Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: August 23, 2019, 9:23 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Meritocracy
#1
Meritocracy
Is your/our/a society equal or egalitarian enough, fundamentally, to be an effective meritocracy? Meritocracy can mean treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same which ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society. What would it take to make your society more meritorious in it's reward system. At what threshold of egalitarianism could a move from elitism of person to meritorious structure be a better step? Would it be a better step? Just open for thoughts and discussions.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post

always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Reply
#2
RE: Meritocracy
!define merit

Comrade, as it seems weapons > drugs > sports > needs.

We have only merit in our own work,
Reply
#3
RE: Meritocracy
I can see both sides of this.  I grew up in Northern Ireland, where opportunity and advancement were based primarily on religious and political affiliations. This system sucks, as it naturally engenders a sense of unfairness that borders on (and sometimes turns into) outright class warfare.

Birth and background don't matter nearly as much in NZ, although there is still evidence that it occurs (just not systemic as in NI).

Improvement towards a meritocracy is best accomplished via education.

Boru
'A man is accepted into a church for what he believes.  He is turned out for what he knows.' - Mark Twain
Reply
#4
RE: Meritocracy
meritocracy- government or the holding of power by people selected on the basis of their ability.

As opposed to a society that put privilege, power, money at the top of the chain, etc.

In our current PC climate where biases and privilege are being revealed, is great for equality of opportunity. Assuming that a social dominance hierarchy is biologically trained and inescapable, how would we use the info gained on the under/over privilege towards a more meritorious structure? Would we want to. Should we value something better than competence? Maybe celebrities, because they're the most beautiful should rule? <j/k> but food for thought.
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post

always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
Reply
#5
RE: Meritocracy
(July 29, 2019 at 2:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Is your/our/a society equal or egalitarian enough, fundamentally, to be an effective meritocracy? Meritocracy can mean treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same which ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society. What would it take to make your society more meritorious in it's reward system. At what threshold of egalitarianism could a move from elitism of person to meritorious structure be a better step? Would it be a better step? Just open for thoughts and discussions.

In the US, at least, I'm pretty sure Donald Trump's residency in the Oval Office is proof that we've achieved a mediocracy here.
-- 
Dr H


"So, I became an anarchist, and all I got was this lousy T-shirt."
Reply
#6
RE: Meritocracy
(July 29, 2019 at 4:36 pm)Dr H Wrote:
(July 29, 2019 at 2:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Is your/our/a society equal or egalitarian enough, fundamentally, to be an effective meritocracy? Meritocracy can mean treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same which ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society. What would it take to make your society more meritorious in it's reward system. At what threshold of egalitarianism could a move from elitism of person to meritorious structure be a better step? Would it be a better step? Just open for thoughts and discussions.

In the US, at least, I'm pretty sure Donald Trump's residency in the Oval Office is proof that we've achieved a mediocracy here.
  Not sure I'd give it that much elevation.
I never thought I'd live long enough to become a grumpy old bastard. Here I am, killing it!
Reply
#7
RE: Meritocracy
(July 29, 2019 at 4:36 pm)Dr H Wrote:
(July 29, 2019 at 2:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Is your/our/a society equal or egalitarian enough, fundamentally, to be an effective meritocracy? Meritocracy can mean treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same which ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society. What would it take to make your society more meritorious in it's reward system. At what threshold of egalitarianism could a move from elitism of person to meritorious structure be a better step? Would it be a better step? Just open for thoughts and discussions.

In the US, at least, I'm pretty sure Donald Trump's residency in the Oval Office is proof that we've achieved a mediocracy here.

If the mediocre is defined to be that portion of the bottom 35% which aspires to be ruled by the bottom 0.000035%.
Reply
#8
RE: Meritocracy
(July 29, 2019 at 2:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Is your/our/a society equal or egalitarian enough, fundamentally, to be an effective meritocracy? Meritocracy can mean treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same which ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society. What would it take to make your society more meritorious in it's reward system. At what threshold of egalitarianism could a move from elitism of person to meritorious structure be a better step? Would it be a better step? Just open for thoughts and discussions.

I think people are (ideally) entitled to 100% of the fruits of their labor. But no one seems to be able to be figure out how to do things without some exploitation. It's like exploitation is some kind of constant that makes production possible. I think Marx had a pretty good idea of a meritocracy, but all the attempts to realize his vision are worse (in the exploitation department) than capitalism.

To me, elimination of all exploitation is essential if you are aiming for a "meritocracy." I mean, you can't call it a meritocracy if your "merit" can be claimed by those to whom it does not belong.

One thing I think we could do is implement free education (all the way through grad school) to students who demonstrate mastery. Scholarships and such do this to some degree, but they are more like a lottery (much of the time) than a functionary system that rewards merit.
Reply
#9
RE: Meritocracy
(July 29, 2019 at 7:47 pm)vulcanlogician Wrote:
(July 29, 2019 at 2:36 pm)tackattack Wrote: Is your/our/a society equal or egalitarian enough, fundamentally, to be an effective meritocracy? Meritocracy can mean treating people with fundamentally unequal backgrounds as superficially the same which ignores and even conceals the real advantages and disadvantages that are unevenly distributed to different segments of an inherently unequal society. What would it take to make your society more meritorious in it's reward system. At what threshold of egalitarianism could a move from elitism of person to meritorious structure be a better step? Would it be a better step? Just open for thoughts and discussions.

I think people are (ideally) entitled to 100% of the fruits of their labor. But no one seems to be able to be figure out how to do things without some exploitation. It's like exploitation is some kind of constant that makes production possible. I think Marx had a pretty good idea of a meritocracy, but all the attempts to realize his vision are worse (in the exploitation department) than capitalism.

To me, elimination of all exploitation is essential if you are aiming for a "meritocracy." I mean, you can't call it a meritocracy if your "merit" can be claimed by those to whom it does not belong.

One thing I think we could do is implement free education (all the way through grad school) to students who demonstrate mastery. Scholarships and such do this to some degree, but they are more like a lottery (much of the time) than a functionary system that rewards merit.


Marx merely assumes an ideal conclusion, which anyone can do, and does not really show how and to what extent the ideal can be achieved.      

Also, whether getting rid of exploitation is essential for meritocracy depends what you judge to be meritorious and towards what end are these merits meritorious.
Reply
#10
RE: Meritocracy
(July 29, 2019 at 8:05 pm)Anomalocaris Wrote: How is Marx's ideal meritocratic?

I suppose it depends on how you define merit. To me, labor is a meritorious activity. Taking this into mind, Marx is meritocratic because he wants to ensure laborers are rewarded completely for their meritorious activity.
Reply





Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)