Do you think the Nobel prize process is fair and unbiased?

No, I don’t think the process is unbiased – it is elitist. And political.

Biased towards the US, if anything. The US has almost 3 times the number of laureates of the next on the list.

Probably not. Does it have to be? If I as a private citizen wish to give or bequeath a million-dollar annual prize to someone for something, to whom am I accountable? What guarantee do I owe you that I consider you a candidate on your merits and on an equal footing with everyone else? Can’t I just give it to my favorite petite curly-haired redheads if I want, without having to explain it to anyone, and even if I call it a prize for culinary achievement or comic-book art? It’s not as if it were an academic grade or a public election.

Nope. But everything is biased. If you’re dealing with humans regarding rewarding human accomplishment, there is always going to be biases based on peoples’ own internal judging mechanisms.

Human jury = biased.

Elitist? That is bad? Should it be awarded by lottery?

@jaytkay I don’t think the antonym to elitist is random.

When you give the prize for the best in something, what is that but a recognition of the elite—“the choice or best of anything considered collectively, as of a group or class of persons”? Is there something wrong with singling out the highest-performing individuals, by some measure or another, and giving them praise? If individuals, groups, and societies did not reward achievement, how would we know what our standards are, and what would our young aspire to?

@Jeruba Well, I sure as hell don’t want my young to aspire to win the Nobel Prize above all else When I used the term elitism, I used in a way that the process by which a person can even achieve the kind of project that would be pushed through is elitist – for many years it was only white men, then some men of color, then maybe women, then maybe (once it was extended to categories of Peace) women of color. There is a reason many countries can’t hope to ever have one of their own get a Nobel Prize and that isn’t for lack of intelligence, work ethic or talent.

Aren’t you speaking of a bias such as racism or sexism or nationalism rather than elitism, @Simone_De_Beauvoir?

If my writing club gives awards for the best of its members’ work, is that elitist because it doesn’t open the competition to all comers everywhere and doesn’t give writing awards to the person who brings the best brownies? Or is it free to define the field of candidates from which it will choose its recipients?

You have two issues mixed up, I think, when you say you don’t want your young to aspire to win the Nobel Prize. I didn’t assert that the Nobel was the best of all possible prizes and the greatest thing to aspire to. What I referred to was the recognition of excellence by any means, the Nobel being only one. Others include academic awards and scholarships, spelling prizes, science fair awards, sports trophies, Oscar and Emmy and Grammy and Tony awards, Pulitzers, writing contests, chili cook-offs, juried art exhibits, dog shows, golf tournaments, the Olympics, and everything else that includes or implies seeking and identifying the best performers in a defined field, large or small, open or closed, often with some sort of material benefit in addition to the laurels.

This is how we set and uphold standards of excellence.

You can’t speak of excellence apart from standards, and you can’t motivate achievement if you don’t know what achievement means. Achievement necessarily entails comparison, one to another or one to oneself or one to an established measure.

The Nobel is one recognition-granting institution, and in my opinion it is free to grant whatever recognition it chooses and for whatever reason. There’s nothing about it that represents an obligation to egalitarianism.

No. I suppose that makes them unfair and biased? I don’t know, I’m tired.

@Jeruba No, it doesn’t have an obligation to egalitarianism – I never said it has to – I just don’t fawn over it like others do, that’s all – standards are human made and are very objective, obviously. Perhaps, my definition of elitist is different from yours but it is my opinion that the Nobel Prize process is so – you and I just differ as to whether having something be elitist is an issue.