Advocacy for #3 precludes advocacy for #4.I guess this is a too complicated and foreign concept for most fans, but it's possible to think simultaneously that:
- nepotism is wrong
- nepotism seems to exist within the org
- Nash seems to be a beneficiary of it and has achieved his current role at least partially for wrong reasons
- Nash might be good at what he does and will be given a chance to show it
The definition of nepotism inherently implies lack of fitness for the job. That's why it is considered bad. Trying to say both is effectively trying to say "he's not fit for the job, but he might be fit for the job". It's self-contradictory.Please explain
According to which definition?The definition of nepotism inherently implies lack of fitness for the job.