The concept of meritocracy was coined in its modern version, only in 1958 by the British sociologis

In the second column of this series, Matthew Cociña involves a confrontation between two central ideas of the current somelier Chilean debate: inequality as an urgent problem and meritocracy as the route to a more just country. A meritocratic society, warns, not reduce or eliminate inequality "simply redistributes the probabilities somelier of being in the advantaged group." That is, if a country concentrates wealth in 45 thousand persons, as in Chile, will not deliver better meritocracy; only change the way they choose the 45 mil, leaving the other 15 million in the same situation. "A purely meritocratic somelier notion ignores the fact that a nation is more than an arena of competition," explains the author. somelier
The concept of meritocracy was coined in its modern version, only in 1958 by the British sociologist Michael Young Labour activist in his book The rise of the meritocracy, 1870-2033: An essay on education and equality (The Rise of the Meritocracy, 1870-2033: an essay on education and equality) (Young 1961). Being much newer than the idea of equality of opportunity, the idea of meritocracy has been off the radar of policy discussions philosophy theory of justice, despite winning a few decades central to the neoliberal discourse.
A society in which a lottery to allocate 10% of newborns sufficient resources to live a full life, giving the remaining 90% resources so minimal that only guarantee survival was implemented, it would be a perfect society with equal opportunities. No one would be more likely than the rest to live a full life. There would be space for inherited somelier privilege. It would, however, a fairly difficult qualify society.
Young's book is a frontal critique of what the author envisioned as a trend toward formal education route gentrification in Europe, and has the form of a fictionalized character in a fictional first-person recounts how Britain has test become in 2034 (we're not that far) a country with a system of government that favors intelligence and "skills" over any other criteria. This has created, in the dystopian world narrated by Young, occupied by a "tireless elite" made up a "creative minority" at the expense of the "stolid mass" government. The formula "IQ + Effort = Merit" is a way of validating the privileges obtained by the new ruling class. Meritocracy is, in short, a term coined by Young "to designate the government for those deemed to have merit; merit is equated with intelligence more effort, whose holders are identified early and are selected for adequate intensive education, and there is an obsession with quantification, test scores and grades "(Fontana Dictionary of Modern Thought 1988. 521 he quoted in Sen 2000: 7) Any resemblance to the project of modern Chile and criticism made by rebellious students Benjamin Gonzalez somelier and Justin Hudson is, of course, purely coincidental (see previous column)
After a couple of decades a disillusioned Michael Young had to watch his concept, originally coined with a critical end, he was adopted by the neoliberal discourse that endowed him in a positive connotation of universal claims. These claims can be challenged, however, by at least five main reasons.
First, a society organized around the idea of meritocracy is a society based on what we call "equal somelier opportunity". We are all certainly in favor of equal opportunities. It can be argued without much controversy that equality of opportunity is a necessary condition for building a society that we call fair condition. somelier Asked to choose between a society that does not create equal opportunities (Chile today is certainly a notable example) and who does not much room where lost. Achieve somelier higher levels of equality of opportunity would, in fact, a big step toward building a society where everyone can live a full life. Take seriously the concept of equal opportunities imply radical reforms are certainly needed in Chile.
This does not mean, however, that a society that provides equal opportunities necessarily somelier be a just society. Equality of opportunity is, in other words, a necessary but not sufficient for the construction of a just order condition but.
In fact, as noted sociologist Erik O. Wright in his latest book (Wright 2010) and in his presidential address to the American Sociological Society (Wright 2013), the idea of equality somelier of opportunity has a number of limitations . A society in which,