|
|
This is only a preview of the paper
Click here to register and get the full text.
Existing members click here to login
|
|
|
“Kidults”: The New Breed of Power Progeny Entering a web-search with the words “Egg Donor” will bring up a list of egg-donor sites in which it would seem you are completing an on-line order for the ideal person. When searching for an egg-donor, you have the choice of entering eye-color, hair-color, height, weight, race, and even education and athletic ability. This “order-form” reflects a meritocratic system that has intrinsically grown from a naturally competitive society. In short, children today are bred for success. This success is gauged not by the happiness one achieves in life, but by an elaborate system, which considers such factors as the school one attends, the career one pursues, and the financial capital one gains. This arrangement may seem, at first glance, to be desirable. Those who work harder, and have inherently superior skills, will gain the greatest wealth, and accordingly be the most successful individuals in society. Another desirable effect of such a system is that society as a whole can benefit from the advancements made by those who end up on top. While competing solely for their own advancement, the benefits these individuals experience through their own innovation will assist the entire society by the same means. In an age of progress, countries that have developed this intrinsic meritocracy such as the U.S. and U.K. have enjoyed the highest economic standards of living. Webster has defined a meritocracy as “a system in which advancement is based on individual ability or achievement.” Similarly sociologists have developed the equation: Merit= IQ + Effort (Young 5). According to both models, IQ or “individual ability,” is a factor in one’s aptitude for success, however it is not the only factor. What one may lack in natural ability one may make up by the amount of effort he/she puts forth. Thus a meritocratic system should be pleasing to everyone because every individual has an equal chance to advance in society through his or her own merit. As Michael Young puts it: Since bottom agrees with top that merit should reign, they can only cavil at the means by which the choice has been made, not at the standard which all alike espouse (114). In other words, since all individuals have the same opportunity to excel by their own merit (be it mostly IQ or mostly effort), then they have only themselves to blame in the event that they do not excel to the greatest heights of society. One’s position in a lower social class can be reformed by one’s own merit, therefore status and ability to succeed is not based on family, inheritance or other superficial means, as it was when aristocracies and monarchies were more prevalent, but upon an individual’s merit. By placing more value on one’s merit as opposed to the family in which one was born, society moves towards both greater equality as well as greater efficiency. An equal chance at success based on merit ensures that the resources of the country are being well used, and that a very gifted individual who may have been born into a poor family can achieve success while unintentionally benefiting the society as a whole through his/her productivity. Likewise this system does not allow individuals of lesser merit to remain in leadership positions simply because of their familial background (Young 29). However the supposed equality and benefits provided by a meritocratic system, as shown by the U.S. and U.K., far from outweigh the list of societal tribulations that arise in tandem from this system. Although it is possible to break out of one social class and join the ranks of another, it is a very difficult task to accomplish. Truly the equation of merit should read: Merit= IQ + Effort + Access to financial resources + Race/Gender/Other superficial variables. Another problem that has arisen is the enormous amounts of stress that such meritocracies have placed on both children and parents alike, causing family disorder as well as severe ego damage and psychological problems. The very concept of childhood as a societal institution is threatened by the rigorous demands placed upon children through the complex demands of meritocracy. And finally, the values upon which education is based are skewed and distorted by the ideals which meritocracy has come to promote: a quest for success, even if it entails sacrificing knowledge. Equality is a cornerstone of the U.S.’s societal structure, and it seems that some of this equality can be attributed to the fact that people can rise or fall in society due to their own merit. Similarly the U.K. has moved away from the monarchy and aristocracy in search of a more equitable societal system. However the ideal that in a meritocracy the only factors of success one will achieve are IQ and effort is hardly realistic. Granted it is much easier to rise or fall due to one’s merit in the U.S. and U.K. today than it was when one’s status was determined solely by family ties, gender, and race, each of these attributes still play a role in the determination of one’s achievements. Children born into wealthy families, although not guaranteed a life of prosperity, are much more likely to have access to the tools which allow them to thrive. Their IQ may not advance due to their wealth, but they possess the financial resources to hone their academic skills through private tutors and higher-level education. A person born into a poor family with the same intelligence of a wealthy person will not experience the same opportunities, and therefore may never be able to attain his/her desired level of achievement due to his/her lack of resources and the trap of poverty which many people experience (Mankiw 433- 434). However it is not only those who do not have the resources to compete that suffer from harmful consequences of meritocracy. Those who do have the resources that enable them to ambitiously compete in the ever-more antagonistic meritocracy also experience negative repercussions. The ability for one to advance is based upon his/her ability to compete, and the competition has become stiff. Parents take this into account from the very beginning, and determined that their child succeed, they go to great lengths to ensure their child “jumps through all the right hoops” to reach this ultimate goal (Brooks 23).
Approximate Word count = 4114
Approximate Pages = 16.5
(250 words per page double spaced)
|
|
|
|
|
|