TED Conversations

Bernard White

TEDCRED 20+

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Equality versus Meritocracy. Which Wins?

I have been having this debate in my Head for quite a while now, and I can't decide. Which is more important? Both are in conflict to a certain extent on various issues, like "Education" for example.
It could help to watch this TED talk :
- Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives.
http://www.ted.com/talks/jonathan_haidt_on_the_moral_mind.html
I ask this because many politicians talk about "Fairness" they usually mean many different things. Roughly speaking when Liberals talk about "Fairness" they typically mean "Equality". While when Conservatives talk about "Fairness" they typically mean "Meritocracy".
So which one is more important to you? (Or in other words, What do you mean when you say "Fairness"?)

0
Share:

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Aug 30 2013: Bernard, I am concerned that people would either accept or attempt to defend the definitions you have mandated to liberals or conservatives.

    By your definition there should not ever be a rich liberal ... that would be immoral and "unfair". Liberals should spread their wealth ... to be fair. Ain't gonna happen. As a example: Obama has a Aunt and Uncle in the US illegally. Both are on welfare .... he is a multimillionaire who acknowledges them but will not use his money to assist even his relatives ... I fail to see the "fairness" or "equality".

    As for conservatives ... perhaps you have confused meritocracy and capitalism. I would more closely associate meritocracy with the communist / socialist programs that existed in Russia and the communist blocks. Wher capitalism allows those citizens to advance who provide a service or product that is in demand. That person can come from any walk of life. America, democracy, capitalism provides the opportunity for growth.

    In this case I would say that fairness would be to not label either party, thus stacking the deck and skewing the answers.

    I like your question ... but your explanation has the appearance of a political agenda.

    I wish you well. Bob.
    • thumb
      Aug 31 2013: Well, I can assure you I have no political agenda. Only a honest interest in this matter, but I can see how explanation can lead to this assumption. The reason of my explanation is that is what the statistics say.
      With regards to Obama, I think he is being immoral (if this is true), I think he has a duty to help his relatives.
      I wish you well also! :-)

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.