5 ms·

A true meritocracy wouldn't be a friendly world to live in. Think about the current state of education. Parents with resources over-optimize their kids' educat

by arberx 4y ago

A true meritocracy wouldn't be a friendly world to live in. Think about the current state of education. Parents with resources over-optimize their kids' education because they understand the inefficiencies in the system and/or understand what it takes to become successful in our society.

xdavidliu 4y ago
some may argue that affirmative action, as it currently is implemented, does not directly address disparities in resources, but rather uses race as a proxy for resources (which would be controversial)
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> Parents with resources over-optimize their kids' education because they understand the inefficiencies in the system and/or understand what it takes to become successful in our society This is a perfectly fine response to meritocratic pressure. With tuning to ensure the response is productive learning, versus e.g. rote memorisation, the outcome should be a more-productive citizenry. In any event, the case is about race-based affirmative action. Nobody is going after means-based anything.
- ericmay 4y ago
  I'm not sure about how I feel about Affirmative Action and I do appreciate another member's suggestion to look at socio-economic background. But is this really our goal? > should be a more-productive citizenry I'm not sure I care that much about that. Especially w.r.t college admissions. If you wanted to be more productive you'd not even send many people to college in the first place and just have them go straight into the labor force.
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > wanted to be more productive you'd not even send many people to college in the first place and just have them go straight into the labor force This is incorrect. The question of education's impact on GDP per capita is thoroughly researched [1][2][3]. When one broadens to measuring living standards, the results get starker. [1] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60b0/ad7223c9ba54c73af7d3327476d51fe05933.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60b0/ad7223c9ba54c73af7d332... [2] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09654313.2018.1480707 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09654313.2018.14... [3] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ma-Wadud/publication/4804496_Relationship_between_education_and_GDP_growth_A_mutivariate_causality_analysis_for_Bangladesh/links/02e7e5376ce5d9b26f000000/Relationship-between-education-and-GDP-growth-A-mutivariate-causality-analysis-for-Bangladesh.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ma-Wadud/publication/48...
willio58 4y ago
Yeah this is the problem with meritocracy, it doesn't exist in a vacuum. The reason someone has merit is arguably _only_ due to external factors. You are the way you are because of your DNA and environment. You are who you are because of who your parents are and how they chose to raise you, but they are only who they are because of their parents. And that recurses all the way back to the first organisms.
- trention 4y ago
  >_only_ due to external factors. You are the way you are because of your DNA and environment. Your DNA is not an "external factor". Rather, it's the most internal factor there is.
  - willio58 4y ago
    Where does your DNA come from if not an external source?
    - trention 4y ago
      What does that moronic question have to do with what I stated?
- mech765 4y ago
  Even a staunch defender of meritocracy will admit that life isn't fair if they are honest. The important thing to consider is the benefits afforded by meritocracy. When we have adequate filtering mechanisms to help put competent trustworthy people in positions of power, we get less bridges that collapse, less space shuttles that explode, less government officials demanding bribes, and less subtle failures at many levels of the economy. These failures are years downstream of the decisions that set people on their path in life. Most people have not yet mastered their profession; helping this process along is good for everyone. Those who criticize meritocracy should be honest with themselves as well that these failures can happen.
silisili 4y ago
That's only part of the equation. The fact is, generally, anyone in the US who has a capable brain and really tries can excel. There's no shortage of examples of people growing up poor who did excellent in school and/or careers. Do they have a disadvantage in not having the same resources as a wealthy family? Definitely. But it's only a disadvantage, not a roadblock. I feel like a lot of the argument is little more than regret filled excuses and sour grapes.
- thelock85 4y ago
  > The fact is, generally, anyone in the US who has a capable brain and really tries can excel. This is a great populist message but not sure it can be backed up with enough data at any meaningful enough scale to enact policies. Just like if I posited, "Generally, there are a lot of smart, capable and hardworking people who are just surviving check to check." It feels good and there are plenty of anecdotes to back it up, but it's too vague to make policy decisions upon. Raj Chetty's research [0] on social mobility dives into the complexity of it all. [0] https://rajchetty.com/publications/ https://rajchetty.com/publications/ Edit: > But it's only a disadvantage, not a roadblock. You really nailed the crux of it here in terms of equality of opportunity vs. equity in opportunity. The unhappy compromise to avoid irreparable divisions in U.S. society lies somewhere between removing roadblocks vs. addressing disadvantages.
  - silisili 4y ago
    Well it's easier for me to say, having grown up relatively poor in a relatively poor area. The kids who listened, took notes, participated, for the most part all did well in school and went off to college. Most kids did not, they were disruptive, asleep, rude, violent, etc. Public school was very frustrating to me for that reason, so I guess it struck a nerve. The equity vs equality is hard to square. Imagine someone who came from real poverty who worked 2 jobs while studying to give his family a better life. He or she makes it, finally, only for them and their kids to be punished for it come admissions time. Is that fair? I don't have great answers, I just feel like everything they try today isn't right, either.
adastra22 4y ago
So it causes parents to optimize their kid’s education. I fail to see the problem here?
- arberx 4y ago
  Imagine if our meritocracy valued basketball skills above anything else.
  - adastra22 4y ago
    If it were a basketball training program you were applying to, that would make sense. I fail to see your point regarding universities using academic merit as admission criteria.

by arberx 4y ago

xdavidliu 4y ago

some may argue that affirmative action, as it currently is implemented, does not directly address disparities in resources, but rather uses race as a proxy for resources (which would be controversial)

JumpCrisscross 4y ago

> Parents with resources over-optimize their kids' education because they understand the inefficiencies in the system and/or understand what it takes to become successful in our society This is a perfectly fine response to meritocratic pressure. With tuning to ensure the response is productive learning, versus e.g. rote memorisation, the outcome should be a more-productive citizenry. In any event, the case is about race-based affirmative action. Nobody is going after means-based anything.

ericmay 4y ago
I'm not sure about how I feel about Affirmative Action and I do appreciate another member's suggestion to look at socio-economic background. But is this really our goal? > should be a more-productive citizenry I'm not sure I care that much about that. Especially w.r.t college admissions. If you wanted to be more productive you'd not even send many people to college in the first place and just have them go straight into the labor force.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > wanted to be more productive you'd not even send many people to college in the first place and just have them go straight into the labor force This is incorrect. The question of education's impact on GDP per capita is thoroughly researched [1][2][3]. When one broadens to measuring living standards, the results get starker. [1] https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60b0/ad7223c9ba54c73af7d3327476d51fe05933.pdf https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/60b0/ad7223c9ba54c73af7d332... [2] https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09654313.2018.1480707 https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/09654313.2018.14... [3] https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ma-Wadud/publication/4804496_Relationship_between_education_and_GDP_growth_A_mutivariate_causality_analysis_for_Bangladesh/links/02e7e5376ce5d9b26f000000/Relationship-between-education-and-GDP-growth-A-mutivariate-causality-analysis-for-Bangladesh.pdf https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ma-Wadud/publication/48...

willio58 4y ago

Yeah this is the problem with meritocracy, it doesn't exist in a vacuum. The reason someone has merit is arguably _only_ due to external factors. You are the way you are because of your DNA and environment. You are who you are because of who your parents are and how they chose to raise you, but they are only who they are because of their parents. And that recurses all the way back to the first organisms.

trention 4y ago
>_only_ due to external factors. You are the way you are because of your DNA and environment. Your DNA is not an "external factor". Rather, it's the most internal factor there is.
- willio58 4y ago
  Where does your DNA come from if not an external source?
  - trention 4y ago
    What does that moronic question have to do with what I stated?
mech765 4y ago
Even a staunch defender of meritocracy will admit that life isn't fair if they are honest. The important thing to consider is the benefits afforded by meritocracy. When we have adequate filtering mechanisms to help put competent trustworthy people in positions of power, we get less bridges that collapse, less space shuttles that explode, less government officials demanding bribes, and less subtle failures at many levels of the economy. These failures are years downstream of the decisions that set people on their path in life. Most people have not yet mastered their profession; helping this process along is good for everyone. Those who criticize meritocracy should be honest with themselves as well that these failures can happen.

silisili 4y ago

That's only part of the equation. The fact is, generally, anyone in the US who has a capable brain and really tries can excel. There's no shortage of examples of people growing up poor who did excellent in school and/or careers. Do they have a disadvantage in not having the same resources as a wealthy family? Definitely. But it's only a disadvantage, not a roadblock. I feel like a lot of the argument is little more than regret filled excuses and sour grapes.

thelock85 4y ago
> The fact is, generally, anyone in the US who has a capable brain and really tries can excel. This is a great populist message but not sure it can be backed up with enough data at any meaningful enough scale to enact policies. Just like if I posited, "Generally, there are a lot of smart, capable and hardworking people who are just surviving check to check." It feels good and there are plenty of anecdotes to back it up, but it's too vague to make policy decisions upon. Raj Chetty's research [0] on social mobility dives into the complexity of it all. [0] https://rajchetty.com/publications/ https://rajchetty.com/publications/ Edit: > But it's only a disadvantage, not a roadblock. You really nailed the crux of it here in terms of equality of opportunity vs. equity in opportunity. The unhappy compromise to avoid irreparable divisions in U.S. society lies somewhere between removing roadblocks vs. addressing disadvantages.
- silisili 4y ago
  Well it's easier for me to say, having grown up relatively poor in a relatively poor area. The kids who listened, took notes, participated, for the most part all did well in school and went off to college. Most kids did not, they were disruptive, asleep, rude, violent, etc. Public school was very frustrating to me for that reason, so I guess it struck a nerve. The equity vs equality is hard to square. Imagine someone who came from real poverty who worked 2 jobs while studying to give his family a better life. He or she makes it, finally, only for them and their kids to be punished for it come admissions time. Is that fair? I don't have great answers, I just feel like everything they try today isn't right, either.

adastra22 4y ago

So it causes parents to optimize their kid’s education. I fail to see the problem here?

arberx 4y ago
Imagine if our meritocracy valued basketball skills above anything else.
- adastra22 4y ago
  If it were a basketball training program you were applying to, that would make sense. I fail to see your point regarding universities using academic merit as admission criteria.