|
I would argue that as a way to describe a selection process, "Meritocracy", warts and all, works great. By warts, I mean that merit, as shorthand for "assessment of skill, talent, or capability", has other factors mixed in because flawed people decide who gets life's prizes. The Gates example shows the missing ingredient - not luck, but recognition of luck's role in success, what some might call humility. The article referred to gratitude research, which probably means the same thing. It's a missing ingredient because it doesn't seem too valuable anymore, especially when compared to other qualities, such as the ability to "talk smack." And it's associated with sackcloth and ashes, or being a "loser." Moreover, it's often called false. Coming back to meritocracy, what do we have as alternatives? Random selection? Suppression of individual differences (aka C.S. Lewis' "Parity of Esteem")? I don't know. Parity of Esteem ref = http://www.samizdat.qc.ca/arts/lit/Toast_CSL.pdf |