Skip to content
Carmelics
Topics
Thinkers
Changes
Contributors
Loading account…
Statements
321,452
Perspectives
108,905
Topics
42
Home
/
Original
/
inverse
See Original
Inverse View
It is not the case that FEO already contains sufficient action-guidance through its core requirement that social positions be open to all with equal native talent and motivation.
?
Set your confidence on the premises below to see your aggregate.
Reasons For
1 perspective
Reason for
?
1.
FEO ignores how pre-existing inequality in resources, networks, and cultural capital shapes 'motivation' and measured talent.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
Without guidance on redistributive mechanisms, FEO permits vast wealth concentration that erodes meaningful equal opportunity.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Identifying native talent requires objective metrics that may themselves encode unstated values and disadvantage non-dominant groups.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Reasons Against
1 perspective
Reason against
?
1.
Equal opportunity meritocracy provides clear, actionable guidance: remove barriers and allocate positions by talent/motivation.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
2.
This standard avoids paternalism by respecting individuals' autonomous choices about effort and career paths.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
3.
Empirically, societies reducing formal obstacles to entry have seen improved economic dynamism and social mobility.
?
How convincing is this?
Think about whether this reason is strong or weak
Next step
Based on where you are in your exploration
Strongest counterpoint
Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.