A well-functioned society depends on its ability to nurture,attract,and deploy talents in critical sectors.However,the implementation of some meritocratic principles to allocate positions often leads to unjust social ...A well-functioned society depends on its ability to nurture,attract,and deploy talents in critical sectors.However,the implementation of some meritocratic principles to allocate positions often leads to unjust social hierarchies.Is there,then,a solution to meritocracy’s dysfunctional hierarchical effects?This paper attempts to answer this by drawing on the real-world cases of Singapore and the USA to investigate the relationship of toxic social hierarchies with meritocracy.It proposes three solutions to curb the unjustifiable social stratifications and the erosion of social cooperation often associated with social meritocracy.These reflections could help to shed light on the grounds for the ongoing debates on social hierarchies and provide valuable insights into how to weigh up existing socio-political structures.展开更多
The criticisms of the falsity of universal recognition carried| out by leftists, led by Karl Max, and the queries of its desirability proposed by rightists, represented by Friedrich Nietzsche, raise challenges to Fran...The criticisms of the falsity of universal recognition carried| out by leftists, led by Karl Max, and the queries of its desirability proposed by rightists, represented by Friedrich Nietzsche, raise challenges to Francis Fukuyama’s theory of “the end of history” from two opposite directions. At present, Chinese-style political meritocracy based on the party state is a political form that combines these left-wing and right-wing challenges and has the potential to move beyond “the end of history”. However, whether it can truly surpass “the end of history” depends on whether it can form a desirable and stable alternative political form under modern conditions. To this end, Chinese-style political meritocracy must respond positively to the three challenges it faces under modern conditions: the tension between “debicheng- wei” (one’s virtue must have a matching position, 德必称位) and moral universal- ism, the corrosion of social justice from the hierarchical social structure caused by “weibichenglu” (one’s position must have a matching salary, 位必称禄), and the threat of social indoctrination to individual autonomy. The “introversive political meritocracy” jointly shaped by “advocating morals for the public,” “arete based on altruism,” and “introversive self-cultivation” is a desirable political form that can successfully respond to these three challenges.展开更多
Education has enormous influence on individual prospects for a flourishing life, thus, the justice of an education system is a key indicator of the justice in a society. Normally, the debate over educational justice r...Education has enormous influence on individual prospects for a flourishing life, thus, the justice of an education system is a key indicator of the justice in a society. Normally, the debate over educational justice refers to two fundamental questions： the conception of justice and the aims and purposes of education. We may agree about the meaning of justice, but disagree about the aim of education, and vice versa, and thus come to very different perspective about what educational policies should entail. However, what does justice look like when it comes to the distribution of educational goods？ Should we ensure that all children have equal educational resources and opportunities or should we rather concentrate on equal educational attachment？ Recently, there is a debate on educational justice which mainly focuses on the status and role of comparatively considerations within a just distribution of educational benefits. According to the adequacy approach, the state is required to ensure all children have enough or adequate education. Once the adequate threshold of educational resources is obtained, there is no injustice in the fact that some children have better education than others. In contrast with adequacy approach, proponents of what can be called educational equality approach have instead argued that justice requires prospects for educational achievement to be dependent upon a child＇s ability and willingness to learn, and not on factors outside of her control. Therefore, the state is required to ensure that an individual＇s prospects for educational achievement should be a function only of that individual＇s effort and talent, not of his or her social class background or other factors outside of her control. It seems that the debate between proponents of adequacy and proponents of equality in educational opportunity reflects very different ways to think about just educational policy and practice. This paper is trying to address this debate. It proceeds as follows. In the next section, I will outline the Equality vs. Adequacy debate. Then, in section III, I would like to take issue with these approaches. I will argue that both approaches have negative effects on equality and justice in education. Finally, inspired by Harvard political philosopher Danielle Allen＇s work on education and equality, I will propose an alternative conception of educational equality. I believe it is a better way of understanding the meaning of educational justice for a democratic society.展开更多
Scholars often contend that civil examinations were what made imperial China a political meritocracy. They point to the examination system to show that the selection process served more as a common training program fo...Scholars often contend that civil examinations were what made imperial China a political meritocracy. They point to the examination system to show that the selection process served more as a common training program for literati than as a gate-keeper to keep non-elites out. Despite the symbiotic relations between the court and its literati, the emperor played the final card in the selection process. The asymmetrical relations between the throne and its elites nevertheless empowered elites to seek upward mobility as scholar-officials through the system. But true social mobility, peasants becoming officials, was never the goal of state policy in late imperial China; a modest level of social circulation was an unexpected consequence of the meritocratic civil service. Moreover, the meri^t-based bureaucracy never broke free of its dependence on an authoritarian imperial system. A modem political system might be more compatible with meritocracy, however. One of the unintended consequences of the civil examinations was creation of classically literate men （and women）, who used their linguistic talents for a variety of non-official purposes, from literati physicians to local pettifoggers, from fiction-writers to examination essay teachers, from Buddhist and Daoist monks to mothers and daughters. If there was much social mobility, i.e., the opportunity for members of the lower classes to rise in the social hierarchy, it was likely here. Rather than ＂social mobility,＂ this phenomenon might be better described as a healthy ＂circulation＂ of lower and upper elites when compared to aristocratic Europe and Japan.展开更多
As a typical American Product, the Human resource management （HRM） system provides a strong sense of equity, of a trustworthy exchange relationship, and alleges that assessment and promotion mainly depend on an indi...As a typical American Product, the Human resource management （HRM） system provides a strong sense of equity, of a trustworthy exchange relationship, and alleges that assessment and promotion mainly depend on an individual＇s merits. The critical perspectives of HRM reveal that the ＂soft＂ HRM offers a smokescreen for ＂hard＂ HRM to cover its unchanged reality, which emphasizes rationality, individualism, control and short-term orientation. This article analyzes the underlying philosophy of HRM, which offers the fundamental theoretical support for it, from four aspects： individualism, meritocracy, rationality and short-termism.展开更多
Individual education performance is usually influenced jointly by ability and background （family background）. The relative share of these two factors forms the basic grounds for judgments of educational equity. Usin...Individual education performance is usually influenced jointly by ability and background （family background）. The relative share of these two factors forms the basic grounds for judgments of educational equity. Using sheaf coefficients, we compare the influence of these two mechanisms on the distribution of access to regular first degree higher education opportunities for institutions at different levels. Our findings show that both ability and family background have a marked influence. The higher the level of the institution, thegreater the ability demanded of its students. The effect of family also increases significantly at this level, but ability always has a much stronger influence than family background. It can be seen that though fatuity background is influential in the distribution of higher education opportunities in China today, ability fundamentally remains the dominant criterion, embodying the classic features of a meritocratic society ＂open to talent.＂展开更多
基金the Research programme‘Ethics of Socially Disruptive Technologies’,the Gravitation programme of the Dutch Ministry of Education,Culture,and Science and the Netherlands Organization for Scientific Research,(Grant No.[024.004.031]).
文摘A well-functioned society depends on its ability to nurture,attract,and deploy talents in critical sectors.However,the implementation of some meritocratic principles to allocate positions often leads to unjust social hierarchies.Is there,then,a solution to meritocracy’s dysfunctional hierarchical effects?This paper attempts to answer this by drawing on the real-world cases of Singapore and the USA to investigate the relationship of toxic social hierarchies with meritocracy.It proposes three solutions to curb the unjustifiable social stratifications and the erosion of social cooperation often associated with social meritocracy.These reflections could help to shed light on the grounds for the ongoing debates on social hierarchies and provide valuable insights into how to weigh up existing socio-political structures.
文摘The criticisms of the falsity of universal recognition carried| out by leftists, led by Karl Max, and the queries of its desirability proposed by rightists, represented by Friedrich Nietzsche, raise challenges to Francis Fukuyama’s theory of “the end of history” from two opposite directions. At present, Chinese-style political meritocracy based on the party state is a political form that combines these left-wing and right-wing challenges and has the potential to move beyond “the end of history”. However, whether it can truly surpass “the end of history” depends on whether it can form a desirable and stable alternative political form under modern conditions. To this end, Chinese-style political meritocracy must respond positively to the three challenges it faces under modern conditions: the tension between “debicheng- wei” (one’s virtue must have a matching position, 德必称位) and moral universal- ism, the corrosion of social justice from the hierarchical social structure caused by “weibichenglu” (one’s position must have a matching salary, 位必称禄), and the threat of social indoctrination to individual autonomy. The “introversive political meritocracy” jointly shaped by “advocating morals for the public,” “arete based on altruism,” and “introversive self-cultivation” is a desirable political form that can successfully respond to these three challenges.
文摘Education has enormous influence on individual prospects for a flourishing life, thus, the justice of an education system is a key indicator of the justice in a society. Normally, the debate over educational justice refers to two fundamental questions： the conception of justice and the aims and purposes of education. We may agree about the meaning of justice, but disagree about the aim of education, and vice versa, and thus come to very different perspective about what educational policies should entail. However, what does justice look like when it comes to the distribution of educational goods？ Should we ensure that all children have equal educational resources and opportunities or should we rather concentrate on equal educational attachment？ Recently, there is a debate on educational justice which mainly focuses on the status and role of comparatively considerations within a just distribution of educational benefits. According to the adequacy approach, the state is required to ensure all children have enough or adequate education. Once the adequate threshold of educational resources is obtained, there is no injustice in the fact that some children have better education than others. In contrast with adequacy approach, proponents of what can be called educational equality approach have instead argued that justice requires prospects for educational achievement to be dependent upon a child＇s ability and willingness to learn, and not on factors outside of her control. Therefore, the state is required to ensure that an individual＇s prospects for educational achievement should be a function only of that individual＇s effort and talent, not of his or her social class background or other factors outside of her control. It seems that the debate between proponents of adequacy and proponents of equality in educational opportunity reflects very different ways to think about just educational policy and practice. This paper is trying to address this debate. It proceeds as follows. In the next section, I will outline the Equality vs. Adequacy debate. Then, in section III, I would like to take issue with these approaches. I will argue that both approaches have negative effects on equality and justice in education. Finally, inspired by Harvard political philosopher Danielle Allen＇s work on education and equality, I will propose an alternative conception of educational equality. I believe it is a better way of understanding the meaning of educational justice for a democratic society.
文摘Scholars often contend that civil examinations were what made imperial China a political meritocracy. They point to the examination system to show that the selection process served more as a common training program for literati than as a gate-keeper to keep non-elites out. Despite the symbiotic relations between the court and its literati, the emperor played the final card in the selection process. The asymmetrical relations between the throne and its elites nevertheless empowered elites to seek upward mobility as scholar-officials through the system. But true social mobility, peasants becoming officials, was never the goal of state policy in late imperial China; a modest level of social circulation was an unexpected consequence of the meritocratic civil service. Moreover, the meri^t-based bureaucracy never broke free of its dependence on an authoritarian imperial system. A modem political system might be more compatible with meritocracy, however. One of the unintended consequences of the civil examinations was creation of classically literate men （and women）, who used their linguistic talents for a variety of non-official purposes, from literati physicians to local pettifoggers, from fiction-writers to examination essay teachers, from Buddhist and Daoist monks to mothers and daughters. If there was much social mobility, i.e., the opportunity for members of the lower classes to rise in the social hierarchy, it was likely here. Rather than ＂social mobility,＂ this phenomenon might be better described as a healthy ＂circulation＂ of lower and upper elites when compared to aristocratic Europe and Japan.
文摘As a typical American Product, the Human resource management （HRM） system provides a strong sense of equity, of a trustworthy exchange relationship, and alleges that assessment and promotion mainly depend on an individual＇s merits. The critical perspectives of HRM reveal that the ＂soft＂ HRM offers a smokescreen for ＂hard＂ HRM to cover its unchanged reality, which emphasizes rationality, individualism, control and short-term orientation. This article analyzes the underlying philosophy of HRM, which offers the fundamental theoretical support for it, from four aspects： individualism, meritocracy, rationality and short-termism.
基金supported by the National Philosophy and Social Science Foundation project"A Study of Trends in the Evolution of the Structure of Social Strata in China"(10ASH002)the Ministry of Education Humanities and Social Sciences Key Research Bases(Center for Studies of Sociological Theory and Method of Renmin University)major topic"Sociological Theory and Empirical Research on Equity in Education"(07JJD840198)Tsinghua University Humanities and Social Sciences Revitalization Fund Research Program Later Stage project"Research on Educational Equity and Social Stratification"(2010WKHQ008)
文摘Individual education performance is usually influenced jointly by ability and background （family background）. The relative share of these two factors forms the basic grounds for judgments of educational equity. Using sheaf coefficients, we compare the influence of these two mechanisms on the distribution of access to regular first degree higher education opportunities for institutions at different levels. Our findings show that both ability and family background have a marked influence. The higher the level of the institution, thegreater the ability demanded of its students. The effect of family also increases significantly at this level, but ability always has a much stronger influence than family background. It can be seen that though fatuity background is influential in the distribution of higher education opportunities in China today, ability fundamentally remains the dominant criterion, embodying the classic features of a meritocratic society ＂open to talent.＂
