Sign Up Now
Get instant access to over 1 million+ study documents
OR
Already registered? click here to login
By creating your account, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and student honor code.
¶ … 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…
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 and perhaps inherently violates the rights of some (37). He notes that the central argument in creating equality is not "why?" But "what?" What needs to be equal in all people? Wealth? Income? Happiness? It can be assumed, he says, that on a certain level, of course human beings are equal. (39) However, citing William Letwin, Western notes that "in as much as people are unequal, it is rational to presume they be treated unequally." (38) Western notes that "human beings...begin life with different endowments of wealth and liabilities...different natural environments...[different] societies and communities... [different] epidemiological factors in the region in which we live..." (40)
A specific modern debate that directly relates to this is the assertion by certain religious groups that they should be treated unequally in the eyes of the law. Specifically, in 1990, a group of Native Americans asserted that their religion required the ingestion of peyote, a substance deemed illegal to ingest by the government. This group asked for an exception to the law, for unequal treatment, on the basis of their "difference," their religion. In the interest of "equality," the Supreme Court denied this request. (Smith v. Board of Employment, 1990) Disputes such as this one lend credence to the argument that "equality" can, at times, be in direct conflict with "liberties," in this case, religious liberty.
What, then, is Western's solution to this juxtaposition that he described at the beginning of the article? He says that we should differentiate between equality of "primary goods and the freedom to pursue one's objectives..." (43) This would allow different groups or individuals to be treated differently, to pursue their own objectives, without trying to regulate or redistribute goods, wealth, or rights so that they are exactly like other groups or individuals. And in doing so, in treating them unequally based on their individual circumstances, we will have established a baseline of "equal treatment."
Full creativity allows the production of greater wealth, for a stronger and more evolved society. Further in defense of the moral systems or perceived lack thereof in terms of newly created wealth, D'Souza asserts that most wealth currently created is the result of personal effort, rather than means such as inheritance. The wealth can then indeed be seen as the reward for effort, rather than wealth as a result of
Price Beauty? 'For though beauty is seen and confessed by all, yet, from the many fruitless attempts to account for the cause of its being so, enquiries on this head have almost been given up" William Hogarth, The Analysis of Beauty, (1753) Not very encouraging words, but if the great artist William Hogarth felt himself up to the task, we can attempt at least to follow his lead. That beauty is enigmatic
E. The voices who argue that America should and could be an imperial superpower, but lacks sound practical judgment. The thesis of this paper is that the history of the Roman Empire can be matched to that of the United States in terms of economy, political power, as well as aspirations. In this sense, present day America is very similar to fourth of even fifth century Rome; this poses one stringent
Cold War and Film Generally speaking, the Cold War has been depicted as an era of spy games and paranoia in popular films from the 1960s to the present day, but the reality of the era was much more complex. The Cold War was a period of military and political tension from 1947 to 1991, or from the end of WW2 to the collapse of the Soviet Union, in which