JesusCarlos: An ancient belief, both Christian and Buddhist! Perhaps older than religions themselves. And a mantra of today’s world, of meritocracy that justifies inequality between human beings.
Vineeto: Here is a question for you – if meritocracy is the cause which “justifies inequality between human beings”, then why do you value the expertise, reports and explanations how to become actually free from those fellow human beings who have succeeded? (link)
JesusCarlos: I didn’t say that meritocracy was the cause that “justifies inequality among human beings.” I think I needed to provide more context. Meritocracy is a rationale that seeks to allocate resources based on effort and merit. I have no problem with that. I was rather talking about meritocracy as an ideology used by some people in the real world here in Mexico, to justify why some have more than others. They attribute everything to individual effort and erase the true reasons why many people obtained certain resources: social status, class, inheritance, corruption, theft, plunder, violence, etc.
Of course, I value the testimonies of those who have succeeded in achieving actual freedom through their own merits, because it has nothing to do with anything other than their own merit and effort. In this case, the purpose suggested by meritocracy truly applies. That’s why, before writing that final statement, I was thanking Kuba for all his success and progress reports, which are very helpful to me.
My apologies, I wrote a problematic final sentence without being clear and without providing context. And I think there are aspects I need to analyze more closely, as to why I came to link one thing with another. (link)
Hi JesusCarlos,
Thank you for your clarification.
Now that you provided the context, the ideological usage of the word, I do understand better what you meant. As you said, “meritocracy as an ideology used by some people in the real world” then you would be aware that other people would use ‘equality’ as an ideology to counteract the ideology of meritocracy and similarly make a hash of it. It is standard practice in the real world to cure one unpopular/ upsetting situation with its very opposite.
For actualism it may be more useful to make a distinction between expertise (based on knowledge, skill and/or lived experience) and an authority connected with power, including psychic power for you to come to your own conclusions. What other human beings do is their own business.
Richard: There are two meanings to the word ‘authority’ and the one that causes all the troubles is the one connected with power. (The power of the authority to enforce obedience; the power of the authority to enforce moral or legal judgements; the power of the authority to command or give the final decision; the power of the authority to control; the power of the authority of a governing body; the power of an authoritative holy book; the power of the authority to inspire belief and so on). The second – less used – meaning is: an expert on a particular subject. (Richard, Selected Correspondence, Authority and Expertise)
For equity and parity to flourish, one looks at and eventually abandons all principles, ideologies, beliefs, convictions, attitudes and concepts. (see The Formation and Persistence of the Social Identity, #04)
Cheers Vineeto