Young’s satirical fantasy, this new form of inequality would be so rigid and oppressive that it would end in violent rebellion.