- Joined
- Jul 28, 2026
- Messages
- 319
- Reaction score
- 268
- Awards
- 4
You're listing all those humanitarian ideas, but none of them actually cares about valuing equality. You don't actually value equal rights because they are equal. You value them because you believe they are good for the individuals. The goal of feeding people is to save them from starvation, not to make the distribution of food more equal across society. In other words if you value equality because of some other things then you actually, fundamentally value those things and equality is just a mean to an end - valuable conditionally, only as a tool.I think you're not saying that equality always comes from personal hatred or jealousy, /but that once equality becomes the goal, it can lead to wanting to get rid of differences simply because they're differences..
But that isn't necessarily envy. I think we can value equality based on things like dignity or equal rights, without wanting to make everyone equal in all situations.
Probably the real disagreement, then, is if equality cann be a fundamental value and not just a tool of justice.
I'm not sure it can't be yet, but I think I see what you mean now.
It requires attention what does it mean for something to be a fundamental value. It means that it is being pursued without any further reason, treated as an axiom of morality - a good in itself. When equality is a fundamental value of a given ethical system, then being good requires making other people equal to each other not to make them happier or the society functioning more effectively - only to satisfy one's own moral claims.