+
Skip to content

Update util.md #171

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Oct 12, 2025
Merged

Update util.md #171

Show file tree
Hide file tree
Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
5 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
3bc2639
Update util.md
tim-one Oct 12, 2025
0e74c59
Update .wordlist.txt
tim-one Oct 12, 2025
95774ad
Update util.md
tim-one Oct 12, 2025
bfd1dec
Update .wordlist.txt
tim-one Oct 12, 2025
2f868ce
Update util.md
tim-one Oct 12, 2025
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
3 changes: 3 additions & 0 deletions .wordlist.txt
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -116,3 +116,6 @@ cishet
Nozick
Nozick's
RoR's
Ehmke
Ehmke's
Coraline
21 changes: 11 additions & 10 deletions psf/util.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -18,26 +18,27 @@ Now I'm an amateur in philosophy. Little relevant training, and no credentials,

- A "meritocracy" is a system under which power and status are granted on the basis of demonstrated accomplishment and ability. In theory, things like social status, personal connections, wealth, and demographic markers are irrelevant. Python's earliest days are a clear example of that. You rose in the pecking order if and only if you got tangible things done to visibly advance the project.

- "Utilitarianism" is a philosophy holding that the best decisions are those that maximize the utility across a community. "Utility" is a somewhat subtle concept, which can be usually be read as "happiness" without much loss of important nuance. There's more than one flavor of this general theory.
- "Utilitarianism" is a philosophy holding that the best decisions are those that maximize the utility across a community. "Utility" is a somewhat subtle concept, which can often be read as "happiness" without much loss of important nuance (although some philosophers would disagree). There's more than one flavor of this general theory.

There are multiple philosophical schools in favor of meritocracies. And also opposed. Utilitarianism is one such line, employed in both directions by different thinkers.

The academic philosopher Robert Nozick criticized utilitarianism by way of a thought experiment, involving a hypothetical "utility monster". Someone who derived _far_ more utility from, say, apples, than anyone else. A mindless application of utilitarianism therefore counsels that _all_ apples should be given to that monster. Giving them to anyone else could only reduce the community's aggregate utility.
The academic philosopher Robert Nozick criticized utilitarianism by way of a thought experiment, involving a hypothetical "utility monster". Someone who derives _far_ more utility from, say, apples, than anyone else. A mindless application of utilitarianism therefore counsels that _all_ apples should be given to that monster. Giving them to anyone else could only reduce the community's aggregate utility.

Now that's so silly you wouldn't think it would get much attention, but by the norms of academic philosophy is did land a major blow. It points to potential internal incoherence. Utilitarianism was "supposed to be" about benefiting everyone, not just about pleasing an elite of greedy pigs.
Now that's so silly you wouldn't think it would get much attention, but by the norms of academic philosophy is did land a major blow (although far from fatal). It points to potential internal incoherence. Utilitarianism was "supposed to be" about benefiting everyone, not just about pleasing an elite of greedy pigs.

Note that wasn't talking about meritocracies, just utilitarianism[^merit].
Note that Nozick wasn't talking about meritocracies, just utilitarianism[^merit].

[^merit]: I don't recall Nozick ever addressing meritocracy directly. But he was widely viewed as "radical libertarian", so it's easy to guess that he would have approved if, and only if, all the governed freely agreed to abide by such a system - and pretty much regardless of _which_ "system" you asked him about. His philosophical bent couldn't have much less in common with C's.
[^merit]: I don't recall Nozick ever addressing meritocracy directly. But he was widely viewed as "radical libertarian", so it's easy to guess that he would have approved if, and only if, all the governed freely agreed to abide by such a system - and pretty much regardless of _which_ "system" you asked him about. His work was much more about individual rights than about governance models, His philosophical bent couldn't have much less in common with Ehmke's.

Fast forward to another amateur philosopher, who I'll just call C. Best I can tell, nothing about C's educational background is public knowledge, so while I may be wrong, they "read like an amateur philosopher" to me. People with credentials in the "soft sciences" often throw them in your face <0.5 wink>.
Fast forward to another philosopher. Coraline Ada Ehmke, who has made opposition to meritocracy something of a personal brand. Best
I can tell, nothing about her educational background is public knowledge, so while I may be wrong, she "reads like an amateur philosopher" to me. People with credentials in the "soft sciences" often throw them in your face <0.5 wink>.

One of C's passions is abolishing meritocracies, believing they grant power that "should be" given to others. Apparently to garner some "philosophy cred", they invoked Nozick's "utility monster" to describe those at the top of many OS projects' developer hierarchies (still too typically cishet white males).
One of her passions is abolishing meritocracies, believing they grant power that "should be" given to others. Apparently to garner some "philosophy cred", she invoked Nozick's "utility monster" to describe those at the top of many OS projects' developer hierarchies (still too typically cishet white males).

But, unlike Nozick's monsters, those aren't primarily benefiting only themselves. They're instead viewed as benefiting the project itself, and so also the project's entire community. Ignoring that makes the attempted analogy very strained to my eyes. Nozick's _fundamental_ aim was to concoct monsters who benefit _only_ themselves.

In any case, that gained traction among some "regular people". and so I accept it as some "consensus kinda truthiness-like" thing now.
In any case, that gained traction among some "regular people". and so I accept it as some "consensus kinda truthiness-like" thing now. In some circles, Nozick's "utility monster" is read with Ehmke's take rather than with the original intent.

An irony is that their argument is inherently utilitarian: they're arguing that maximizing community utility is best served by abolishing meritocracy. But Nozick was arguing against utilitarianism _itself_. His monster constructed to knock that philosophy down must be very confused to find itself a key player on that philosophy's team :wink:.
An irony is that her argument is inherently utilitarian: they're arguing that maximizing community utility is best served by abolishing meritocracy. But Nozick was arguing against utilitarianism _itself_. His monster constructed to try to knock that philosophy down must be very confused to find itself a key player on that philosophy's team :wink:.

A sounder line would be to accept utilitarianism, and pursue instead that meritocracies demonstrably give rise to insulated elite cliques in some real-life cases. They can fail to meet utilitarianism's goals.
A sounder line would be to accept utilitarianism, and pursue instead that meritocracies sometimes demonstrably give rise to insulated elite cliques. They can fail to meet utilitarianism's goals.
点击 这是indexloc提供的php浏览器服务，不要输入任何密码和下载