You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.12 AVERAGE
4.12 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
An interesting argument that the way merit is conceived of and constructed in modern America has led to many of our current social problems. Didn’t agree with the author on all points, but he makes a very compelling case. The audiobook is read by the author, who does a middling job of it — no errors, but in that tone of someone clearly reading a script aloud.
Michael Sandel was recently on some podcasts to discuss his book and I found his discussion a bit more illuminating than the actual book on the topic of meritocracy. I found the arguments laid out in Markovits "The Meritocracy Trap" to be a bit more enlightening on the topic. Sandel treats the topic with a bit more theoretical / philosophical bent if one is more interested in approaching it from that angle.
A dense, wonky, and thoughtful look at the history behind the rise and acceptance of meritocracy, the idea that if you work hard and play by the rules, you will be able to rise as far as your talents will take you. Sounds reasonable, and it's become a baseline assumption in America and much of the world, but meritocracy has resulted in rising inequality and large segments of the populace being left behind and undervalued. There is much to think about here, but few suggestions for improvement or remediation. Some of the sections of the book dragged, but I especially appreciated the section on the dignity of work. This is an important book, with useful takeaways for readers across the political spectrum.
This book has some bright spots. Sandel is obviously good at the philosophy parts and those parts are generally very good. There's good explorations of the philosophical underpinnings of Meritocracy and the implications for those. The section at the end on Contributitive Justice is new (at least to me) though he makes it clear that its a new framing of an old idea from the 60s.
On the merits, I think he underrates the idea that some people don't want to work forever. There's also practically no discussion of utilitarian evaluations of the neoliberal project. In general he argues strongly from lack of social cohesion which is reasonable but also arguable. I think the dignity of work is culturally contingent and also likely very masculine coded in many cultures.
The parts on SATs and the pains of being a Meritocrat are better done in other books. Similarly the political analysis is weak and presupposes the conclusion.
Overall a good contribution to the anti-Meritocracy reading list.
For myself, I'll also say that it's always been extremely obvious to me that elite admissions are a lottery and that I am mostly just lucky and privileged. I barely worked hard in high school and had the luck of having a strong aptitude for the school work. That, combined with other people making connections for me, is what got me to Princeton. The fact that I knew this likely contributed to the fact that I was very late in taking advantage of the opportunity. I wasn't "lucky to be there" nor was it something I had worked my ass off for. Instead it felt like the next step in a gradual process, not by right or by luck, but rather by happenstance or something like that. I don't derive meaning from the fact of my work, or anything in comparison to my peers. I derive meaning from contribution to the world and the team. And to earn a paycheck. Idk what philosophical bucket that falls into though. In general it seems like a bad idea to pin self worth on economic contributions.
On the merits, I think he underrates the idea that some people don't want to work forever. There's also practically no discussion of utilitarian evaluations of the neoliberal project. In general he argues strongly from lack of social cohesion which is reasonable but also arguable. I think the dignity of work is culturally contingent and also likely very masculine coded in many cultures.
The parts on SATs and the pains of being a Meritocrat are better done in other books. Similarly the political analysis is weak and presupposes the conclusion.
Overall a good contribution to the anti-Meritocracy reading list.
For myself, I'll also say that it's always been extremely obvious to me that elite admissions are a lottery and that I am mostly just lucky and privileged. I barely worked hard in high school and had the luck of having a strong aptitude for the school work. That, combined with other people making connections for me, is what got me to Princeton. The fact that I knew this likely contributed to the fact that I was very late in taking advantage of the opportunity. I wasn't "lucky to be there" nor was it something I had worked my ass off for. Instead it felt like the next step in a gradual process, not by right or by luck, but rather by happenstance or something like that. I don't derive meaning from the fact of my work, or anything in comparison to my peers. I derive meaning from contribution to the world and the team. And to earn a paycheck. Idk what philosophical bucket that falls into though. In general it seems like a bad idea to pin self worth on economic contributions.
This was a strong argument against merit as a sorting mechanism, made me think about college admissions and the dignity of work in a new light, and I wish I could make more powerful people read this.
4.5 stars. Really thoughtful look at the way we've structured our economy and society. Also just depressing in that, in order to fix anything, seems like we need to undergo a massive project of re-understanding the basis of democracy.
challenging
informative
inspiring
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
It’s a case of “I have seen others make too much of your point better than you did” for me. I appreciate Sandel going beyond superficial explorations of polarization. Nevertheless, this book tried to do too much and lost its punch along the way. The relatively high amount of repetition did not help here, as much of that space could either have been cut or spent developing other points.
Content Warnings
Moderate: Addiction, Alcoholism, Death, Drug abuse, Misogyny, Suicide, Classism
informative
reflective
medium-paced