Merit and Equality the Immediate Challenge of

Merit and Equality The immediate challenge of society revolves around the construction of a society that is fair and just. The exact principles that allow society to do that is particularly difficult to define and initiate within the context of the existing framework of society. Two concepts that appear to be diametrical opposites are equality and merit. Individuals who invite society to be structured on merit suggest that the inherent inequalities in individual abilities should be the mechanism through which individuals are separated and even stratified.

Others suggest that such a position ignores historical antecedents that privilege some groups above others and hence it is important to construct a society that is based on the equality of all the citizens. Equality is a concept that is difficult to define and more difficult to achieve. I agree that merit and equality are incompatible structuring society on one of the concepts negates the use of the other. According to Kabanoff (1991) equality refers to the different members of a relationship having the same value as individuals.

This promotes mutual self-esteem and tends to suggest a sense of solidarity among the individuals of a group. In this sense equality allows persons from diverse backgrounds to stand before some common entity on the same footing. The concept of equality is usually generated in reference to the position of individuals before the law. This type of equality allows each person to have access to the same type of justice or judgment from the legal system.

Advocates of equality suggest that it is not only conceptually relevant but a necessary feature of societal organization (Joseph 1980). The push toward equality of all persons means that institutions within society are rendered blind and does not consider qualities such as sex, wealth and status when viewing individuals. Institutions treat persons the same without regard to their station in life or any other quality that may act to give one group an advantage above another group.

These individuals often advocate that it is necessary for the state to engage processes that redress inequalities and create a more egalitarian society. This attempt to flatten the social structure and remove hierarchal stratification from the structure is often met with opposition from individuals from multiple positions within the social structure. The advocates of a merit system suggest that individuals should be rewarded based on their performance and personal ability (Gosepath 2011). This type of system suggests that status; position and privileges should be based on achieved rather than ascriptive values.

Achieved qualities are generally attained through education and personal ability. According to Parsons (1960) rewards based on achieved qualities is the hallmark of developed societies. In modern society any differences between individuals is as a consequence of merit and nothing else. The argument is that the strongest will survive and the weakest will not be able to thrive in a merit system. The merit system therefore is the most useful structure of societies to adopt since the result is a stronger society.

Critics of the merit system suggest that such a system ignores the true mechanisms that create differences between people. They identify historical antecedents such as slavery and gender domination. Feminist theorists in particular suggest that the patriarchal system that governs the world creates unequal systems of power. These unequal systems of power allow men to have greater access to resources and opportunities giving them an advantage over women. The idea of a merit system ignores this underlying power differential that skews the power toward one group.

Additionally, the merit system tends to increase the wealth of the wealthiest and does not provide a balance to the inherent wealth and power consolidation of particular sectors of the society. Merit and equality are systems that.