![]() ![]() Equality of outcome can be a good thing after it has been achieved, since it reflects the natural ‘interdependence of citizens in a highly organized economy’ and provides a ‘basis for social policies’ which foster harmony and good will, including social cohesion and reduced jealousy. One view is that there is a moral basis for equality of outcome, but that means to achieve such an outcome can be malevolent. In political philosophy, there are differing views whether equal outcomes are beneficial or not. Equality of perception is an uncommonly used term meaning that ‘person should be perceived as being of equal worth.’ Sen’s approach requires ‘active intervention of institutions like the state into people’s lives’ but with an aim towards ‘fostering of people’s self-creation rather than their living conditions.’ Sen argued that ‘the ability to convert incomes into opportunities is affected by a multiplicity of individual and social differences that mean some people will need more than others to achieve the same range of capabilities.’Įquality of process is related to the general notion of fair treatment, and can be thought of as ‘dealing with inequalities in treatment through discrimination by other individuals and groups, or by institutions and systems, including not being treated with dignity and respect,’ according to one definition. It is generally seen as a procedural value of fair treatment by the rules.Įquality of autonomy is a relatively new concept, a sort of hybrid notion of philosopher Amartya Sen and can be thought of as ‘the ability and means to choose our life course should be spread as equally as possible across society.’ It is an equal shot at empowerment or a chance to develop up to his or her potential rather than equal goods or equal chances. The essence is that job seekers have ‘an equal chance to compete within the framework of goals and the structure of rules established,’ according to one view. It entails the ‘elimination of arbitrary discrimination in the process of selection.’ The term is usually applied in workplace situations but has been applied in other areas as well such as housing, lending, and voting rights. According to this view, wealth and income is a reward needed to spur such activity, and with this reward removed, then achievements which would benefit everybody may not happen.Įquality of opportunity generally describes fair competition for important jobs and positions such that contenders have equal chances to win such positions, and applicants are not judged or hampered by unfair or arbitrary discrimination. A related way of defining equality of outcome is to think of it as ‘equality in the central and valuable things in life.’ After the Russian Revolution of 1917, the political structure of the Soviet Union tried to emphasize equality of outcome as a primary goal.Īn opposing view is that equality of outcomes is not beneficial overall for society since it dampens motivation necessary for humans to achieve great things, such as new inventions, intellectual discoveries, and artistic breakthroughs. The concept is central to some political ideologies and is used regularly in political discourse, often in contrast to the term equality of opportunity. This could involve a transfer of income and/or wealth from wealthier to poorer individuals, or adopting other institutions designed to promote equality of condition from the start. Achieving this requires reducing or eliminating material inequalities between individuals or households in a society. Equality of outcome is a controversial political concept which describes a state in which people have approximately the same material wealth or, more generally, in which the general conditions of their lives are similar.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |