Putting the Meritocracy on Trial
Richard and I had an entertaining, disembodied video exchange -- hosted at PJTV by the entertaining Glenn Reynolds -- about law school, bar exams, and the "secret of my success" (for those Michael J. Fox/Helen Slater fans out there). Richard looked charming in a headset and mic -- now if I could only get him up to outer space!
But seriously, it might be worth watching for those out there who are interested in whether the ranking of a college or law school matters very much, whether good grades are the secret to success, and what the bar exam is really about. On this one, I think, Richard and I agree on the faults of the grade-less law-less Yale law school curriculum and the importance of learning real law in real classes -- and we speak nostalgically about the good old paper chase days when Professor Kingsfield ruled.
- Comment (5)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (2)
Comments :
Aug '10
Re: Putting the Meritocracy on Trial
The very word meritocracy disturbs me a little, since it seems to presume that we can know a person's true merit (something which I imagine could be known only to God).
We can measure productivity, developed abilities, intelligence, etc -- all of these things somewhat imperfectly, though it has to count as good enough. But merit?
Quite possibly a mentally-deficient guy born in a slum to an abusive family, who nonetheless leads a decent, hard-working, law-abiding life, has more merit than a Harvard-educated senator. And maybe both have more merit than me.
We can't have merit based on the gifts we were born with, which we didn't choose, can we? (As Dumbledore says, "It is our choices, Harry, that show what we truly are, far more than our abilities.") Yet the dictionary definition of meritocracy is, "(the rule of) an elite group of people whose progress is based on ability and talent ".
Does the concept of "meritocracy" encourage the gifted among us to feel arrogant enough to use our gifts unwisely, while it encourages the less-gifted to feel victimized and therefore discourages them from making good use of the gifts they have?
Jun '10
Re: Putting the Meritocracy on Trial
Only the truly stupid are arrogant.
John Steinbeck once wrote, and I paraphrase as I don't have the quote: A man of true genius could explain to an eight year old child his field of expertise in such a way that the child could understand what it was that he did.
There is no arrogance in the person who could make just such an explanation for two reasons: 1) the depth of understanding requied, and 2) the humility involved in constructing it.
May '10
Re: Putting the Meritocracy on Trial
Professor Yoo and Professor Epstein, your discussion was wonderful. The PJTV video was linked to via AboveTheLaw and I can honestly say it was the talk of the office yesterday. I even had to bite my tongue when a good liberal friend of mine (I have to be a closet conservative at work) lamented that he thinks he signed his office email address to a "tea party" website just to watch it.
May '10
Re: Putting the Meritocracy on Trial
I didn't hear an answer as to whether grades are the secret to succes, but I think Yale has it right.
Grades create an incentive to take easy, high GPA classes rather than rigorous classes. Most second and third year law students take a bunch of high grade classes, pass/fail a tough class, and put all their effort into a core class they're told looks good for clerkships. I know some students that always print out the grade curve PDF my school publishes when selecting their classes.
They also cause students to study to the professor. I once sat in on a study group where over half the time was devoted to what the professor's pet projects were and speculating on his opinions on issues. It worked - he managed to fit two of them onto his Civ Pro exam. So much for substance.
As for incentive - I left a good job to pay a lot of money; I'm going to max out my credits and take hard classes regardless of grades. In a professional school that should be reason enough to study, I shouldn't have to put the smiley face sticker on my chart.
Aug '10
Re: Putting the Meritocracy on Trial
Cas Balicki: Only the truly stupid are arrogant.
Really? Granted, arrogance may be viewed as a kind of moral stupidity, but I've met many highly intelligent people who were arrogant. Haven't you?
Humility may be a moral virtue, but it's not always the best mindset for getting ahead.