Redefining a normative framework for Meritocracy in the era of Generative AI: An Inter-disciplinary perspective

Meritocracy is the hallmark of our modern day societies. It is widely believed, and also empirically established, that meritocratic systems outshine non-meritocratic ones. Meritocratic individuals, on average, tend to perform better. Meritocracy takes subjective elements, such as chance, and luck out of the equation, and seeks to reward those with intelligence, and fortitude. From the Silicon Valley in the US, Singapore’s political and economic growth, to the rise, and the sustenance of the big pharma in Switzerland, meritocracy has consistently nourished these economies to catapult them to the world’s leading economies, and innovation systems. The meteoric rise of Singapore from a resource-deprived and newly independent country (in 1959) to the world’s fifth richest Nation State (in 2022) may be attributed in part to its unique, meritocratic political system. What then is this meritocracy? Is there one standard understanding of meritocracy, or does it vary by the State, the context, or is it simply a narrative of the times that we live in? Is there a correlation between meritocracy and inequality? This research article discusses the nature of meritocracy, and how the fallacies of meritocratic societies be remedied to ensure a balance between meritocracy, egalitarianism, and justice. The article discusses the foregoing issues against the backdrop of the fast-rising Generative Artificial Intelligence, that just like meritocracy, contributes to growth, while simultaneously exacerbating the societal inequalities (and its accompanying discontent). From a normative perspective, this research suggests a Scandinavian approach to balancing wealth creation with a more positive and detailed welfare-state institution that will not only foster increased social trust; it will also ensure that those with ‘merit’ are able to exercise it with ‘empathy’ in the age of Generative AI.