Researcher in Causal Inference
我们似乎很难接受一个事实：世界充满偶然。
努力不一定换来回报，善良不一定带来好运，聪明也可能被时代的浪潮淹没。于是，人会本能地寻找一种更“确定”的解释方式——把结果变成证据，把成功变成理由，把命运变成“你是谁”的证明。
We seem to have difficulty accepting one basic fact: the world is full of contingency.
Effort does not always lead to reward, kindness does not always bring good fortune, and intelligence can easily be overwhelmed by the tides of history. As a result, people instinctively search for more “certain” explanations—turning outcomes into evidence, success into justification, and fate into proof of who one is.
Michael Sandel 在《The Tyranny of Merit》（《功绩的暴政》）第二章做的，并不是批评某种具体政策，也不是讨论名校录取，而是更底层的追问：我们为什么会如此自然地把成功与德性绑定？
而我读完这一章之后的感受是：问题不在于我们想解释世界，问题在于我们太快、也太轻易地完成了道德结论。
In Chapter 2 of The Tyranny of Merit, Michael Sandel is not criticizing a specific policy, nor is he debating elite university admissions. Instead, he asks a deeper question: why do we so naturally bind success to moral worth?
After reading this chapter, my impression is that the problem is not our desire to explain the world, but how quickly—and how effortlessly—we rush toward moral conclusions.
第二章的独特之处在于，Sandel 并没有从现代资本主义或当代教育制度讲起，而是追溯功绩主义背后那种更深层的“道德结构”从何而来。他把线索拉回到基督教神学内部关于“得救”的争论：人到底能不能凭自己的努力“配得”救赎？
What makes this chapter distinctive is that Sandel does not begin with modern capitalism or contemporary education systems. Instead, he traces the deeper moral structure underlying meritocracy. He returns to theological debates within Christianity over salvation: can human beings “deserve” salvation through their own efforts?
在一种倾向中，人被认为拥有自由意志，可以凭善行获得救赎。善行与回报之间存在一条可理解的因果链条：你做得好，就应当得到好结果。这种结构很容易被外推到日常世界，演化成一种直觉性的道德世界观：好事发生在好人身上，坏事发生在坏人身上。结果因此被赋予了道德含义。
In one tradition, humans possess free will and can earn salvation through good works. There is a comprehensible causal chain between virtue and reward: if you do well, you deserve good outcomes. This structure easily extends into everyday thinking, forming an intuitive moral worldview in which good things happen to good people and bad things happen to bad people. Outcomes thus become moral signs.
另一种传统则强调得救靠恩典，而非功绩。从理论上看，这反驳了“结果即德性”的观点。但 Sandel 指出一个更现实的问题：人很难在没有回报机制的世界中生活。当一切取决于恩典、偶然与不可知时，人会感到深刻的不安。
Another tradition insists that salvation depends on grace rather than merit. In theory, this refutes the idea that outcomes reflect moral worth. Yet Sandel points out a more practical problem: people struggle to live in a world without a reward mechanism. When everything depends on grace, chance, and uncertainty, anxiety inevitably follows.
随着新教伦理的发展，这种不安被转化为世俗形式。勤勉、纪律与成功逐渐被理解为“迹象”，象征着自己或许走在正确的道路上。上帝逐渐退场，但功绩结构得以保留。
With the rise of Protestant ethics, this anxiety was transformed into secular form. Diligence, discipline, and success came to be understood as “signs” that one might be on the right path. God gradually disappeared, but the merit structure remained.
读到这里，我逐渐意识到，把成功与德性绑定并不只是傲慢，而更像是一种心理防御机制。在高度不确定的世界中，人需要一个叙事中心。成功提供了这样一个中心：我努力了，我成功了，我因此成为某种人。
At this point, I began to see that binding success to moral worth is not merely arrogance—it is a psychological defense. In a deeply uncertain world, people need a narrative center. Success offers one: I worked hard, I succeeded, therefore I am someone.
问题不在于解释本身，而在于收敛过快。一旦看到结果，我们就迅速将其升级为对一个人整体价值的判断。
The issue lies not in explanation itself, but in premature closure. Once outcomes appear, we too quickly elevate them into judgments about a person’s overall worth.
以 CEO 为例，个人能力当然重要，但成功的放大倍数往往由时代窗口、行业周期与结构性机会决定。当结果被用来全面解释一个人时，局部合理性被夸大为整体道德裁决。
Take the example of a CEO. Individual ability certainly matters, but the amplification of success often depends on historical windows, industry cycles, and structural opportunities. When outcomes are used to explain the whole person, local validity is inflated into global moral judgment.
在健康与财富问题上，这种收敛尤为残酷。当成功被视为德性的体现，贫穷与疾病就会被默认为个人失败。然而，基因、心理创伤、成长环境与社会结构往往不可见。
This form of closure is especially cruel in matters of health and wealth. When success is taken as evidence of virtue, poverty and illness are easily interpreted as personal failure. Yet genetics, psychological trauma, upbringing, and social structure are largely invisible.
指责流浪者或精神疾病患者“不努力”，往往忽视了一个事实：没有成长在毒品泛滥、创伤密集的环境中，本身就是一种优势。
Blaming homeless individuals or those with mental illness for “not trying hard enough” ignores a basic fact: not growing up in environments saturated with drugs and trauma is itself an advantage.
承认运气并不等于否认责任，拒绝道德化结果也不等于否认道德本身。关键在于区分结果、行为与人格。
Acknowledging luck does not negate responsibility, and rejecting moralized outcomes does not mean rejecting morality itself. The key lies in distinguishing outcomes, actions, and character.
成功可以作为部分证据，但不应成为最终裁决。责任应从羞辱式审判转向回应与修正。道德判断的重心，也应从评价“人”转向评价“行为与制度”。
Success may serve as partial evidence, but never as a final verdict. Responsibility should shift from punitive judgment to responsive correction. Moral judgment should move away from labeling people and toward evaluating actions and institutions.
在和平的资本主义时代，世界看似可控，于是成功被误认为道德证明，失败被视为道德缺陷。这不是理性，而是对不确定性的逃避。
In a peaceful capitalist era, the world appears controllable. Success is mistaken for moral proof, and failure for moral defect. This is not rationality—it is an escape from uncertainty.
避免过快收敛，不是放弃判断，而是让判断更有耐心、更具条件意识，也更能承认偶然性。唯有如此，我们才能既不陷入功绩主义的傲慢，也不滑向道德虚无。
Avoiding premature closure does not mean abandoning judgment. It means making judgment more patient, more conditional, and more attentive to contingency. Only then can we avoid both meritocratic arrogance and moral nihilism.