The Trouble with Meritocracy
Few ideals command such broad and uncritical assent as meritocracy - the principle that rewards should flow to those whose talent and effort earn them. It appears, on its face, to be the very embodiment of fairness, a welcome corrective to the inherited privilege of earlier ages. Yet a growing chorus of thinkers contends that the concept, however benign in intent, conceals troubling consequences that its champions seldom confront.
The first difficulty is empirical. A genuine meritocracy would require a level starting line, and no society has come remotely close to providing one. Talent is nurtured or stunted long before a candidate sits any examination, and the resources that cultivate it - stable homes, tutoring, expectation - are distributed with conspicuous unevenness. To crown the eventual winners as purely self-made is therefore to mistake the effects of advantage for the rewards of virtue.
The second objection is subtler and, to its proponents, more disquieting. Even were a perfect meritocracy attainable, it might prove a harsh and divisive arrangement. The doctrine encourages the successful to regard their position as wholly deserved, and, by grim implication, to view those who falter as the authors of their own misfortune. Such reasoning corrodes solidarity, replacing the older obligations of mutual regard with a self-congratulation that curdles easily into contempt.
None of this amounts to a defence of nepotism or a counsel of despair. The point is rather to puncture a comforting illusion: that a society can be ordered by merit alone without reckoning with luck, circumstance, and the debts we owe to others. To acknowledge how much of our fortune we did not author is not to abandon the pursuit of excellence, but to temper its arrogance with a humility that a purer meritocracy can ill afford.
Прочитайте текст і виконайте завдання.
- 1
What is the 'empirical' difficulty with meritocracy that the author identifies?
- 2
Why does the author consider the 'second objection' more disquieting?
- 3
In context, the phrase 'self-congratulation that curdles easily into contempt' implies that:
- 4
The author argues that criticising meritocracy amounts to defending inherited privilege or nepotism.
- 5
The author suggests that acknowledging the role of luck need not mean abandoning the pursuit of excellence.
- 6
Which criticisms of meritocracy does the passage advance? (Choose all that apply.)
Оберіть усі правильні варіанти.
Що у цьому завданні (1)
- The Tyranny of the Deserving — Прочитайте текст і виконайте завдання. · Few ideals command such broad and uncritical assent as **meritocracy** - the principle that rewards should flow to those whose talent and effort earn them. It appears, on its face, to be the very embodiment of fairness, a welcome corrective to the inherited privilege of earlier ages. Yet a growing chorus of thinkers contends that the concept, however benign in intent, conceals troubling consequences that its champions seldom confront. The first difficulty is empirical. A genuine meritocracy would require a level starting line, and no society has come remotely close to providing one. Talent is nurtured or stunted long before a candidate sits any examination, and the resources that cultivate it - stable homes, tutoring, expectation - are distributed with conspicuous unevenness. To crown the eventual winners as purely self-made is therefore to mistake the effects of advantage for the rewards of virtue. The second objection is subtler and, to its proponents, more disquieting. Even were a perfect meritocracy attainable, it might prove a harsh and divisive arrangement. The doctrine encourages the successful to regard their position as wholly deserved, and, by grim implication, to view those who falter as the authors of their own misfortune. Such reasoning corrodes solidarity, replacing the older obligations of mutual regard with a self-congratulation that curdles easily into contempt. None of this amounts to a defence of nepotism or a counsel of despair. The point is rather to puncture a comforting illusion: that a society can be ordered by merit alone without reckoning with luck, circumstance, and the debts we owe to others. To acknowledge how much of our fortune we did not author is not to abandon the pursuit of excellence, but to temper its arrogance with a humility that a purer meritocracy can ill afford.