SIX: EQUALITY, VALUE, AND MERIT
1 Equal Treatment and Making Equal
The key goal of the fight for liberty is to ensure everyone is treated equally under the law. This idea also applies to how people interact with each other, showing the democratic spirit that makes the inequalities from freedom less harsh. Real equality is about treating people the same according to laws and moral standards, even though individual freedom can lead to different results, including inequality. The argument for equal treatment insists that differences among people should not lead to different treatment by the government, and calls for material equality should not rely on the false belief that everyone is truly equal.
2 the Importance of Individual Differences
Humans are very diverse, with many differences in abilities and potential. Each person is born with unique traits from their genes and life experiences, which can lead to great achievements or create a special individual. While some believe that a person's surroundings shape who they are, it is essential to recognize that people also have important differences right from birth. The idea that "all men are born equal" is more about treating people fairly in society than a true fact. Because people are different, treating everyone the same can lead to unequal results, and real equality would mean treating people based on their specific needs.
Even though aiming for equality is good, it can conflict with freedom and individual worth. Demands for everyone to be the same can lead to unfair rules that take away personal freedoms. While it is nice to want less inequality, this cannot justify using force against people in a free society. Instead, we should make smart choices in policies that help meet needs while respecting individual differences and maintaining equal treatment under the law.
3 Nature and Nurture
There are two important ideas about the similarities and differences among people. First, no individual or group can completely understand or determine what another person is capable of achieving. While differences exist, they will never be so great that one person's mind can fully grasp all that another can do. Second, when someone in a community gains new abilities, it generally benefits the whole community, even if it may create more competition for others.
It's also crucial to differentiate between traits that people are born with and those shaped by their environment. Both can influence a person's social value, but neither should be connected to moral worth. This difference matters because inborn traits cannot be changed, while environmental influences can potentially be modified. Institutions may need to be adjusted to lessen the advantages that come from a person's background, such as their family, inherited wealth, or education.
Family can provide significant advantages, and the skills and qualities developed within a family setting are just as valuable as those that arise from natural talents. Society gains from these family connections and cultural legacies that are passed down through generations.
4 the Family and Inheritance
The family is seen as important for passing on values, knowledge, and material wealth. While some argue against inheriting property because it creates inequality, it is necessary for maintaining social standards and benefits. Wealthy children gaining advantages is no different from other forms of inheritance like intelligence or morals. Limiting material inheritance would ignore the natural instincts of parents to support their children. Moreover, if inheritance were restricted, wealthy individuals might find costlier ways to ensure their children's success, leading to greater social injustices. Therefore, inheritance of property can be viewed as the lesser evil in addressing inequality.
5 Equality of Opportunity
The focus of equality has shifted from inheritance to education, with a strong desire for equal educational opportunities for all. Many argue that everyone should have access to the best education, and that financial advantages should not determine who gets higher education. Instead, admissions should be based on uniform ability tests.
However, imposing strict equality in education could prevent some from achieving the education they are capable of receiving. It's acknowledged that some advantages in education will always exist and that it is undesirable to deny these benefits to those who might use them well.
Historically, the goal was to remove barriers to success, allowing individuals to strive based on their own merits. Now, there is a demand for assured equal starting points, which could limit personal freedom. Additionally, many of these demands stem from envy towards the successful, posing a risk to societal freedom, as it suggests that the government should eliminate all social disparities, which is impractical and undermines individual responsibility.
6 the Conflict Between Merit and Value
The conflict between merit and value in society involves the tension between the demand for equality and the desire for fair reward distribution based on individual merit. Many people feel that material rewards should reflect the recognized merits of individuals, but this perspective is flawed. In a free society, a person's success does not rely on others’ perceptions of their merit.
"Merit" is defined here as the moral quality of actions, distinct from the value of achievements. A person's skills or talents can provide benefits to others without being a reflection of their effort. To reward based on merit requires considering assessable merit, which involves recognizing actions rather than focusing solely on outcomes. True merit emphasizes effort rather than results, meaning individuals should receive recognition for their attempts, even if they do not succeed. However, measuring merit accurately is complex because it requires deep knowledge of an individual's efforts and circumstances, which is often not available. Thus, allowing freedom enables individuals to use knowledge others may lack, making it difficult to fairly assess their merit.
7 Principles of Remuneration and Freedom of Choice
Rewarding people based on their merit can conflict with their freedom to choose what they want to do, especially in uncertain fields like research or exploration. In these areas, it’s difficult to know in advance who will be successful, so it’s important to give the rewards only to those who succeed. If everyone who worked hard shared the rewards, it would require someone to decide who gets to compete for them, limiting personal freedom. When making choices, people need to consider the value of different outcomes. The goal is to achieve usefulness with as little effort and sacrifice as possible. In the market, people are paid based on the value of their work to others, rather than the effort they put in, meaning rewards usually depend on results more than individual merit.
8 the Consequences of Distribution According to Merit
Distributing rewards based on merit is a complicated issue because it assumes we can accurately evaluate everyone's skills and achievements. This assumption goes against the idea of a free society, where people should be rewarded for their successes, not just their efforts. If society focused only on merit, it would take away people's responsibility, making them do things based on what others expect instead of their own choices.
In daily life, people usually expect to be paid based on the value of what they provide, not how hard they worked to provide it. This shows that in a free society, what counts is the benefit others get from a person's work, rather than their personal merits. Most individuals do not link a high income with personal worth, understanding that value can exist without referring to effort or moral judgment.
Moreover, trying to match rewards strictly with merit can harm motivation and create a tougher environment for those seen as unsuccessful. It is essential to understand that value and merit do not always connect, and someone's achievements can come from situations they cannot control.
While recognizing and rewarding real merit is important, in a free society, rewards should primarily reflect the value given, promoting greater individual freedom and a wider range of opportunities.
9 Freedom and Distributive Justice
Justice involves how individuals treat each other and the conditions of life controlled by society. While equal conditions provided by government are important, they can result in unequal outcomes. Merit-based rewards cannot be achieved through equal provision of resources or treatment, as they depend on the wishes of others. Attempts by the government to enforce income equality create demands for more controls, ultimately leading to a society where authority dictates individual actions, which contradicts the idea of a free society.
10 Claims Based on Membership of Particular Community
The idea that being a member of a particular community or nation gives individuals a right to a certain standard of living is discussed. This belief conflicts with the idea of merit-based distribution, as one's community membership is an accident of birth, not a measure of personal merit. Wealthy communities can offer advantages to their poorest members that are not available in poorer areas. Claims for wealth based on community membership are hard to defend, especially if those making the claims are not willing to grant the same rights to outsiders. Such claims could lead to exclusive rights over national resources, similar to private property, which few would accept globally. While there are reasons to use political structures to support the weak and victims, being born into a wealthier group does not justify demanding wealth from others. This viewpoint may lead to greater exclusivity in nations and more friction internationally over wealth distribution rights.
1 Equal Treatment and Making Equal
The key goal of the fight for liberty is to ensure everyone is treated equally under the law. This idea also applies to how people interact with each other, showing the democratic spirit that makes the inequalities from freedom less harsh. Real equality is about treating people the same according to laws and moral standards, even though individual freedom can lead to different results, including inequality. The argument for equal treatment insists that differences among people should not lead to different treatment by the government, and calls for material equality should not rely on the false belief that everyone is truly equal.
2 the Importance of Individual Differences
Humans are very diverse, with many differences in abilities and potential. Each person is born with unique traits from their genes and life experiences, which can lead to great achievements or create a special individual. While some believe that a person's surroundings shape who they are, it is essential to recognize that people also have important differences right from birth. The idea that "all men are born equal" is more about treating people fairly in society than a true fact. Because people are different, treating everyone the same can lead to unequal results, and real equality would mean treating people based on their specific needs.
Even though aiming for equality is good, it can conflict with freedom and individual worth. Demands for everyone to be the same can lead to unfair rules that take away personal freedoms. While it is nice to want less inequality, this cannot justify using force against people in a free society. Instead, we should make smart choices in policies that help meet needs while respecting individual differences and maintaining equal treatment under the law.
3 Nature and Nurture
There are two important ideas about the similarities and differences among people. First, no individual or group can completely understand or determine what another person is capable of achieving. While differences exist, they will never be so great that one person's mind can fully grasp all that another can do. Second, when someone in a community gains new abilities, it generally benefits the whole community, even if it may create more competition for others.
It's also crucial to differentiate between traits that people are born with and those shaped by their environment. Both can influence a person's social value, but neither should be connected to moral worth. This difference matters because inborn traits cannot be changed, while environmental influences can potentially be modified. Institutions may need to be adjusted to lessen the advantages that come from a person's background, such as their family, inherited wealth, or education.
Family can provide significant advantages, and the skills and qualities developed within a family setting are just as valuable as those that arise from natural talents. Society gains from these family connections and cultural legacies that are passed down through generations.
4 the Family and Inheritance
The family is seen as important for passing on values, knowledge, and material wealth. While some argue against inheriting property because it creates inequality, it is necessary for maintaining social standards and benefits. Wealthy children gaining advantages is no different from other forms of inheritance like intelligence or morals. Limiting material inheritance would ignore the natural instincts of parents to support their children. Moreover, if inheritance were restricted, wealthy individuals might find costlier ways to ensure their children's success, leading to greater social injustices. Therefore, inheritance of property can be viewed as the lesser evil in addressing inequality.
5 Equality of Opportunity
The focus of equality has shifted from inheritance to education, with a strong desire for equal educational opportunities for all. Many argue that everyone should have access to the best education, and that financial advantages should not determine who gets higher education. Instead, admissions should be based on uniform ability tests.
However, imposing strict equality in education could prevent some from achieving the education they are capable of receiving. It's acknowledged that some advantages in education will always exist and that it is undesirable to deny these benefits to those who might use them well.
Historically, the goal was to remove barriers to success, allowing individuals to strive based on their own merits. Now, there is a demand for assured equal starting points, which could limit personal freedom. Additionally, many of these demands stem from envy towards the successful, posing a risk to societal freedom, as it suggests that the government should eliminate all social disparities, which is impractical and undermines individual responsibility.
6 the Conflict Between Merit and Value
The conflict between merit and value in society involves the tension between the demand for equality and the desire for fair reward distribution based on individual merit. Many people feel that material rewards should reflect the recognized merits of individuals, but this perspective is flawed. In a free society, a person's success does not rely on others’ perceptions of their merit.
"Merit" is defined here as the moral quality of actions, distinct from the value of achievements. A person's skills or talents can provide benefits to others without being a reflection of their effort. To reward based on merit requires considering assessable merit, which involves recognizing actions rather than focusing solely on outcomes. True merit emphasizes effort rather than results, meaning individuals should receive recognition for their attempts, even if they do not succeed. However, measuring merit accurately is complex because it requires deep knowledge of an individual's efforts and circumstances, which is often not available. Thus, allowing freedom enables individuals to use knowledge others may lack, making it difficult to fairly assess their merit.
7 Principles of Remuneration and Freedom of Choice
Rewarding people based on their merit can conflict with their freedom to choose what they want to do, especially in uncertain fields like research or exploration. In these areas, it’s difficult to know in advance who will be successful, so it’s important to give the rewards only to those who succeed. If everyone who worked hard shared the rewards, it would require someone to decide who gets to compete for them, limiting personal freedom. When making choices, people need to consider the value of different outcomes. The goal is to achieve usefulness with as little effort and sacrifice as possible. In the market, people are paid based on the value of their work to others, rather than the effort they put in, meaning rewards usually depend on results more than individual merit.
8 the Consequences of Distribution According to Merit
Distributing rewards based on merit is a complicated issue because it assumes we can accurately evaluate everyone's skills and achievements. This assumption goes against the idea of a free society, where people should be rewarded for their successes, not just their efforts. If society focused only on merit, it would take away people's responsibility, making them do things based on what others expect instead of their own choices.
In daily life, people usually expect to be paid based on the value of what they provide, not how hard they worked to provide it. This shows that in a free society, what counts is the benefit others get from a person's work, rather than their personal merits. Most individuals do not link a high income with personal worth, understanding that value can exist without referring to effort or moral judgment.
Moreover, trying to match rewards strictly with merit can harm motivation and create a tougher environment for those seen as unsuccessful. It is essential to understand that value and merit do not always connect, and someone's achievements can come from situations they cannot control.
While recognizing and rewarding real merit is important, in a free society, rewards should primarily reflect the value given, promoting greater individual freedom and a wider range of opportunities.
9 Freedom and Distributive Justice
Justice involves how individuals treat each other and the conditions of life controlled by society. While equal conditions provided by government are important, they can result in unequal outcomes. Merit-based rewards cannot be achieved through equal provision of resources or treatment, as they depend on the wishes of others. Attempts by the government to enforce income equality create demands for more controls, ultimately leading to a society where authority dictates individual actions, which contradicts the idea of a free society.
10 Claims Based on Membership of Particular Community
The idea that being a member of a particular community or nation gives individuals a right to a certain standard of living is discussed. This belief conflicts with the idea of merit-based distribution, as one's community membership is an accident of birth, not a measure of personal merit. Wealthy communities can offer advantages to their poorest members that are not available in poorer areas. Claims for wealth based on community membership are hard to defend, especially if those making the claims are not willing to grant the same rights to outsiders. Such claims could lead to exclusive rights over national resources, similar to private property, which few would accept globally. While there are reasons to use political structures to support the weak and victims, being born into a wealthier group does not justify demanding wealth from others. This viewpoint may lead to greater exclusivity in nations and more friction internationally over wealth distribution rights.