Jay-Ar Merquita Grade 12 St.

Rita of Cascia
February 25, 2019
“EGALITARIANISM or EQUALITY”
Now People should get the same, or be treated the same, or be treated as
equals, in some respect. People should be treated as equals, should treat one another
as equals, should relate as equals, or enjoy an equality of social status. In this
philosophy of equality there are different types or ways the people might be treated the
same as the other people.

But in this modern world many people has been discriminated, injustices and
mistreated. Equality is based on the principle that everyone not only deserves the same
rights, but that everyone actively has access to them. The topics about the equality are
commonly about the gender, status, religion, and freedom to love. Things in a perfect
world would never have been questioned in the first place. The truly disheartening part
is that, for the most part, it comes down to ignorance. It comes down to uneducated
choices made by people who refuse to understand – who are unwilling to see things
differently. Ignorance has the power to destroy everything and anything in its path, and
the terrifying part is that it can be found within anyone.

Equality is not about the benefits of one; it’s about the benefit of everyone. This
theory is connected to the theory of justice by Aristotelian. Despite Aristotle's famous
conceptual analysis of equality, is generally hostile towards the idea of social and
economic equality. Plato's account of the best and most just form of the state in
the Republic is a society of very clear social, political, and economic hierarchy. It is with
Thomas Hobbes that the idea of equality is put to work. This article explores equality as
an issue of distributive justice; equality in the history of political philosophy; equality in
contemporary political philosophy; the views of Ronald Dworkin, Karl Marx, and David
Hume; equality of welfare; equality, priority, and sufficiency; Amartya Sen's capability
theory; and luck egalitarianism.

Quality has long been a source of political and philosophical controversy. A

central question about equality is how one might link empirical or moral claims about the
extent to which persons are equal to judgments about the moral acceptability or
unacceptability of social inequalities, and in particular how far considerations of equality
license social action to bring about greater social equality. A traditional liberal argument
holds that approximate equality of human strength makes it prudent for humans to place
themselves under a common political authority, thus producing a justification for equality
before the law. But any generalization of this argument ignores the cases where
strength is unequal and the resulting balance of power unjust. Equality of worth is a
principle recognized in many philosophical traditions, but its broad acceptance leaves
open many problems of interpretation. In particular, it is not clear how far the principle
calls for greater equality of social conditions. Persons may derive a sense of worth from
enjoying the fruits of their labor, and this will legitimately block some redistribution;
certain inequalities may work to everyone’s advantage; and the impartial concern of the
equality principle may be at odds with the sense of us as persons with specific
attachments. In this context, some have wanted to soften the interpretation of equality to
mean equality of opportunity or merely that inequalities should not be cumulative,
although how far these moves are justified is a matter for dispute. By contrast,
challenges to the equality principle from considerations of incentives, desert or
difference can more easily be met.