Myth of meritocracy

 Meritocracy, some say is becoming a myth. The path that is woven for one to be assessed on merits is an exclusive path reserved for the privileged few. How true is this? I for one remain in ignorance as to if it is a myth. I have not (and pray that I never) will reach a state of denial. What is there to deny you ask? That those whom I have witnessed achieving success based on meritocracy may blind me to the realities of today's situation.

Such denial ought to be the death of me. As to the path that is reserved or can only be partaken by the privileged, that I cannot claim ignorance. I see if for myself how that path at certain stages has toll gates that only some can afford to pay.

Existence of such toll gates were much lesser during my time. I was surprised to hear that on top of sending kids to premium football academies, parents also send them to specialised classes. Such classes focuses on technical skills, which is a very important part of your game skills. Would the kid attending it have an advantage over another who doesn't? Mostly obviously, unless the other kid is super natural talent. 

So you see, the path does have much toll gates, but whether in paying to get through them and ultimately be selected through 'merit' remains a contested area. But this is sports I speak of. A field where natural talent may outshine your average athlete. And the public will question why the talented individual is not selected.

But in one's academics journey, things are not so simple. Limited spots in schools. Criteria for acceptance may not solely be on academic results. CCAs may play a part. Additional activities also helps. Again, the path is filled with toll gates. Some expensive, others less so.

Nevertheless, we must not simply give in to this saying that meritocracy is a myth. Even if there is small bit of truth in it, we must do what we can to keep the path as equal as possible.

-SMN-

Social media addiction

 Well, who knew I was addicted to social media. For someone who proudly claims that he is not actively engaged in any social media platforms - in truth, it turned out that 'not being actively engaged' does not equate to 'not being addicted'.

How did I find out I was an addict? First, I turned off my YouTube history suggestion. So if reflexively I entered into YouTube, I will not find any recommend videos. Previously, I would be distracted by the recommended videos and will (out of interest) click and watch the video.

Now that the tap to distraction (in fact, addiction) was turned off, I then sub consciously turned on the other tap. The Instagram tap. I have an insta account which I use sparingly. Mostly to see videos shared by wife and friends. But to my surprise (and horror), I began using insta more. And more and more. Could spend a few hours a day on it. Damn. And so I new I was a addict.

I then decided to uninstall (not delete) insta. Now, let's see what other tap(s) will I turn on. Hopefully none.

The story here is that we think we are not addicted to something until that something gets taken (or deleted) away, and you find you struggle (terribly) without it.

Perhaps, it can be put that we are all addicts in someway. To TV, food, media etc. Whether our train is wired to crave for certain things, and in finding those things, it gradually turns into addiction, is something worth probing or is already probed into by scientists.

If us adults who are coming to realise the risk of social media addiction and become unknowingly addicted to it, what then can we expect of the young.

More than the addiction, what I found even more concerning was I could no longer focus while reading. The reflexive (or urge) to toggle to YouTube or insta confounded me. Even now I continue to toggle. But with the uninstallation of insta, let's see i become sober.