Supporters of egalitarianism would argue, however, that egalitarianism seeks to improve the lot of all humans, rather than reduce their condition. In their view, egalitarianism seeks to make the poor rich, make the weak strong, and make the ugly beautiful.
However, there are many problems with the actual implementation of egalitarianism. For example, are human fetuses to be considered equal to adults? Are some animals to be considered equal to either humans or other animals? Can the ideal of egalitarianism truly reconcile with some facts of inequality? For example, can we truly consider a person born with a severe mental handicap as equal, at least intellectually, with a person with a genius IQ?
One of the core problems with egalitarianism may be the fact that it is simply a thought or belief that must "piggyback on other ethical systems" (Landauer and Rowlands, 2001). This means that the key moral tenants of other ethical systems can play a role in the interpretation and expression of egalitarian...
To use a modern example, libertarians believe that all individuals can do whatever they want, as long as they do not harm others. Because individuals have the right of self-ownership, they can chose to give away their money or land for example, leading to inequalities in ownership, potentially conflicting with the belief in egalitarianism.
In conclusion, egalitarianism is truly an appealing belief that could be used for the betterment of all humankind. However, egalitarianism can be criticized as actually reducing the human state to its least desirable. Further, serious problems exist with the practical application of egalitarian ideals, and conflicts can arise between the belief in egalitarianism and ethical systems.
References
Arneson, Richard. 2002. Egalitarianism. 09 March 2007 http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/egalitarianism/
Landauer, Jeff and Rowlands, Joseph. 2001. Egalitarianism. 09 March 2007 http://www.importanceofphilosophy.com/Evil_Egalitarianism.html
