Status criteria shift across eras while always rewarding rare talents

Evidence

This opens the question, however, of what actually qualifies as “achievement.” Every group and society believes in certain status criteria—assets, attributes, talents, and possessions that place individuals in a higher position. These ostensibly match the capabilities required for society to best function. Criteria thus differ by era, geography, and situational challenges. But no matter the circumstances, the highest achievements must demonstrate rare and valuable talents. The French sociologist Gabriel Tarde notes that in primitive times, the criteria were “physical vigour and skill, physical bravery” but changed centuries later to “skill in war and eloquence in council” and, still later, to “aesthetic imagination, industrial ingenuity, scientific genius.” — W. David Marx, Status and Culture, 84

Categorization

• XREF: Complements the reader’s broader interest in how value/criteria are socially constructed, echoing themes in Annihilation of Caste and colonial knowledge projects about criteria being contrived to serve elites. — connects to: Achievement-based status only works when few attain the feat — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 302; High status requires others believing one possesses rare, valuable talents — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 78; Status dynamics determine what counts as historically valuable — W. David Marx, Status and Culture: How Our Desire for…, 640 (+1 more)

Broader Connections

• Status dynamics determine what counts as historically valuable #expands (0.82) — W. David Marx, Status and Culture, 640
• High-status choices carry an alibi of being exemplary regardless of actual merit #complicates (0.74) — W. David Marx, Status and Culture, 171