Written by David Kee
The day is coming where each of you will be eager to hear the words from our provost congratulating you on the “degree you have earned.” Today, some are questioning whether you will have truly earned it. I have just finished reading two books: Michael Sandel’s latest titled “The Tyranny of Merit: What’s Become of the Common Good?” and Adrian Wooldridge’s “The Aristocracy of Talent: How Meritocracy Made the Modern World.” I always find it beneficial to read two opposing perspectives on the same topic back-to-back. Sandel’s previous work, “Justice,” was a big hit a few years back. Wooldridge’s previous book, co-written with former U.S. Federal Reserve chief Alan Greenspan, also a success, covered the history of capitalism in America. Both of those books had value, though they each had some disappointing arguments. I have given both authors another chance to impress and teach me.
I have to say, after reading both books, that Wooldridge won this battle–and handily. By choosing to look at meritocracy from a historical perspective, he was convincing in persuading me that a person’s position in society being dependent on one’s ability and skills is a novel concept, absent from most of human history. Rarely had anyone risen above his or her status at birth. This lack of meritocracy brought about suffering, corruption, waste and oppression. Spawned by the Reformation and the Enlightenment, consecutive revolutions transformed society by removing group-specific rights and replacing them with individual rights. This opened the door for anyone to increase chances of success regardless of one’s status at birth. This also created a meritocratic environment in which many barriers certainly remain, but the historical record is quite convincing. Meritocracy has lifted the many. Achievement based on the combination of ability and effort has a strong track record.
Sandel loses the argument because he completely disregards history (a dangerous strategy) and focuses simply on luck and power. In fact, he proposed a return to aristocracy (which explains Wooldridge’s title), where it’s clear that one’s rise in society is clearly due to good fortune (birth) and is not earned. I ended up unconvinced by Sandel’s ideal perspective that merit is oppressive, though it sometimes certainly could be. Despite his correct assertions that the elite tend to thumb their nose at the working class through credentialism, it is still the old losing argument of collectivist thinking over individual achievement, seeking to fit in rather than standing out. He attributes success to luck, even though scientific research into luck has revealed that luck tends to be made. Sandel says that merit is tyrannical, because it is unearned. But so is grace, which is the opposite of tyrannical.
The Samaritan had seemingly fewer positive inputs in his life than the priest and the Levite, yet it’s what he did with these inputs, of his own volition, that made him good. Not perfect, but good. Sandel’s view that those who achieve believing they earned it will start to oppress those who don’t is historically misleading and cynical at best. In my experience, the achieving people work to help those who don’t achieve and lift their opportunities to join them. The most competitive societies are the most philanthropic.
When asked about what we can do to solve today’s challenges, the answer, as with the Samaritan, is within each one of us taking this responsibility personally. We’re all dealt a different set of cards. We must demonstrate care personally, individually, with the tools we have been given. That has merit. And that merit is the opposite of tyrannical. It is hopeful, compassionate and good. Sandel has not proved his point. He should have looked to history, as Wooldridge did, and taken a higher view of humanity.
Many of us are here at Harding because someone had the heart of the Samaritan to personally invest, care and provide for us to forge a path through Christian education. Your scholarship was possibly merited, but aren’t we all at some point the beaten man on the side of the road? Now, regardless of the inputs we have received, let’s make the most of them and redeem the time. Let’s complete our “earned” degrees and aim to be good Samaritans.
