1. Chess is a relative meritocracy, with clear standards for performance and achievement, but I am not sure that chess players as a whole are happier for this. Some ambiguity in one’s level of achievement can be socially useful and somewhat of a relief at the personal level. Life in a sheer meritocracy would be psychologically oppressive.

    — i think i mostly believe tyler cowen here.

    (Source: marginalrevolution.com)

Notes

  1. cacioppo posted this