¶ … Empty Idea of Equality," Peter Western asserts that equality is not only unnecessary to a discussion of human rights and liberties, but that it can actually be damaging to these concepts by undermining the concept of individuality and the differences between people, whether those differences are innate or societal. Western notes that even if we conclude that all human beings are the same at a certain level, that cultural differences will require that different groups be treated differently, giving "equality" a much less important role in our society as compared to freedom, liberty, and the possession of "rights."
Western begins his dismantling of equality as an ideal by noting the oft-perceived "juxtaposition of 'rights' and 'equality'" and stating that perhaps this the two are not such mutually exclusive concepts. (34) In this statement alone, he challenges a vast amount of legal and philosophical assumption, like those that he cites from Aristotle...
(35) In refuting this as a valid basis for moralistic study, Western explains why this statement is really a tautology: of course, all humans are alike on an innate level -- we have the same physiology, were born in the same manner, and share certain genetic characteristics. And when someone tries to differentiate between who is "alike," Western says, we are simply told that people who are alike are those "who should be treated alike." (36) In demonstrating this circular reasoning, he creates a strong case for having another moral basis -- if one can be found -- for equality, since simply stating "likes should be treated alike" is not a logically valid assertion.
How, then, can we differentiate between people without being discriminatory or unfair? Western says that utilitarianism is too "equal," that it distributes things without taking individuality into consideration at all and as such is biased…
