Publication Type

Journal Article

Version

publishedVersion

Publication Date

2-2024

Abstract

This paper compares criticisms of Singapore’s meritocracy, especially against its impact on income disparities and class divisions, with Michael Sandel’s critique of the meritocratic ethic in the United States. Despite significant differences in their history and politics, meritocracy has similar dysfunctions in both societies, allowing us to draw theoretical conclusions about meritocracy as an ideal of governance. It then contrasts Sandel’s communitarian critique of meritocracy with recent Confucian promotion of political meritocracy and meritocratic justice and argues that the Confucian principle of “promoting the virtuous and talented” is different from the contemporary conception of meritocracy. Textual evidence indicates that a Confucian understanding of “merit” is contrary to the technocratic expertise of contemporary meritocracies. Furthermore, pre-Qin Confucian texts do not support a conception of justice that emphasizes individual desert; they address distributive problems from the perspective of needs and sustaining social relations. The texts also support limiting the reign of merit when it results in inequalities that cause suffering, inhibit personal cultivation of some groups, or undermine social relations. The paper concludes with an assessment of Singapore’s on-going attempts to improve its meritocracy from a Confucian perspective.

Keywords

Confucianism, egalitarianism, equality, justice, meritocracy

Discipline

Asian Studies | Ethics and Political Philosophy | Political Science

Research Areas

Humanities

Publication

Journal of Confucian Philosophy and Culture

Volume

41

First Page

29

Last Page

63

ISSN

1598-267X

Identifier

10.22916/jcpc.2024..41.39

Copyright Owner and License

Authors

Additional URL

https://doi.org/0.22916/jcpc.2024..41.29

Download

Share

COinS