[Arguable] Should Universities Get Rid of Selective Admissions and Replace Them with a Lottery System?

Selective admissions have long defined access to elite universities but a number of scholars are challenging this model, arguing that it reinforces privilege and entrenches inequality. In this episode, Dhruva and Utkarsh examine the case for replacing selective admissions with a lottery among qualified applicants. The discussion draws on John Rawls’s concept of the veil of ignorance, and Michael Sandel’s critique of meritocracy, which highlights how systems of selection often obscure privilege and foster a corrosive hubris among so-called “winners,” who come to believe their success is entirely self-made.Advocates of the lottery system argue that it could democratize access, reduce stress and competition, and promote a more just distribution of opportunity. Critics counter that such a shift risks undermining academic standards, devaluing individual achievement, and replacing one set of biases with another.This conversation goes beyond admissions policy and raises deeper questions about fairness, equity, and justice.