In times of extreme political divide, I think one thing we all can agree on is that we would like the world to be a fair place. Unfortunately, no one can seem to agree on what that would look like. With regards to education, many on the left believe in righting past wrongs through affirmative action policies, while right wing figures like Tucker Carlson decry affirmative action policies as discrimination. Conservatives argue that the society already manifest justice through meritocracy with Carlson quoted saying,
"In a meritocracy, for example, you would hire heart surgeons because they're good at heart surgery, not because of how they look or who their parents are. A meritocracy is the only fair way to run a society, and fairness matters to people, always everywhere. Plus, it works well. Fewer people die on the operating table when you do it that way."
This reflects how Carlson and others like him believe that the society prioritizes the best person for any given role. However, this interpretation of our society as a meritocracy is missing a few key factors. The first is within the many points of assessment on the way to becoming a heart surgeon, not everyone has the opportunity to even be in the selection pool. The second is that "finding the best candidate" involves assessment methods that favor certain people over others regardless of their actual aptitude or inherent intelligence. It turns out, who get chosen very much has to do with who your parents are.
One does not simply wake up and find oneself a brain surgeon: there are many structural boundaries put in place to getting there. Which is a good thing right? Not everyone is capable of becoming a brain surgeon. The way we screen for these students is through various levels of schooling. But, unfortunately the education system is not created equal for everyone. Many students cannot afford to pursue higher education, so we are not even testing everyone who might want to become a brain surgeon. Therefore, it is impossible to say the society is truly selecting the best candidate for the job.
The other issue is with the assessment tools themselves. Even all students could afford to attend university and study to be doctors, that would not be a guarantee that the tests are crafted to be fair. Exams like the SATs and MCATs have been proven to favor students who have been prepared with prep courses and private tutors. This means that the tests are reinforcing social stratification by rewarding students with access to this advantage.
Is it fair that some children were born into privilege and some were not? Many conservatives believe that money and power comes to those who work the hardest, but it is impossible to apply this to a child. We cannot help the parents we were born to or the resources we have access to as a result. If we really want to create a just society, we have to recognize the disparity that comes with social stratification and create ways to offset that disadvantage. This means creating policies that help students who don't have access to resources that put them on equal playing field. The fact that the Tucker Carlson's of the world would like to leave well enough alone tells me that they are either ignorant of this predicament, or they don't really want fairness for everyone. Sadly, I'm not sure which is worse.
This was an extremely interesting piece to read, one of the parts that stuck out specifically is the metaphor used with surgeons. I think it's a very basic and simply analogy and I can guarantee majority of those who are given this metaphor would also agree how flawless ir would be in an argument. It is sad to recognize that it is unfortunately not reality in the United States and nepotism is real. Great post again
It is always puzzling to me that people (conservatives) choose to view the world as a meritocracy because the concepts of ownership and inheritance which conservatives are largely in favor of, directly contradict the idea of a meritocracy. Property ownership in the US is driven by inheritance...people still benefit and live off of assets inherited as far back as slavery. Multi-billion dollar corporations stay within families for centuries with little to no outside influence...just look @ Walmart, their family is the richest in the country but none of the founders of Walmart are still alive. 1) Like you said when you inherit something it automatically ignores merit and 2) Inheritance precludes those who don't inherit from attaining that level of…
How do we decide what is fair if everyone has a different idea of the word fair? At that scale of thought, how could humanity ever agree on anything, let alone create an equal version of everything. Even if we were to judge based on meritocracy, therefore how talented and proper someone is within what they do with no regards to surrounding matter, people would always find a way to fake or exaggerate their meritocracy. At least that is what I fear. Very interesting matter!
This posts brings up some very interesting points, especially about the "assessment tools". When I was going through college applications, I noticed that a lot of the standardized tests and extracurricular achievement the university were looking for ends up being a measure on how much resources someone could leverage. However, it is also difficult to design a good assessment tool since all measures can be "hacked" with enough money and resources, which means we must work from lowest level to eliminate the inequality in education
I really enjoyed this specific blog post, it seemed as if it was an onion and with each sentence the issue or topic pealed to another layer. I enjoy the initial point made about the inequality when it comes to choosing "the best heart surgeon" simply because there has to be a method to decide that and that method can come with many factors that lead to inequality or misrepresentation as you have explained in your blog post.