I think you’ve misread the point of the author you critique in your latest post. By “merit,” I took him not to be referring to outcomes or learning, but to effort, determination, etc.

He’s not the first to make this case, but it’s not unreasonable to say that someone doesn’t deserve the fruits of their work (be it in school or otherwise) if they were not responsible for the factors that gave rise to the success. Since one would be hard-pressed to claim that one’s socioeconomic background is one of one’s own making, the results of being from one background over another aren’t deserved. Similarly, since one’s natural intellectual and physical gifts are similarly outside one’s causal control, the benefits these confer aren’t deserved either.

The author seems to want to defend the very radical claim that society’s “winners” should be determined by things like determination, effort, and courage — regardless of what those with these traits actually produce. Leaving aside the workability of such a system, it doesn’t seem to have dawned on him that these traits might also be natural gifts — and thus not desert-conferring either.

A. J. Kreider

Miami