Flipping a coin to decide on a hiring decision is also “fair” and “meritocratic”. It was the essay artisanal intelligence iirc which argued (a bit) against meritocracy and tbh I can see it. It’s kind of a capitalist delusion, it means only the most deserving, well, deserve anything.
Now I’m curious how that kind of thing worked in, like, USSR or how it tends to go in modern China. Like sort of a “to each according to their contribution.” Like if merit has a different connotation in a society where people are largely taken care of on a basic level, even if they aren’t the “most meritous.”
Merit as a way of determining who is qualified for higher positions seems sensible to me in a vacuum, but when we start getting into things like “higher position pays significantly more and has more societal privileges”, then it’s not just about expertise being placed where it belongs, it’s saying that the experts are inherently deserving of more benefits in society. And in a stratified society, what determines who goes on to become an expert can be manipulated through barriers like education and social connections. Kind of like how IQ is a measurement of how someone has been educated, rather than a measurement of inherent “intelligence.”
It’s also that the most ‘capable’ person for a job has more often than not had privileges that made them capable. College costs money and not just in tuition but also in travel fees (if you have to go to another campus for a course), textbooks, and the “cost of opportunity” of not integrating the workforce yet too, which means your parents need to be able to support you for the years you’ll be in college.
It’s no surprise that social mobility doesn’t exist in capitalism and children of wealthy/ier parents will themselves find high-paying jobs. This comic is old but illustrates it, https://digitalsynopsis.com/inspiration/privileged-kids-on-a-plate-pencilsword-toby-morris/, this is basic sociology that even liberals recognize. One thing it doesn’t touch on that artisanal intelligence did is that the promise of meritocracy makes one feel like they have to grind to make it out of the race while not realizing that they were never going to cross the finish line. And ‘the grind’ often means working for unlivable wages and accepting undignified work.
![The Economist on using phrenology for hiring and lending decisions: "Some might argue that face-based analysis is more meritocratic" […] "For people without access to credit, that could be a blessing"](https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/14f5a0b4-82b6-498d-a689-36c2824dd296.png){kind=link}
Flipping a coin to decide on a hiring decision is also “fair” and “meritocratic”. It was the essay artisanal intelligence iirc which argued (a bit) against meritocracy and tbh I can see it. It’s kind of a capitalist delusion, it means only the most deserving, well, deserve anything.
Now I’m curious how that kind of thing worked in, like, USSR or how it tends to go in modern China. Like sort of a “to each according to their contribution.” Like if merit has a different connotation in a society where people are largely taken care of on a basic level, even if they aren’t the “most meritous.”
Merit as a way of determining who is qualified for higher positions seems sensible to me in a vacuum, but when we start getting into things like “higher position pays significantly more and has more societal privileges”, then it’s not just about expertise being placed where it belongs, it’s saying that the experts are inherently deserving of more benefits in society. And in a stratified society, what determines who goes on to become an expert can be manipulated through barriers like education and social connections. Kind of like how IQ is a measurement of how someone has been educated, rather than a measurement of inherent “intelligence.”
It’s also that the most ‘capable’ person for a job has more often than not had privileges that made them capable. College costs money and not just in tuition but also in travel fees (if you have to go to another campus for a course), textbooks, and the “cost of opportunity” of not integrating the workforce yet too, which means your parents need to be able to support you for the years you’ll be in college.
It’s no surprise that social mobility doesn’t exist in capitalism and children of wealthy/ier parents will themselves find high-paying jobs. This comic is old but illustrates it, https://digitalsynopsis.com/inspiration/privileged-kids-on-a-plate-pencilsword-toby-morris/, this is basic sociology that even liberals recognize. One thing it doesn’t touch on that artisanal intelligence did is that the promise of meritocracy makes one feel like they have to grind to make it out of the race while not realizing that they were never going to cross the finish line. And ‘the grind’ often means working for unlivable wages and accepting undignified work.