We live in a world that claims to reward merit. You study hard, score high, and land a job. Simple, right? But scratch beneath the surface and the equation starts to unravel.
Jobs depend on marks. That’s the first checkpoint.
Marks depend on memory. Not everyone who studies scores well. Some remember better, some forget faster. It’s not always about effort — it’s about retention.
Memory, in turn, is deeply rooted in genetics. Science tells us that working memory, cognitive processing, attention span — all have strong hereditary components. Some children are born with minds that grasp information like a sponge; others struggle even after hours of effort.
So let’s follow this chain:
Jobs ← Marks ← Memory ← Genetics.
Which means… Jobs ultimately depend on genetics.
That raises uncomfortable questions:
Is our so-called “meritocracy” actually just a polished version of genetic privilege?
Are we punishing those with weaker memories, slower processing speeds, or neurodivergent minds — not for lack of effort, but for how they were born?
And if that’s true, is our system fair?
Or are we just dressing up chance as choice?
Maybe it’s time to reconsider how we define success — and more importantly, how we measure merit.
Because if we don’t, we may just be perpetuating a caste system of the brain — where biology decides destiny, and effort is just a footnote.