People accept large inequalities they judge as earned or deserved.

Evidence

How is it possible that humans, despite their taste for fairness, condone the enduring privileges of a minority? It may help, in addressing this question, to remember that in modern, which are in principle egalitarian societies, inequalities in resources are actually far greater than they have ever been in most traditional hierarchical societies. One could say say of modern societies exactly what Sachdeva et al. say of traditional societies: “those at the bottom give considerably more to those on the top without reaping the reward of their contribution.” Still, leaving aside very high incomes (like those of finance managers or rock stars) that are quite often seen as unfair, most people in modern societies do not find unfair a ratio of, say, 1 to 10 in income (between a cashier and a lawyer or a surgeon, for instance). They commonly consider that professionals deserve to earn more because they bring more to society than unskilled workers do (Piketty 1999). … This shows that accepting high inequalities is, for many people, quite compatible with the view that the distribution of resources should be fair. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 712

Categorization

• XREF: Relates directly to the reading purpose: the merit-based legitimacy of inequality complements Baumard’s partner-choice/fairness model that the reader is tracking in the Rodrigues analysis. — connects to: Human fairness means overriding merit to aid the needy. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 591; Talented individuals merit larger shares because their outside options are stronger. — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 50; People disagree persistently about what makes inequality fair — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality: The…, 325 (+6 more)
• DEEPTHINKING: The paradox that modern egalitarian societies host far greater inequality than traditional hierarchies, reconciled through perceived deservedness, is a genuinely density-rich observation.

Related

• People disagree persistently about what makes inequality fair (similarity 0.85)
• Human fairness means overriding merit to aid the needy. (similarity 0.84)
• Humans pervasively prefer meritocratic benefit distributions. (similarity 0.84)
• Objections to huge salaries stem from perceived contribution, not raw egalitarianism. (similarity 0.84)
• Fairness judgments track each participant’s earned contribution, not just payoff equality. (similarity 0.80)
• Earned entitlements reshape perceived fairness in resource division. (similarity 0.79)
• Sensitivity to merit and equity emerges early and universally in children (similarity 0.78)

Broader Connections

• Earned entitlements reshape perceived fairness in resource division. #corroborates (0.90) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 117
• Fairness judgments track each participant’s earned contribution, not just payoff equality. #expands (0.90) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 145
• Humans pervasively prefer meritocratic benefit distributions. #corroborates (0.88) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 93
• Earned entitlements and game framing change how much people share. #expands (0.85) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 127
• People disagree persistently about what makes inequality fair #expands (0.82) — Nicolas Baumard, A mutualistic approach to morality, 325