The Deservingness of Legacy Admissions

4min Snip

00:00

Play full episode

Summary

Transcript

Episode notes

i agree with e adrian that harvard should not give an advantage to the children of alumni. But suppose someone defended legas de legacy preference, with exactly the argument that adrian just tried to make about effort. I say that that weak argument in defence legacy admissions is a weak argument generally. Ando eaaito deeability, by definition, is not ourrnoates, it's the other thing. We don't necessarily morally deserve our innate ability, but we do deserve our achievements. It's the combination of icu and effort that produces achievement. So half of that is morally deserved, is your achievement, your effort. Half of it is not morally morally deserve.

Meritocracy has long been an article of faith in the modern Western world. Get an education, work hard and the rewards of success will be yours, regardless of class, privilege or wealth. But recently meritocracy has come under attack, with the charge led by Michael Sandel, the Harvard philosopher whose public debates on how we define the common good have won him a global following. But not everyone agrees. Taking issue with much of Sandel’s arguments is Adrian Wooldridge, the political editor at The Economist. In this week's debate they argue whether we need more or less meritocracy in society. The host is BBC broadcaster Ritula Shah. For Michael Sandel's new bool click here: https://www.primrosehillbooks.com/product/the-tyranny-of-merit-whats-become-of-the-common-good-michael-j-sandel-pb/ For Adrian Wooldridge's new book click here: https://www.primrosehillbooks.com/product/the-aristocracy-of-talent-how-meritocracy-made-the-modern-world-adrian-wooldridge/

Support this show http://supporter.acast.com/intelligencesquared.

See acast.com/privacy for privacy and opt-out information.

Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices