
Meritocracy doesn't exist, and believing it does is bad for you - AndrewDucker
https://www.fastcompany.com/40510522/meritocracy-doesnt-exist-and-believing-it-does-is-bad-for-you
======
robertAngst
How is anyone supposed to take this seriously?

They used an extremely simple psychology study to backup their massive claim
that "Everything is luck'.

Can I similarly use bad data? An anecdote- There are hard working people, and
there are people that would rather not.

After 5 years of this, I've seen the difference in outcomes. After 10 years,
we literally have class differences between the people that are workaholics
and lazy.

Not to say there aren't politics involved. But to call modern society luck
based is ridiculous.

~~~
chongli
Why do people have such a hard time accepting this? People readily accept that
it's luck for someone to grow to 7 feet tall and become an elite basketball
player. Yes, it still takes a lot of hard work to reach the NBA and not
everyone that tall makes it, but no amount of hard work can turn a 6 foot tall
person into a 7-footer.

I see no reason not to think that everything else about a person is similarly
determined by luck, even the fact that someone is a hard worker at all.

I think the biggest myth of all, in Western society, is the myth of laziness.
Spend a little time talking to anyone that society brands as lazy (i.e. pot-
smoking video gamers) and what you'll find is a discouraged and disillusioned
person. What we call "laziness" is really learned helplessness in response to
an ever-increasingly complex and unfair society.

If every trait associated with success (intelligence, conscientiousness, grit,
drive, determination, etc) were as visible as height, we'd have a much harder
time justifying the labelling of people as "lazy."

~~~
dexen
_> the myth of laziness_

If anything, there is a myth of "hard work" as a singular trait that a person
has or doesn't have. And then "laziness" is described as contrast to that.

So is "hard work" a singular trait? Quite the opposite; there are numerous
aspects of work that make it more or less good, helpful, interesting, and
otherwise valuable to the person and to others. The work may be fast, or may
be energy efficient. The work may be very precise, or may span huge scales.
The work may be incredibly complex, or may have been simplified to surprising
degree. It may be artsy, or may be highly professional. All those, and much,
much more, can add to & improve utility of the work. Skill, education, proper
time & place, those too aren't singular aspects, nor stem from singular events
in life or singular traits of the person. Every aspect of work is built up
from from, frankly, the whole life history of the person. You cannot separate,
say, having good education from being in the right place at the right time,
but also from having good contact with the right people (your peers that help
you out); from being able to communicate well but also letting others talk
when proper. And so much more. Trying to distill education - or any other
aspect really - down to "got lucky at this junction in time" is just
disingenuous.

Moreover, closer investigation of examples of "good luck" reveals that often
it is result of others - particularly parents, family, friends - putting in
considerable effort to help the person through life. Creating educational
opportunity or connecting with other people. Good physical development via
nutrition and exercise, just as well as fostering curiosity and ethics.
Passing on experience or helping choose best fit career path. There's nothing
shameful about having been helped by friends and family - if anything, it's
both natural and praiseworthy. And those positive behaviors are likely to be
passed along to subsequent generations, thus progressing humanity in the
longer run.

 _> no amount of hard work can turn a 6 foot tall person into a 7-footer._

Have you ever wondered how many players under 6 feet had good professional
careers in NBA? You would be surprised [1].

There is a myth of "hard work" as a singular thing, while, in fact, a work is
_good_ for the person and others for any number of reasons. And, conversely,
"laziness" is lacking in several departments at once to the point that there's
few people helped by the "lazy" person's actions.

\--

[1] [https://www.ranker.com/list/shortest-nba-players-of-all-
time...](https://www.ranker.com/list/shortest-nba-players-of-all-time/ranker-
nba)

~~~
robertAngst
This really is a 2D question.

I will not deny that a low income and low education people would find it a
massive upfront cost to learn how to code and be ambitious.

The question I'm more interested is among educated people. (or among people
that grew up low income)

There is a gap between Engineering workaholics and Engineering workers.

------
javierluraschi
What’s the alternative?

