Take our Ambition Test

Find a therapist near me

All successful endeavors require self-motivation and effort.

Competence, merit, and standards of excellence are universal and inform every successful human endeavor.

There is no area of human life in which competence and merit are irrelevant

Competence, Merit, and Excellence Have Always Been Social Universal Strengths

Neither competence, merit, nor standards of excellence is a fashion, a preference, or a cultural construct. They are universal principles that inform what exists, what works, what endures, and what advances skills, knowledge, insights, and understanding.

Every successful human endeavor (from the earliest stone tools to the most recent complex technologies) has been governed by the same universal laws. Universal laws are not invented; they are discovered. Once discovered, as noted, these universal truths lead to ongoing advancements in skills, knowledge, insights, and understanding that need to be applied to achieve standards of excellence (Friedman et al., 2024; Oliveira et al., 2024; Siemoneit, 2023).

Thoughts, Choices, Actions, Merit, and Competence

The pyramids did not rise because someone wished them into existence. The Egyptians, the Aztecs, and the Incas all independently developed and built monumental structures in accordance with universal truths.

This is as true in the intellectual realm as it is in the physical, external world. Medicine did not advance because someone felt it should. It advanced because individuals tested, observed, corrected, refined, and applied knowledge with rigor.

Science, engineering, mathematics, literature, music, all of the trades—in fact, every discipline that has ever elevated humanity—have done so because individuals committed themselves to the pursuit of excellence, which required meeting all standards of competence and merit.

Neil Armstrong, Buzz Aldrin, Michael Collins, and NASA

Even the greatest collective achievements of the modern era became possible only because NASA ensured that competence and merit were the organizing principles. The moon landing was achieved only because thousands of people (with the skills, knowledge, competence, and merit-based achievements) across multiple disciplines were selected and then adhered to and applied universal truths with absolute precision.

It was only the universal application of competence, merit, and the unrelenting pursuit of excellence that made it possible for Neil Armstrong to become the first man to walk on the moon, for Buzz Aldrin to follow, and for the successful rendezvous with Michael Collins in lunar orbit before returning safely to Earth.

Competence, Merit, and Excellence Exist in Every Discipline

The same is true across every intellectual and physical discipline one cares to name. The trades, medicine, engineering, sports, the arts, science, organizational human relationships, parenting, education, learning, and more all require the application of competence and the achievement of meritorious outcomes to meet standards of excellence.

Take our Ambition Test

Find a therapist near me

As history has shown, “since forever,” individuals and society thrive where the universal intellectual and physical principles of competence, merit, and the pursuit of excellence are applied. There is no area of human life in which competence and merit are irrelevant. This is because no sphere of human life suspends universal laws to accommodate opinions or preferences (Ericsson & Lehmann, 1996; Ericsson, 2008; Feltovich et al., 2006).

Universal Laws Do Not Change as a Result of Opinions

Competence, merit, and standards of excellence are universal laws. Universal laws do not change because individuals, groups, collectives, or even societies choose not to adhere to them. Self-evidently, anyone can choose to agree, disagree, or deny anything and everything. However, disagreements and denial do not change universal truths.

It is consciousness that provides the ongoing intellectual capacity to keep challenging and disagreeing forever. However, as noted, disagreements and denial, no matter how long they continue, cannot and, self-evidently, will never change universal truths (Bhaskar, 1975; Devitt, 1991, 2020; Popper, 2014).

There are numerous examples of this. “The world is flat.” “The Earth is the center of the universe.” The Greek philosopher Hippocrates (ca. 460–370 BCE) proposed that human life was governed by internal fluids—blood, phlegm, yellow bile, and black bile—and that health depended on their balance.

Then there was the established “science” of phrenology. First advanced by Franz Joseph Gall (1759–1828), this socially accepted “science” remained an authoritative opinion in Britain, France, and the United States until the mid-19th century.

The important point to note here is that even though these ideas—“the Earth is flat,” “the Earth is the centre of the universe,” the opinion of internal fluids (humors), and the “science” of phrenology—were considered truths at the time, it was the process of ongoing research, involving unrelenting questioning, that eventually led to the realization that these so-called “personal truths,” as objective, evidence-based research eventually proved, were not universal truths; they were opinions.

Competence, Merit, and Excellence Matter

This is why competence, merit, and standards of excellence matter, especially in education. As history shows, education, teaching, and learning have always aimed at the highest level of intellectual pursuit to advance skills and knowledge as far as possible.

Many of history’s influential thinkers and innovators exemplify this pursuit, each achieving mastery through competence, merit, and disciplined inquiry: among them Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, William Shakespeare, Leonardo da Vinci, Nicolaus Copernicus, René Descartes, Isaac Newton, Edward Jenner, Louis Pasteur, Thomas Edison, Marie Curie, Rachel Carson, Jane Goodall, Albert Einstein, Christiaan Barnard, and many others who sought universal truths.

Therefore, if we want a future that is socially stable, ethical, moral, intellectually universal, positively supportive, and educationally functional, it is because universal truths and adherence to the standards of competence, merit, and excellence are the immutable conditions that enable ongoing advancements in skills, knowledge, insight, and understanding to take place. This will not occur in education—or in any discipline—if denial or personal truths, which are simply opinions, are permitted to replace universal truths (Bagnoli, 2016; Biesta, 2015; Hattie, 2003; Young, 2007).

Excellence, Effort, and Equality

As such, the universality of competence, merit, standards of excellence, and the effort required to pursue excellence are the only processes that provide equality for every individual. Equality is realized through the universality of competence, merit, and standards of excellence. This is only achieved through the self‑motivated application of unremitting personal effort, perseverance, and resilience.

All disciplines share the same requirements, irrespective of the task, whether it is climbing Everest, designing a submarine, becoming a member of an Olympic team or a national orchestra, running a marathon, performing brain surgery, playing tennis in the Wimbledon finals, building a bridge, reading and performing a Beethoven or Mozart concerto, flying a jet aircraft, constructing a rocket capable of exploring space, or developing the satellite systems that now enable global communication.

The requirements for competence, merit, and standards of excellence do not vary from person to person. Everyone faces the same universal laws, principles, and standards equally. As such, equality is realized through adherence to and application of universal truths, not outcomes.

One excellent evidence-based example of this is Coach John Wooden—widely recognized and voted by ESPN as the greatest coach of all time—whose athletes demonstrated visible, measurable improvements grounded in universal principles of effort, discipline, and mastery, not opinion or preference (Dweck et al., 2014; Ericsson et al., 1993; Ericsson, 2008; Duckworth et al., 2007; Gallimore & Tharp, 2004).

Bagnoli, C. (2016). Kantian constructivism and the moral problem. Philosophia, 44(4), 1229–1246.

Bhaskar, R. (1975). Forms of realism. Philosophica, 15. https://www.philosophica.ugent.be/article/id/82713/download/pdf/

Biesta, G. J. (2015). Good education in an age of measurement: Ethics, politics, democracy. Routledge.

Devitt, M. (1991). Aberrations of the realism debate. Philosophical Studies, 61(1/2), 43–63. https://s3.amazonaws.com/files.commons.gc.cuny.edu/wp-content/blogs.dir…

Devitt, M. (2020). An ignored argument for scientific realism. Filozofia Nauki, 28(2), 5–24.

Duckworth, A. L., Peterson, C., Matthews, M. D., & Kelly, D. R. (2007). Grit: Perseverance and passion for long-term goals. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92(6), 1087–1101. https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Angela-Duckworth/publication/62900…

Dweck, C. S., Walton, G. M., & Cohen, G. L. (2014). Academic tenacity: Mindsets and skills that promote long-term learning. Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED576649.pdf

Ericsson, K. A. (2008). Deliberate practice and acquisition of expert performance: A general overview. Academic Emergency Medicine, 15(11), 988–994.

Ericsson, K. A., & Lehmann, A. C. (1996). Expert and exceptional performance: Evidence of maximal adaptation to task constraints. Annual Review of Psychology, 47(1), 273–305.

Ericsson, K. A., Krampe, R. T., & Tesch‑Römer, C. (1993). The role of deliberate practice in the acquisition of expert performance. Psychological Review, 100(3), 363–406.

Feltovich, P. J., Prietula, M. J., & Ericsson, K. A. (2006). Studies of expertise from psychological perspectives. In The Cambridge handbook of expertise and expert performance (pp. 41–67). https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Paul-J-Feltovich/publication/20077…

Friedman, S., Ellersgaard, C., Reeves, A., & Larsen, A. G. (2024). The meaning of merit: Talent versus hard work legitimacy. Social Forces, 102(3), 861–879. https://doi.org/10.1093/sf/soad131

Gallimore, R., & Tharp, R. (2004). What a coach can teach a teacher, 1975–2004: Reflections and reanalysis of John Wooden’s teaching practices. The Sport Psychologist, 18(2), 119–137.

Hattie, J. (2003). Teachers make a difference: What is the research evidence? Paper presented at the Building Teacher Quality: What Does the Research Tell Us? ACER Research Conference, Melbourne, Australia.

Oliveira, E., Abner, G., Lee, S., Suzuki, K., Hur, H., & Perry, J. L. (2024). What does the evidence tell us about merit principles and government performance? Public Administration, 102(2), 668–690. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdfdirect/10.1111/padm.12945

Popper, K. (2014). Conjectures and refutations: The growth of scientific knowledge. Routledge. https://padron.entretemas.com.ve/documentos/Popper-Conjectures-Rwefutat…

Siemoneit, A. (2023). Merit first, need and equality second: Hierarchies of justice. International Review of Economics, 70(4), 537–567. https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s12232-023-00430-x.pdf

Young, M. (2007). Bringing knowledge back in: From social constructivism to social realism in the sociology of education.Routledge.

There was a problem adding your email address. Please try again.

By submitting your information you agree to the Psychology Today Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy

© Psychology Today