Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.12 AVERAGE
4.12 AVERAGE
It is one thing when a book so perfectly illustrates what you have been thinking but never able to express in words. It is another, and perhaps even more spectacular, when a book is able to convince you of something you have never before considered and may even disagree with. The latter is 'The Tyranny of Merit' for me. I have benefitted from the system of meritocracy in countless ways, spurning arguments to the contrary. This book has profoundly changed the way I think about merit, success, justice and what we owe to others as fellow citizens - it will stay with me for a long time. Absolutely one of the best books I have ever read.
challenging
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
informative
slow-paced
hopeful
reflective
slow-paced
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Offered an insightful perspective that was clearly articulated.
challenging
informative
inspiring
fast-paced
informative
medium-paced
Brilliant, but incredibly repetitive. Felt like Sandel had already exhausted his arguments 2/3 in.
10/10 do not regret coming back to finish this book after my month hiatus (oops). Some parts are a bit more theoretical and harder to parse through, but I found the arguments highly compelling and the central ideas & reasonings very engaging (the solutions I'm not so sure about, but I don't think the focus is there so I'll let it go). I particularly enjoyed the last two chapters on education (literally my life) and work. Also, very humbling (at the end, perhaps even inspiring) - and it really related and brought to greater clarity ideas I've been mulling over for quite a while.
The following bit contains key/salient points that stood out to me, written for my own reference - thus not particularly coherent and contains "spoilers" (but also this is non-fic so does that even apply?? Does it ruin the suspense of finding out the reasons behind the rise of populism?) - but this is also a book that I feel can't really be as effective if summarised (and thus why it's good).
Key points by chapter:
1. History of Merit: rise of the "Protestant Ethic" (salvation through works), "America is great because America is good"
2. Rhetoric of Rising: rise of hubristic attitudes among those who "succeed" and punitive low esteem among those who "failed", welfare state assessing rather than cushioning responsibility
3. Credentialism: rhetoric of education (equality of opportunity), erosion of the dignity of those without college degrees, technocratic talk of "smart" vs "dumb" policies as a means to overcome partisan ideology but which also alienate those without college degrees and fail to engage with moral issues
4. Success Ethics (most theoretical chapter):
- Meritocracy aligns inequality with ability and presumes people get what they deserve through their own "merit".
- A fundamental question: What if it's not just how meritocracy is a "myth" and we are too far from it cos unequal opportunity; but that meritocracy as an idea itself is fundamentally flawed as a political and moral project?
- Outcome of meritocracy is necessarily inequality; however, moral status of talents are questioned (Do we deserve them? Do we deserve the fact that society prizes them?) and it rewards effort, but does effort necessarily get us anything?
- Discussion of the ideas & limitations of 1) free market liberalisation - we should let rewards fall as they are, acknowledging it as just a measure of how society prices goods using demand and supply (Hayek) and 2) welfare state liberalisation - factors and talents and even effort are arbitrary so necessary for the "successes" to give back (Rawls)
- Economic value =/= moral value (however, in pluralistic society hard to quantify what then has moral value)
- Limitations of 1) distinction between value and merit unhelpful, 2) shift to personal morality may not help
- Welfare state egalitarianism - luck egalitarian policy - then policy shifts towards "are you unfortunate because you're unlucky or because you made bad choices" — 1) severity towards imprudent and 2) casting those who qualify as helpless victims
5. The Sorting Machine: higher education does not help social mobility, creates extreme pressure for those at the top of meritocracy while fuelling continued hubris; higher education should not be the only means of civic and moral education
6. Recognising Work: work as not just economic but social esteem (ability to contribute to common good, value, esteem etc), recognising people not just as consumers but producers (the end of work should not just be for consumerism), starting with affirming the dignity of work (market outcomes don't necessarily correlate with the value of the outcome to the common good, e.g. hedge fund managers v school teachers)
"It is often assumed that the only alternative to equality of opportunity is a stetile, oppressive equality of results. But there is another alternative: a broad equality of condition that enables those that do not achieve great wealth or prestigious positions to live lives of decency and dignity [...] we are not self-made and self-sufficient; finding ourselves in a society that prizes our talents is our good fortune, not our due."
The following bit contains key/salient points that stood out to me, written for my own reference - thus not particularly coherent and contains "spoilers" (but also this is non-fic so does that even apply?? Does it ruin the suspense of finding out the reasons behind the rise of populism?) - but this is also a book that I feel can't really be as effective if summarised (and thus why it's good).
Key points by chapter:
1. History of Merit: rise of the "Protestant Ethic" (salvation through works), "America is great because America is good"
2. Rhetoric of Rising: rise of hubristic attitudes among those who "succeed" and punitive low esteem among those who "failed", welfare state assessing rather than cushioning responsibility
3. Credentialism: rhetoric of education (equality of opportunity), erosion of the dignity of those without college degrees, technocratic talk of "smart" vs "dumb" policies as a means to overcome partisan ideology but which also alienate those without college degrees and fail to engage with moral issues
4. Success Ethics (most theoretical chapter):
- Meritocracy aligns inequality with ability and presumes people get what they deserve through their own "merit".
- A fundamental question: What if it's not just how meritocracy is a "myth" and we are too far from it cos unequal opportunity; but that meritocracy as an idea itself is fundamentally flawed as a political and moral project?
- Outcome of meritocracy is necessarily inequality; however, moral status of talents are questioned (Do we deserve them? Do we deserve the fact that society prizes them?) and it rewards effort, but does effort necessarily get us anything?
- Discussion of the ideas & limitations of 1) free market liberalisation - we should let rewards fall as they are, acknowledging it as just a measure of how society prices goods using demand and supply (Hayek) and 2) welfare state liberalisation - factors and talents and even effort are arbitrary so necessary for the "successes" to give back (Rawls)
- Economic value =/= moral value (however, in pluralistic society hard to quantify what then has moral value)
- Limitations of 1) distinction between value and merit unhelpful, 2) shift to personal morality may not help
- Welfare state egalitarianism - luck egalitarian policy - then policy shifts towards "are you unfortunate because you're unlucky or because you made bad choices" — 1) severity towards imprudent and 2) casting those who qualify as helpless victims
5. The Sorting Machine: higher education does not help social mobility, creates extreme pressure for those at the top of meritocracy while fuelling continued hubris; higher education should not be the only means of civic and moral education
6. Recognising Work: work as not just economic but social esteem (ability to contribute to common good, value, esteem etc), recognising people not just as consumers but producers (the end of work should not just be for consumerism), starting with affirming the dignity of work (market outcomes don't necessarily correlate with the value of the outcome to the common good, e.g. hedge fund managers v school teachers)
"It is often assumed that the only alternative to equality of opportunity is a stetile, oppressive equality of results. But there is another alternative: a broad equality of condition that enables those that do not achieve great wealth or prestigious positions to live lives of decency and dignity [...] we are not self-made and self-sufficient; finding ourselves in a society that prizes our talents is our good fortune, not our due."