more on this theme     |     more from this text

Single Idea 22840

[filed under theme 25. Social Practice / B. Equalities / 1. Grounds of equality ]

Full Idea

That the relation of equality might be considered a value in itself is an absurdity. Would the equality of blinding the only sighted person in a blind society be good? Is it inherently good that two trees are the same height? This is nonsense.

Gist of Idea

Mere equality, as in two trees being the same height, has no value at all

Source

John Charvet (Liberalism: the basics [2019], 08)

Book Ref

Charvet,John: 'Liberalism: the basics' [Routledge 2019], p.86

A Reaction

He cites Temkin 1993 as defending the blinding example! Obviously equality is only possible in certain respects (though electrons might be equal in all respects). So the point is to identify the important respects. The rest is rhetoric.

The 27 ideas from John Charvet

22821 Liberalism asserts maximum freedom, but that must be equal for all participants [Charvet]
22822 Liberals promote community and well-being - because all good societies need them [Charvet]
22828 The rule of law mainly benefits those with property and liberties [Charvet]
22823 The rule of law is mainly to restrict governments [Charvet]
22825 The 1689 Bill of Rights denied the monarch new courts, or the right to sit as judge [Charvet]
22826 From 1701 only parliament could remove judges, whose decisions could not be discussed [Charvet]
22827 Justice superior to the rule of law is claimed on behalf of the workers, or the will of the nation [Charvet]
22829 Allowing defamatory speech is against society's interests, by blurring which people are trustworthy [Charvet]
22831 Modern libertarian societies still provide education and some housing [Charvet]
22832 Welfare is needed if citizens are to accept the obligations of a liberal state [Charvet]
22830 Give by ability and receive by need, rather than a free labour market [Charvet]
22834 Egalitarian liberals prefer equality (either of input or outcome) to liberty [Charvet]
22835 Liberals value freedom and equality, but the society itself must decide on its values [Charvet]
22839 Liberalism needs people to either have equal autonomy, or everyone to have enough autonomy [Charvet]
22838 Societies need shared values, so conservatism is right if rational discussion of values is impossible [Charvet]
22836 'Freedom from' is an empty idea, if the freedom is not from impediments to my desires [Charvet]
22837 Positive freedom can lead to coercion, if you are forced to do what you chose to do [Charvet]
22841 Identity multiculturalism emerges from communitarianism, preferring community to humanity [Charvet]
22842 For communitarians it seems that you must accept the culture you are born into [Charvet]
22840 Mere equality, as in two trees being the same height, has no value at all [Charvet]
22843 Inequalities are worse if they seem to be your fault, rather than social facts [Charvet]
22844 First level autonomy is application of personal values; second level is criticising them [Charvet]
22845 Money allows unlimited inequalities, and we obviously all agree to money [Charvet]
22846 The universalism of utilitarianism implies a world state [Charvet]
22849 Rawls's theory cannot justify liberalism, since it presupposes free and equal participants [Charvet]
22848 People with strong prior beliefs would have nothing to do with a veil of ignorance [Charvet]
22847 Kant places a higher value on the universal rational will than on the people asserting it [Charvet]