Episode #205 ... Why a meritocracy is corrosive to society. (Michael Sandel)

Summary

In this thought-provoking discussion, Steven West explores the concept of meritocracy, questioning its societal benefits as presented by Michael Sandell in 'The Tyranny of Merit.' West delves into the unintended consequences of a merit-based society, highlighting how it can lead to a divisive social hierarchy, resentment among the less successful, and a flawed system that overlooks external factors influencing individual success. Sandell suggests that humility, civic virtue, and a reevaluation of societal norms are necessary to address the inequalities and resentments that meritocracy perpetuates.

Takeaways

• 🗳️ The script discusses the concept of meritocracy and its implications in society, as explored by Michael Sandel in his book 'The Tyranny of Merit'.
• 🤔 It questions the assumption that a society based purely on meritocratic principles is inherently good, highlighting potential negative consequences.
• 🏆 The transcript points out that while meritocracy may reward hard work and talent, it can also lead to a society that feels entitled and dismissive of those less fortunate.
• 💡 Sandel suggests that even if a perfect meritocracy could be achieved, it might still result in a flawed society with its own set of problems.
• 👥 The script acknowledges that factors beyond individual control, such as economic policy and historical context, play a significant role in a person's success or failure.
• 📚 It critiques the overemphasis on formal education and credentials as the primary means of achieving social recognition and success.
• 🛠️ The discussion calls for a reevaluation of the value of different types of work and the need to restore dignity to all forms of labor, not just those with high credentials.
• 🌐 Sandel argues that the meritocratic mindset can lead to resentment and populism, as people feel alienated and undervalued by a system that seems to favor the elite.
• 🤝 The transcript emphasizes the importance of humility in recognizing the role of luck and societal structures in individual success.
• 🌱 Sandel advocates for a shift in societal norms to appreciate the contributions of all citizens, not just those with formal education or wealth.
• 📉 The script uses the example of changing economic conditions from 1980 to 2024 to illustrate how external factors can significantly impact an individual's ability to thrive, regardless of merit.

Q & A

What is the main topic discussed in the script?

The main topic discussed in the script is the concept of meritocracy and its critique as presented by Michael Sandel in his book 'The Tyranny of Merit'.

What does the term 'meritocracy' refer to?

The term 'meritocracy' refers to a system where the rewards of a society are distributed based on an individual's talent, hard work, and qualifications.

What are the two main problems Michael Sandel identifies with the theoretical idea of meritocracy?

The two main problems Michael Sandel identifies are: 1) that we do not actually achieve a true meritocracy in practice, and 2) that even if we could, a perfect meritocracy would still be a flawed way to structure society.

Why does Sandel argue that the idea of meritocracy can lead to societal resentment and populism?

Sandel argues that the idea of meritocracy can lead to resentment and populism because it creates a narrative where those who are unsuccessful are seen as deserving their fate, which ignores external factors beyond their control. This breeds anger towards the perceived elite and can fuel populist movements.

What is the historical origin of the term 'meritocracy'?

The term 'meritocracy' was originally coined by Michael Young in his 1958 book 'The Rise of the Meritocracy', which depicted a dystopian future where society is organized around meritocratic principles.

How does Sandel connect the concept of meritocracy to the way people view education?

Sandel connects the concept of meritocracy to education by pointing out that in a meritocratic society, education is often seen as a means to acquire credentials rather than a pursuit of knowledge or personal growth, leading to 'meritocratic warfare' for social and economic advantage.

What is the role of humility in Sandel's critique of meritocracy?

Humility plays a significant role in Sandel's critique as he believes that recognizing the limits of individual control over life outcomes and the importance of external factors can counteract the prideful narrative of meritocracy that everyone gets exactly what they deserve.

What does Sandel suggest as a solution to the issues raised by meritocratic thinking?

Sandel suggests a shift in societal norms and values, focusing on the restoration of the dignity of work, the importance of civic virtue, and the need for a political project that acknowledges the complexity of inequality beyond individual merit.

How does Sandel view the relationship between individual upward mobility and inequality?

Sandel views individual upward mobility as an insufficient explanation for all the factors that lead to inequality, arguing that a more collective understanding is needed to address the systemic and structural causes of inequality.

What is the unintended consequence of meritocracy in the context of education, according to Sandel?

According to Sandel, the unintended consequence of meritocracy in the context of education is the transformation of learning into a private industry focused on credentials rather than genuine education, which can devalue the contributions of those without formal qualifications.

What is the role of voting and political representation in Sandel's view on overcoming meritocratic biases?

Sandel believes that voting for representatives who are genuinely from diverse backgrounds and possess practical wisdom, rather than just academic credentials, can help overcome meritocratic biases and restore a more balanced view of societal value and contribution.

Outlines

00:00

🤔 The Meritocratic Ideal and Its Pitfalls

Steven West introduces the concept of meritocracy, a social system where rewards are distributed based on talent, hard work, and qualifications. He discusses Michael Sandell's critique of meritocracy in his book 'The Tyranny of Merit,' highlighting the idea that meritocracy may not be the ideal system it's often portrayed to be. Sandell questions the notion that society should primarily reward those who are the most talented or hardworking, pointing out that this system can have unintended consequences and may not be as equitable as it seems.

05:02

💼 The Reality of Meritocracy and Its Discontents

This paragraph delves into the practical issues with meritocracy, noting that it is often not achieved in reality. Sandell points out that factors beyond individual control, such as economic policies and historical events, significantly impact a person's success. The paragraph also discusses the psychological impact of meritocracy, suggesting that it can lead to a society where the successful feel they deserve their status, while those struggling are left feeling as though they are to blame for their circumstances.

10:02

🏛️ The Historical and Philosophical Roots of Meritocracy

The script explores the origins of the concept of meritocracy, tracing it back to Michael Young's dystopian novel 'The Rise of the Meritocracy.' It discusses how the idea of meritocracy is intertwined with historical philosophical debates about God's grace and human salvation, suggesting that the belief in meritocracy may stem from a shift in how we view deservedness and individual responsibility. Sandell argues that this perspective can lead to societal corrosion, as it overlooks the role of luck and circumstance in life outcomes.

15:04

📚 The Impact of Meritocratic Thinking on Education

The paragraph examines the influence of meritocratic ideals on education, suggesting that it has become a system focused on obtaining credentials rather than imparting knowledge and wisdom. Sandell criticizes the emphasis on college degrees as the sole measure of a person's worth and the lack of respect for those in trade and other essential jobs. He calls for a reevaluation of the purpose of education and a shift towards teaching civic virtue and practical wisdom.

20:04

🗳️ The Connection Between Meritocracy and Political Representation

The discussion moves to the impact of meritocratic thinking on political representation, noting a bias towards electing individuals with high educational credentials. Sandell argues that this bias overlooks the value of practical wisdom and experience that can come from those who have not followed a traditional academic path. He suggests that political systems would benefit from a broader representation that reflects the diversity of skills and experiences in society.

25:05

🌟 Rethinking Meritocracy and the Path Forward

The final paragraph outlines Sandell's suggestions for moving beyond meritocratic thinking. He emphasizes the need for a political project focused on restoring the dignity of all types of work and calls for a renewed awareness of the importance of community and the common good. Sandell proposes a communitarian approach that values interdependence and shared conceptions of the good, rather than an individualistic focus on personal preferences and achievements.

Keywords

💡Meritocracy

Meritocracy refers to a system where individuals are rewarded based on their talent, effort, and qualifications. In the video, the concept is critically examined as the ideal that drives societal norms in Western culture, with the argument that it may not be as beneficial as it seems. The script discusses the potential flaws and unintended consequences of a merit-based society, such as the feeling of deservingness among the successful and the humiliation of the less fortunate.

💡Social Norms

Social norms are the unwritten rules and standards that shape the behavior of individuals within a society. The video script uses the term to discuss how norms, such as those perpetuated by meritocracy, influence the structure and values of a society. It questions whether the norms around meritocracy are truly beneficial and how they impact social cohesion and individual self-worth.

💡Tyranny of Merit

This term is derived from Michael Sandel's 2020 book title and is used in the script to describe the potential negative aspects of a meritocratic society. It suggests that an overemphasis on merit can lead to a form of tyranny where those who are deemed less meritorious are marginalized or undervalued, creating social divisions and resentment.

💡Deservingness

Deservingness is the belief that individuals get what they deserve based on their actions and abilities. The script explores how meritocracy can foster a sense of deservingness among the successful, which may lead to pride and a lack of empathy for those who are less fortunate, thus affecting social harmony and the common good.

💡Populism

Populism is a political approach that seeks to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups. The video script connects the rise of populism to the resentment felt by those who believe they have been failed by meritocratic systems, suggesting that this has led to a backlash against the elites.

💡Civic Virtue

Civic virtue refers to the habits and values that contribute to the well-being of a community. In the context of the video, Sandel argues for a renewed focus on civic virtue as a counterbalance to the individualism and pride associated with meritocracy, emphasizing the importance of community and the common good.

💡Practical Wisdom

Practical wisdom is the ability to make sound judgments and decisions in complex, real-world situations. The script suggests that education systems should prioritize teaching practical wisdom to prepare individuals to effectively engage with societal issues and manage their communities and families.

💡Credentialism

Credentialism is the emphasis on academic qualifications as the primary measure of a person's ability or worth. The video criticizes credentialism for creating a society where value and respect are disproportionately given to those with formal education, often overlooking the contributions of those without degrees.

💡Humility

Humility is the quality of being modest and respectful toward others, recognizing one's own limitations. The script posits that humility is a civic virtue that is lacking in meritocratic societies, where success can lead to an overemphasis on individual achievement and a disregard for the role of societal support and机遇.

💡Dignity of Work

The dignity of work refers to the inherent worth and respect that should be accorded to all types of labor, regardless of its social or economic status. Sandel argues for a political project that restores the dignity of work, recognizing the value of all jobs and challenging the meritocratic bias towards certain professions.

💡Structural Changes

Structural changes refer to modifications in the fundamental systems or institutions of a society. The video suggests that while Sandel does not advocate for a complete overthrow of the capitalist system, he does support structural changes to address the inequalities and social divisions perpetuated by meritocracy.

Highlights

The episode discusses the concept of meritocracy and its implications in Western culture, questioning whether it's truly the ideal societal structure.

Michael Sandel's book 'The Tyranny of Merit' critiques the meritocratic system and its potential negative consequences.

Sandel argues that meritocracy may not be fully achievable in practice, with examples of Ivy League demographics illustrating this point.

The episode explores the philosophical underpinnings of meritocracy, tracing its roots to societal and religious beliefs about deservedness.

Sandel suggests that even a perfect meritocracy could lead to societal flaws, such as a lack of humility and increased resentment among the less successful.

The original coiner of 'meritocracy,' Michael Young, envisioned a dystopian future where meritocracy leads to societal unrest.

The transcript examines the impact of meritocracy on public assistance attitudes and the potential for increased social division.

Sandel highlights the importance of acknowledging factors beyond individual control when assessing societal value and success.

The episode discusses the historical context of economic changes from 1980 to 2024 and their effects on societal structures.

Sandel calls for a reevaluation of the value placed on education and credentials, suggesting they may not be the sole determinants of societal contribution.

The transcript addresses the potential for meritocratic thinking to overshadow the importance of practical wisdom and civic virtue in education.

Sandel advocates for a political shift that focuses on restoring the dignity of work and recognizing the value of all jobs in society.

The episode suggests that the meritocratic focus on credentials may lead to an undervaluing of non-academic professions and skills.

Sandel proposes that political representation should not be limited to the highly credentialed, but should include diverse experiences and wisdom.

The transcript concludes with a call for a communitarian approach that emphasizes the interdependence of community members and a shared conception of the good.

Transcripts

hello everyone I'm Steven West this is

philosophized this thanks to the people

that do all the things that support the

show so last episode was all about the

importance of participating in a

democracy taking responsibility having

the sometimes tough conversations with

each other that eventually make up the

Norms of the societies we live in and if

you wanted an example of one of these

Norms a social ideal that sandal thinks

we'd benefit a lot from if we talked

about it more how about an ideal that

drives way we think about a lot of

things in Western culture that what we

should be aiming for is a society based

on the concept of a meritocracy or a

system where the rewards of a society

are distributed based on who's the most

talented who works the hardest and who's

the most qualified for the job in a true

meritocracy you could say talented

hardworking qualified people would be

the ones that are the most socially

rewarded everybody knows this is a

common way that people wish our

societies could be set up and Michael

Sandell in his 2020 book called The

Tyranny of Merit is going to question

whether that's actually a good way to be

giving recognition in a society and

before we get into his critique one

thing needs to be acknowledged here

right at the start I think well I guess

a question that needs to be asked here

is why would anybody want to do it in a

different way why would anybody want the

incentives of their society set up in

any way that doesn't primarily reward

these people I mean when I need a heart

surgery for example I want the best

possible surgeon you can find you know I

don't want some man or woman that you

know they've seen every episode of gry's

anatomy or Mash as Sandell says when

you're on a flight you want the pilot

that's the most qualified to be flying

the plane I mean seriously what else are

people really even making a case for

here we don't want a society where

people are incentivized to sit on the

couch all day complain and then expect

to get the same outcomes as everyone

else nobody wants a society like that we

need people doing great things everybody

benefits when people provide value to

the world and we want things set up in a

way where the people that work hard are

rewarded over the people that didn't

apply themselves we want a situation

where if somebody's the best for the job

they get the job and are not held back

by some immutable thing that they happen

to be born with I mean we've seen

nepotism and Prejudice be the selection

method throughout history what Society

doesn't want to do away with all that

and pay the way as much as we can for

the people with the most Merit to rise

to the top and I think if we're able to

acknowledge all these points as a place

to start you know plant a flag in the

ground right here then I think we can

open ourselves up to the rest of the

discussion few more layers to it that

Michael Sandell wants to turn us on to

today what he wants to ask is does US

setting things up to be a meritocracy as

much as we possibly can come with

certain unintended consequences that we

can see in the world all around us but

that we often don't attribute to the

meritocracy again building off the ideas

from last episode if we want to take

responsibility for the norms and ideals

that we organize society around and then

do the work every day to engage with

them then the idea of meritocracy is

going to be one of these things that we

need to take a closer look at from

Michael Sandell and there's two main

problems he thinks with the theoretical

idea of our meritocracy number one he

says is that we just don't actually

achieve it in practice this is important

of course but it's also something

everybody listening to this has already

heard no less than 800 times before in

your life for example sandal talks about

how 50% of the people that go to Ivy

League schools are from the top 1% of

families in terms of income that's the

fact he gives here but it doesn't need

to be this fact you don't like that one

just enter in any statistic you want

here that's more persuasive to you that

certain people get certain privileges

simply because of something about how

they were born plenty of examples of

that no matter what your politics is

point is to him problem number one with

our meritocracy is that we don't

actually achieve the meritocracy problem

number two though which I think is far

more philosophically interesting is that

he says even if we could start providing

a perfect meritocracy and remove all the

barriers out of people's way that would

still be a very flawed way to be

structuring Society that's filled with

all sorts of bad results for the people

that live in that Society in fact the

person that originally coined the term

meritocracy was a guy named Michael

Young back in the year 1958 he wrote a

book called The Rise of the meritocracy

it's a fiction novel that's about a

dystopian future where a society

organizes things around a meritocracy

and then in the year 2034 in the book

there's a violent populist uprising of

all the citizens that feel betrayed by

the leaders of the society that they're

a part of and it's funny you can hear

that and be like oh oh my God what could

possibly be wrong with a society based

on Merit well Michael Young saw the

problems that Sandell thinks are playing

out in the real world all around us see

fans of a meritocracy will say that one

of the strengths of it is that it's a

situation where everybody gets exactly

what they deserve and then maybe more

importantly everybody feels like they

got exactly what they deserved so one

version of that is that a young smart

talented hardworking motivated person

will do great things and Society will

benefit from their work and they will be

compensated well for doing those things

everyone will give them a ton of social

recognition and these successful people

will feel like everything that they got

in life is something that they deserve I

worked hard I was smart I deserve all

the things that I have because it was me

doing the things that got them but the

flip side of that sandal says is that in

other cases where tons of people are

struggling for whatever reason they

might be struggling those people in this

same method of determining social value

are also left to feel like they got

exactly what they deserved which would

be fine if individual effort and talent

were the only factors that determined

whether somebody's doing good or not but

unfortunately in the world we live in

there's a lot of other factors that just

fall outside the control of what a

single person can wake up and have an

effect on with their daily effort for

the sake of an example that I think

Sandell wouldn't object to here take the

difference between income levels

relative to cost of living between the

years 1980 and 2024 this 44e time span

by the way that No Doubt's going to go

down in history as a pretty unique

period of Change by the way I originally

saw this example on a random Youtube CH

a few weeks ago don't know who it was it

was one of these big channels where they

do cost of living comparisons anyway I

thought it was a great comparison of pre

and post neoliberalism anyway in 1980 in

the United States where I live for

example federal minimum wage was at $310

per hour and the average apartment

rental back then was between $250 and

$300 per month which means if you worked

40 hours a week for 4 weeks your

take-home pay would be

$496 which means that your apartment

rental if it was $250 a month would be

about 50% of your pay fast forward to

2024 you know past this period of

neoliberal get the government out of my

way globalize market fundamentalism and

the federal minimum wage today is

$7.25 an hour with the average apartment

cost being

$1,713 a month now if you worked 40

hours a week at $7.25 an hour all the

money that you make in a month if you

didn't eat or do anything else with it

all of it wouldn't be enough to afford

this apartment so then you consider

States like Washington that have

mandated a minimum wage increase to $15

an hour a few years ago and it's going

to keep rising up for the next 5 10

years that's nice of them and you'll

hear people that are a little older that

used to make 20 bucks an hour back in

2003 and they'll hear that and they'll

go man I cannot believe what these

delivery drivers expect to be getting

paid these days what are they they

driving a Lamborghini when they go to

pick up my my loaded baked potato fries

at least my baked potato fries will be

warm when they get here right no $15 an

hour 40 hours a week makes your

take-home at the end of the month $2,400

before taxes now compare that to the

1713 you need to get an apartment and

that would be 71% of your monthly income

so then you say okay come on though who

can really expect to be able to rent an

apartment simply with a minimum wage job

anyway shelter like that is a privilege

not a right well okay let's look at

college graduates then out of school

they start out averaging $24 an hour

which makes their monthly take-home

around $3,800 a month before taxes

compare that to the 1713 cost of an

apartment that would be 45% of their

monthly income in other words a college

graduate today has about a 5% better

situation than the person making the

federal minimum wage did back in 1980

hopefully the intent here is clear it's

not to say that there are no other

factors to these numbers here the point

is to illustrate how there are things

other than individual effort that

determine whether someone's struggling

or not and there are often things that

IND individuals have no control over

macroeconomic factors like inflation

wage stagnation jobs being sent

elsewhere growing inequality in general

there's historical factors too like the

events of the world that dictate many of

the opportunities and challenges that

your specific generation will have to

deal with more than that there's the way

your particular historical moment is

going to prioritize your skills like if

you're a person listening to this and

you have a really high IQ and you get

paid a lot because you have a job that

requires a high IQ and you found a way

within this current setup to make all

that happen yes you have a skill that is

highly valued in this world right now

but you also know that at another level

if you were born into a different

Society a thousand years ago you'd

likely just be the highest IQ person

pushing a plow you know looking for

pattern recognition and and how your pet

cockroach moves around in the box you

keep them in see from macroeconomics to

historical factors to even biological

facts about a person these things all

play an undeniable role and how someone

may be struggling in life and when you

ignore the importance of these and

determining where people end up and you

replace it instead with this attitude

towards people that everybody's getting

exactly what they deserve all sorts of

ways of thinking about things stem out

of this that you wouldn't necessarily

expect for example in this meritocratic

setup as he calls it to Michael sandel

people are more skeptical towards Public

Assistance as a thing that we need to be

providing after all if the reason you

can't afford your own house is just

because you're a loser that made bad

decisions get in the wrong degree or

you're not Sid hustling enough to make

more money then why do my tax dollars

got to pay to fix your situation you go

out and fix it another thing this leads

to he thinks is a situation where our

society flatters the successful people

in it and humiliates the unsuccessful he

says this because again it tells

successful people that you're the reason

for all your success and you don't have

to consider all the factors outside of

your control that made your situation a

pretty fortunate one and then again for

the unsuccessful you too are the reason

for your lack of success and you really

shouldn't be sitting around complaining

about these outside factors nobody cares

nobody needs to come and rescue you you

just need to work harder and overcome

these things like everybody else does in

other words this is an attitude towards

each other that is corrosive to a

society in fact more than that to

Michael Sandell it's corrosive to the

common good that we talked about last

episode our ability to have the

conversations that are going to make our

society into something that we all want

to live in it's corrosive in a few

different ways one it makes it so that

we don't focus on the bad economic

policy that got us into the situation

we're in if people are struggling when

we fail to have substantive

conversations about how politicians and

economists made huge mistakes a couple

decades ago that have led to this place

and instead we just blame the people who

are struggling for not working hard

enough all that does is leave these

people in a place where they become

humiliated and resentful because from

their perspective all they've done is go

to school get a degree and do everything

Society told them to do you know they

followed the recipe and now they're

being told they can't afford to function

in the world what because they lack the

willpower to start a side hustle and

what little time they have off already

is that the kind of society that we

would want to collectively design if we

were drawing it up in a brainstorming

session I think most people would say no

and Michael sandel says this anger and

resentment from the people being sent

this message that they're the problem

when it comes to why their life has

gotten worse in recent years make no

mistake this anger is what has created

the recent rise of populism all across

cross the political landscape in the

last 10 years or so see if populism is

usually Grassroots political movement

that centered around a distaste for some

Elite group who people generally think

are hurting them in some way that as we

talked about in one of the xek episodes

big pieces of both the modern left and

the right would have to say that that's

a pretty accurate description of them

and the meritocratic ways of thinking

that produce this resentment where

people feel as though Elites are out of

touch and don't appreciate anything that

they provide to the world for Michael

Sandell this allows for populous

candidates to swoop in and take

advantage of this resentment by

promising that everything you're upset

about with the elites well I'm not one

of those Elites and trust me I'm going

to fix everything by getting rid of them

as a quick detour here it's interesting

to consider where sandal says this all

comes from in the history of philosophy

as he puts it where did this idea that

Merit is connected to deservedness even

come from and he says interestingly in

the Western World the specific way that

we think about it may come originally

from conversations we used to have about

God and salvation the quick version of

this is that there used to be a problem

in the philosophy of Christianity where

the question was do I go to heaven if

I'm a good person you know if I perform

the sacraments and I do good deeds you

know 12 hail mares 400 Lord's Prayers if

I do all this stuff do people that do

good things go to heaven and people that

do bad things go to hell or does God

have the ability to let me into heaven

whether I do any of this stuff or not it

may seem like a weird question on the

surface but it actually has pretty big

implications for people who are

Christians and if you're not Christian

don't worry about it just treat it like

it's the trolley car problem because

when Augustine thought about this

problem if getting into heaven requires

that you've done certain good things

then in one sense he says God cannot be

omnipotent with that picture because if

you haven't done any of this good stuff

then in that case his hands would be

essentially tied you know I I wish I

could let you into heaven but you

haven't done your Lord's Prayers sorry I

my hands are tied here doesn't seem

likely that's the case to Augustine more

than that though he thinks that it can't

be the case because if it were then he

says the whole thing about sacrif iing

his one and only son to forgive people

of their sins that whole thing would be

completely unnecessary you wouldn't need

it if you could just live your life as a

good person and get into heaven on the

other hand though if God can just let

you into heaven regardless of whether

you're a good person or not then do we

even do good things during our time here

I mean sure it'd be nice if you did if

it's something that makes you happy but

do you really need to do good things in

order to get into heaven so the

implications of this are huge for

Christian thought at the time and the

further thing to consider about this

conversation if you're Michael sandel is

that depending on which position you

take in this debate that will determine

a direction that your thinking starts to

steer into for example if you take the

line that you need to be a good person

to get into heaven that bad people go to

hell then salvation as sandal puts it

becomes a bit like self-help where as

long as you live as a good religious

follower then you can feel a sense of

Pride about the Good Deeds that you've

embarked on and earned your place in

heaven and then you can look down on all

the people who did bad things but if you

believe that it was was God's sacrifice

of his son Jesus that gets you into

heaven then the alternative way to feel

about it is a sense of humility towards

God's grace again depending on what your

answer is to this question you'll either

feel Pride for your own Good Deeds or

humility in the presence of God's grace

and here's the point we live for Michael

sandel in a dialectic between pride on

the one hand and humility on the other

and we live in an age where pride is

over represented in our political

economic and civil relationships it

originated in the history of our

thinking from the results of these sorts

of conversations because if you

transpose this point about salvation to

our conversation about the meritocracy

the idea that you've done good things so

you deserve your good place in the world

and people that haven't done good things

haven't earned a good place in the world

and need to do better well you can see

the direct parallel sandal is talking

about there on the other side of this

too you can see how the acknowledgement

of outside forces that you as an

individual really have no control over

acknowledging how much of those have

played into the exact spot that you're

at in life that's a type of humility

that people who are doing well in the

world that think it's all because of

them might benefit from exploring a bit

more in their worldview so to tie the

first part of sandel's points together

here and put it into a neat single

sentence version of this it's not that a

meritocracy is bad because we shouldn't

be compensating people or appreciating

them if they do something valuable

meritocratic thinking over indexes the

way people look at the world on the

pride end of this Pride versus humility

dialectic and to Michael Sandell that is

is corrosive to society and the common

good and as you'll see throughout the

rest of the episode here there are so

many examples of the corrections he

thinks we should be making that are

going to be centered around the main

civic virtue he thinks we're in dire

need of in the western world right now

and that is more humility Michael

sandela said that the biggest inequality

that exists between people today is not

when it comes to purchasing power

although that is important don't get him

wrong but he say the bigger inequality

that people face is the one of social

recognition or social esteem it's worth

asking the question if we're going to

examine the Norms that make up the

society we're a part of what is it that

makes someone valuable to the society

that they're in what counts as a

valuable contribution that we should

feel Instant Respect for when we hear

that someone's doing it well with the

way that we currently look at the world

people usually feel this way about

people like doctors about scientists

maybe about Judges but obviously we have

respect for far more than just these

careers so what is it that warrants this

social recognition more generally well

to Michael sandel we have this sort of

default respect for people when they've

gone to school and spent years of their

life to get a degree or more accurately

we have respect for someone's career

when they are well credentialed at what

they do I mean these are the kind of

people where you go to a party you hear

about what they do and you're like wow

wow you really are doing something

important with your work not like me I

I'm just one of those delivery drivers

making 15 bucks an hour but is this

level of respect of someone simply for

having a college degree hanging on the

wall is that something that's welld

deserved

there's not an easy yes or no answer to

this which is why it's something we got

to examine deeper to him Michael Sandell

would say that one of the reasons we see

people with college degrees in this way

is because of the messaging we've been

receiving from a meritocratic culture

for the last three and a half Decades of

Our Lives Bill Clinton he says way back

in the 90s told everyone when he was

pushing school that what you earn will

depend on what you learn this is the

tagline back in the 90s actually it was

one of Clinton's Chief advisers Dr Seuss

that came up with that one you know that

guy wasn't actually a Doctor by the way

and to sandell's point why would he have

said that he was a doctor when he wasn't

well because of all this unquestionable

recognition that we give to people that

are credentialed but in all seriousness

back in the 90s this was a tagline and

for Michael Sandell what this was was a

meritocratic workaround of the situation

we talked about before where bad

Economic Policy produces uncertain

Economic Times for people and instead of

dealing with that directly as a way to

safeguard against it politicians

teachers parents everybody told

everybody that if you want to make it in

the world what you do is you go to

school you get credentialed you make

your resume into something that when

when people see it they just have a

coronary they fall over in other words

to Michael sandel becoming a valuable

member of society has become essentially

to go to a college and get a certificate

to hang on your wall that then arms you

to engage in what he calls meritocratic

Warfare but not only is it not the case

anymore that you go to school and you

get a degree and you're set for life in

whatever field you got the degree in

but this whole message that we send to

people in Mass what he calls the

rhetoric of rising it comes with certain

unintended consequences as well we start

to view the entire concept of Education

in our societies as just a way for

people to acquire credentials so they

can get paid in the world economic

Justice then becomes about making sure

there's no barriers in the way of people

being able to get these credentials so

that they can then enter into a lifetime

of meritocratic warfare with all the

other people with the sheer numbers of

people that are going to college and the

instant judgment you get if you say

you're not going to go to college the

whole thing starts to not feel like

education anymore but more like a

Private Industry that's been heavily

subsidized by Government funding and

political propaganda for the last 35

years now none of this is to say that

college isn't important to sandal it is

especially if you want to get into

highly specialized fields and to him we

would do well as a society to make

College as accessible as possible for

the people that want to go but that is a

very different situation than what we're

currently doing we are currently at

least in the United States spending $162

billion a year of taxpayer money to send

people to college and only 1 billion

dollars a year to help people go to

trade school 162 to one what is the

message we are sending about what a

valuable contribution is to society it's

no wonder why everybody knows what I'm

talking about when I say we have a

special level of default respect for

people with credentials it's no wonder

people that do the jobs that keep the

world running often don't feel

appreciated by the society they're in

it's no wonder why in Michael Young's

book about the dystopian future of a

society built on meritocracy why there

was a populist Uprising in the year 2034

where people felt like certain types of

work and intelligence were being

valorized in a way that made them feel

like the elites of their society barely

even cared about their existence so the

takeaway from all this is that education

becomes one of the unexpected casualties

of the meritocracy for Michael Sandell

he thinks collectively it would be

really good for us to rethink the way we

see education from the ground up maybe

to reform it in a way where instead of

it being focused so much on giving

people credentials maybe we focus more

on producing the types of people we need

to maintain a society that can solve its

own problems we need better education

about civic virtue we need better

teaching of how to engage in a real way

with the issues of your day we need to

teach a type of practical wisdom that's

invaluable for being able to manage

families and communities and we also

need to be making education something

that teaches our future citizens how to

love the process of learning not to just

learn this thing today so that maybe

you'll get a promotion tomorrow these

are the things that are missing from our

education system and in keeping with our

conversation from last episode it is our

job to make these things a priority

moving forward but how am I supposed to

change the education system Michael

Sandell what am I supposed to take over

the classrooms and scream at all the

children you all need more practical

wisdom in your life well no the answer

is through voting which directly

connects to another unexpected casualty

of the meritocracy of your Michael

Sandell that is the way we see people

that represent us in government to put

it briefly when you look at the numbers

we are extremely biased towards electing

people that have these special

credentials hanging on the wall I mean

can you imagine voting for a president

or a prime minister or a city council

member that didn't even graduate college

on one hand it can seem ridiculous to do

that but on the other hand knowing that

a lot of people's college experience

hasn't exactly been focused on the

purest form of education for the last 40

years and thinking about whether a

president or a prime minister once

they're elected are they really solving

some problem that's going on in a

community by pulling something out of

political science class from 25 years

ago no no what skills are they using to

get the job done there well likely to

Sandell the kind of civic virtue

practical wisdom and Leadership that we

should be teaching kids more in school

in other words it's not the degree

that's hanging on the wall and until we

stop electing people simply because they

can recite platitudes about the economy

while handing out photocopies of their

we will never get to a place where we

move beyond the meritocratic thinking

that has led us to the place we're in

this idea that you're not worthy of

respect or that your job is just not

important if you don't have a degree

this has to go for Michael sandel one

it's just not true two again if you were

examining the social norms of your

society and tending to the care of the

society you live in it's a horrible

social Norm to have that does nothing

but make most people that do most jobs

feel unimportant it's toxic to to the

way that we see each other in fact

sandel thinks that in his country of the

United States what the Democratic party

used to represent was the life of

Working Class People but now he says

both parties have bought in this

meritocratic nonsense that makes them

parties of elitist thinking where you're

either well credential in a certain type

of work or you're unimportant if you

wanted some ways to move forward with

all this to sandel it comes down to two

main things we need to focus on we need

to First collectively understand that

individual upward Mobility can never

fully account for all the factors that

lead to inequality and second we need a

political project that has at the center

of its focus the restoration of the

Dignity of work Co taught us a little

bit about how important Frontline

workers are but it's not enough we need

a new awareness campaign connected to

actual policy decisions that has the

workers that make our societies even

possible at the center of the

consideration of the movement sandal

thinks that the political actors that

manage to do that in an authentic way

are going to be massively successful and

again maybe part of the solution in some

places will be electing people locally

that are truly from these types of

positions people who therefore draw on a

different kind of wisdom from people

that actually know what's going on so as

you can see these ways to move forward

for sandel are not going to be things

that involve overthrowing the broken

capitalist system altogether you know

this is more of a communitarian approach

it shifting in the way that we think

about each other it has almost a

spiritual component to it at times as

well for Michael sandal and it comes

from bringing people A Renewed awareness

of their position within a society see

the team Freedom approach that we talked

about last episode it highly values the

protection of individual preferences you

know just stay out of my way and let me

do what I want to do but the problem

with having that much of an individual

focus is that the people that live in

societies like that often just assume

that the common good what's best for

everyone is just the sum total of

everyone's individual preferences but

what you're in a society is to Michael

sandal to be a citizen is not just I'm

going to wake up every day and exercise

my freedom your life as a citizen is

more than just meeting up with some guy

off Craigslist in a Walgreens parking

lot seeing if you might could want to

buy his jet ski for 400 bucks it's more

than that you're part of a country or a

community that stands for something far

greater than that every Community to

Michael sandel every system for that

matter every country every company every

Bible study group presupposed opposes

some common conception of the good so to

be a citizen and this goes all the way

down to his views on subjectivity and

the self to be a human being is not to

be an independent rational agent that's

making free and autonomous choices it's

to be an interdependent member of a

community that presupposes some

conception of the good and then

obviously with the whole conversation

we've been having for the last two

episodes there's a responsibility that's

incumbent upon you as a member of that

Community again Michael sandel

represents present not one of these

people that wants to overthrow

capitalism though he does think there

need to be some structural changes to it

he represents a very optimistic side of

the conversations that are going on

today where he believes in our ability

to arrive at Civic agreements that allow

us to coexist in peace with each other

hopefully for extended periods of time

if we are willing to do the work in this

way an important thing to realize about

sandal is that he represents a type of

thinker these days who's highly

skeptical towards the idea of liberalism

as being some rational way P the

negative emotions of political

disagreement see that's another very

popular take when it comes to thinking

about the issues of our day there's a

lot of thinkers that believe that some

of the central tasks that things like

liberalism communism or socialism are

trying to accomplish are just missing

something important about what the

challenges are that we're really facing

in politics that each one of those

strategies this person will say tries to

come up with some Grand mechanism that's

going to remove the negative emotions

from human beings organizing themselves

in communism you could say it's about

removing the class struggle that causes

so many problems and liberalism you

could say it's about using rationality

and science to arrive at a sort of

objective consensus that makes

disagreeing with things seem impossible

all of these and more this person might

say are just ways of trying to avoid the

inevitable that human beings will

disagree and it will be a messy business

when they do disagree but maybe that's

what Society needs to move forward and

that maybe the path forward shouldn't be

about trying to remove political

disagreement but maybe the whole task of

politics should be far more focused on

channeling this disagreement in a way

that is productive the work of Shantal

mu and her concept of agonism comes to

mind which could be coming up soon on

this podcast if it's something that you

guys want to hear about anyway as always

uh for those of you out there who get it

thanks for getting it you know if you've

been listening to this show for years

you know this podcast is not a soap box

for my own political beliefs and it

never will be the goal what I'm always

trying to do is to make these ideas more

accessible to people because I have an

enormous amount of respect for these

sinkers and the value they provide to

the world and I remember working at a

warehouse doing manual labor every day

wishing that I had a podcast like this

to listen to and and I get it it can be

frustrating if you don't like one of

these ideas that you hear who do you

yell at about it other than the host of

the show who's who's clearly trying to

indoctrinate people to be just like him

I I just will never be that and I'm

sorry there's not a clearer person to

yell at sometimes I guess but if you

like what we're going for here thanks

for making a show like this possible

patreon / philosophies this and as

always thank you for listening I'll talk

to you next time