5 ms·

This is why debates over the extent to which particular individuals are “self-made” and over the effects of various forms of “privilege” can get so hot-tempered

by BMc2020 2y ago

This is why debates over the extent to which particular individuals are “self-made” and over the effects of various forms of “privilege” can get so hot-tempered. These arguments are not just about who gets to have what; it’s about how much “credit” people can take for what they have, about what their successes allow them to believe about their inner qualities. That is why, under the assumption of meritocracy, the very notion that personal success is the result of “luck” can be insulting.

yieldcrv 2y ago
from what I've seen over the past few years, a surprising effect of this conversation has demotivated a whole generation of people. its a mixture of nihilism and demotivation. like with the 'privilege' discussion, even when defined as 'fewer roadblocks', people just realize they weren't born in one socioeconomic bracket so there's no point in bothering. I'm surprised because when I look at some individual circumstances, I see lots of opportunity available to them that they can't perceive. They didn't 'check their privilege' at all, actually, despite telling trust funders of certain phenotypes that. Play the cards you're dealt, but actually look at the cards. On the same vein, there are plenty of people with all of the necessary resources and subsidies that do nothing with their life. Fall into substance abuse, or derailed in some other ways. Many now choose to marginalize themselves in order to "live their truth". Which means someone financially successful or acknowledged for their contributions can still be celebrated for playing the cards they were dealt.
- theGnuMe 2y ago
  The joke is that meritocracy is something that only people accepted to Stanford believe in.
  - s1artibartfast 2y ago
    Which is the problem. Why bother leaving the couch or going to school if you can't be the next Bill Gates without some luck. Might as well be going into impoverished schools and cancel classes because math and reading or any other measure of capability has been proven to have zero impact on life outcomes.
    - theGnuMe 2y ago
      The alternative is not nihilism.
      - s1artibartfast 2y ago
        The thrust of my point is that it would not be factually correct to assert such a thing. Behavior, effort, knowledge, and discipline matter. Even if it is in a probabistic sense.

yieldcrv 2y ago

from what I've seen over the past few years, a surprising effect of this conversation has demotivated a whole generation of people. its a mixture of nihilism and demotivation. like with the 'privilege' discussion, even when defined as 'fewer roadblocks', people just realize they weren't born in one socioeconomic bracket so there's no point in bothering. I'm surprised because when I look at some individual circumstances, I see lots of opportunity available to them that they can't perceive. They didn't 'check their privilege' at all, actually, despite telling trust funders of certain phenotypes that. Play the cards you're dealt, but actually look at the cards. On the same vein, there are plenty of people with all of the necessary resources and subsidies that do nothing with their life. Fall into substance abuse, or derailed in some other ways. Many now choose to marginalize themselves in order to "live their truth". Which means someone financially successful or acknowledged for their contributions can still be celebrated for playing the cards they were dealt.

theGnuMe 2y ago
The joke is that meritocracy is something that only people accepted to Stanford believe in.
- s1artibartfast 2y ago
  Which is the problem. Why bother leaving the couch or going to school if you can't be the next Bill Gates without some luck. Might as well be going into impoverished schools and cancel classes because math and reading or any other measure of capability has been proven to have zero impact on life outcomes.
  - theGnuMe 2y ago
    The alternative is not nihilism.
    - s1artibartfast 2y ago
      The thrust of my point is that it would not be factually correct to assert such a thing. Behavior, effort, knowledge, and discipline matter. Even if it is in a probabistic sense.