The Instigator
BaruchSpinoza
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
jam20636
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Meritocracy as a moral principle is insufficient to ground justice

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/13/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 236 times Debate No: 92679
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (0)

 

BaruchSpinoza

Pro

Definitions:
Meritocracy as a moral principle: A principle that allocates praise and rewards based on ability and performance alone.

insufficient to ground justice: the principle above cannot alone explain how we decide an outcome or situation is just

Round 1 is for acceptance only (no arguments)
Round 2 is statement of arguments
Round 3 is for rebuttals (not for introducing totally new material) and for closing statements

Burden of Proof is shared
jam20636

Con

Challenge accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
BaruchSpinoza

Pro

BaruchSpinoza forfeited this round.
jam20636

Con

jam20636 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
BaruchSpinoza

Pro

BaruchSpinoza forfeited this round.
jam20636

Con

jam20636 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by BaruchSpinoza 1 year ago
BaruchSpinoza
Hi,

Wouldn't defining justice at the outset be sort of begging the question? Merit-based allocations of resources is often invoked as a principle by which justice can be defined. I am arguing that won't work.

In other words, we are working on trying to provide content to the concept of justice. My position is that meritocracy can't do the job of fulfilling our intuitions about what justice means.
Posted by Crudelis 1 year ago
Crudelis
I feel sorry for whoever accepts this challenge. Not only is it set up so that the opposition has barely a leg to stand on, justice and just haven't been well enough defined, so not only will the opposition have barely a leg to stand on s/he'll also be standing in quicksand.
No votes have been placed for this debate.