Debunking the holy trinity: competition, individualism, and meritocracy

Abstract

This chapter draws on conceptual resources from debates on collective intentionality and responsibility to call into question the close links between competition, ontological atomism, and individual responsibility implied by meritocracy. Against this ‘holy trinity’, we argue that competition is not reducible to an ontology of atomized agents and individual notions of responsibility, which supposedly justify meritocratic justifications of unequal outcomes in competition. By offering a non-individualist concept of competition, we argue that competitive actions are collective and relational. As a result, responsibility in competition is much more shared between competitors and within competitive teams than is commonly thought. This argument implies that the collective foundations of competition should be more appreciated and that the redistribution of recognition among winners and losers in competition should be reconsidered.