Take a photo of a barcode or cover
marisbest2 's review for:
The Tyranny of Merit: What's Become of the Common Good?
by Michael J. Sandel
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.