Merit - What it is not

[ZSorenson]

I've realized something about merit while thinking about things like privilege and altruism, and the concept of the American dream. Merit is misunderstood.

The ethical doctrine of hedonism says that what makes you feel happy should be your standard of value. Happiness for the sake of happiness. This is wrong for many reasons, the main reason being that this doctrine ignores the nature of man. Man is that he uses reason to pursue value. Man is that he lives in and must abide reality. The constraints of reality, understood and exploited by man's reason, provide him with the means to obtain value - with happiness being the result and proper purpose of this rational pursuit. But man must depend on reason to determine what he ought to do.

This applies to merit in that a common misunderstanding of merit depends on hedonistic ethics. This understanding basically says that suffering earns you merit, and joy spends it. The connections to altruism and the doctrine of self-sacrifice are more than apparent here. If the mere feeling of happiness or pleasure is the standard of value, and zero-sum competition with others the inevitable consequence of ethics, then of course merit would be defined this way!

I submit that the only connection between suffering and merit is that the pursuit of value for rational reasons is highlighted by pain or suffering - the pursuit occurs in spite of it, and is rational and therefore not hedonistic. But merit does not depend on suffering.

Merit depends on only two factors - reality, and volition. This means that people who are smarter, or naturally at an advantage (born wealthy), have to some extent a greater advantage in terms of legitimate merit visavis the rest of society. Chance often plays a large role in success. It has been demonstrated cconvincingly that if Bill Gates had been born a few years later someone else may have become the world's big tech billionaire, and Mr. Gates may not have earned even a small fortune in his lifetime. This does not diminish from what he contributed to his wealth - he certainly is a man of talent.

It is fortunate that even the most disadvantaged - with enough will - can earn value for themselves. That study can produce smarts. That risk and ingenuity can create wealth. That attitude can correspond to happiness. Merit depends also on volition, and volition is the primary driver behind merit. Even advantages must be taken advantage of by choice. Rational volition means that a person may from time to time choose pain or suffering for a short while in pursuit of a higher value. That suffering, in the name of reason and higher value can contribute to a person's virtue, no doubt. But that is all.

In other words, the concept of 'deserving' is a horribly misapplied one. You deserve rights, that is all. No amount of will or effort in life entitles you to one penny. But chances are you will earn many if you work hard.

This is what is meant by 'the pursuit of happiness' and why it is so critical to the American dream. American values are not hedonistic, we do not seek Roosevelt's four 'freedoms', we seek the right to be human, to hold and pursue values.

The American dream isn't about the possibility of 'maybe' becoming rich. It isn't about something we'll obtain or accomplish because we're American. It's about pursuing those things that give us life - that pursuit is what gives us meaning, by our nature.

In other words, it is about living a life - not about having one.

When people discuss merit, see if you can't often identify a hedonistic standard. Ask them how much a person needs to suffer, and in what manner precisely, to deserve that happiness that is the antithesis of their suffering. Then tell them that other than rights, people deserve only what reality and their choices provide for them. And here's the kicker: often, reality itself limits or increases the effect of volition on outcome. Some people aren't as smart, some people are psycologically damaged, some people have to suffer more for the same opportunities as others who don't. But the universe doesn't exist to provide.

Does anyone disagree?