Discussion question responses and analysis

¶ … resolution to the issue based on the principles of distributive equality.

Distributive equality

One of the difficulties in defining equality is that unless a highly simplistic and unrealistic form of 'simple' equality is enforced, in which all members of society are 'forced' to be equal, such a principle fails to be workable in the real world, as manifested in the failure of communism to create a truly equal society. "Equality distorts incentives promoting achievement in the economic field, producing an inefficiency grounded in a waste of assets arising from the administrative costs of redistribution (Okun 1975). Equality and efficiency need to be placed in a balanced relation" (Gosepath 2012). Does equality mean that every student receives an 'A' in class? Or that the tax system should be so progressive that everyone makes the same amount of money? This might indeed be equal, but it would hardly seem fair in most concepts of justice. "With simple equality, personal freedoms are unacceptably limited and distinctive individual qualities insufficiently regarded; in this manner they are in fact unequally regarded" (Gosepath 2012).

Distributive equality rests upon the principle that "it is not equality of objective or subjective well-being or resources themselves that should be equalized, but an equal opportunity to gain the well-being or resources one aspires to" (Gosepath 2012). Theoretically, for example, entrance into college is determined upon distributive equality. Anyone, rich or poor, can submit his or her application to a school and be judged based upon his or her report cards, standardized test scores, and resumes. Most schools will waive the application fee if the student is indigent.

However, when dealing with the question of the college admissions process, the question of equality becomes more vexed. On a level of simple equality, the college admissions process fails the test miserably, because the most prestigious and the most competitive institutions do not have open admissions policies. To truly avail one's self of all of the resources offered by schools such as MIT and Harvard, candidates must prove themselves worthy through a selection process, and intelligence is a major qualifier for admission. Measuring intelligence is innately exclusive and 'unequal.' Also, some people may have access to resources that others lack, which facilitates them presenting a more qualified appearance to the admissions committee. Affirmative action may make some allowances for this, but overall, this cannot entirely distill the potential impact of class upon the process.