Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

In a just social order, the principle of equality ought to take precedence over that

  1. Dec 21, 2003 #1
    In a just social order, equality ought to take precedence over liberty.

    I'm starting this thread as grounds for a civil debate.

    In a just social order, the principle of equality ought to take precedence over that of liberty.

    Here's my take on the subject and a general form to follow for your first statement about your beliefs.

    Due to the fact that I value both liberty and equality, I must affirm the statement "In a just social order, the principle of equality ought to take precedence over that of liberty. "

    My vaules are protection of life and utilitarianism.

    When referring to a just social order I'll be referring to a society in which the ideals of the western world are fully realized. When referring to liberty, I'll be referring to freedom of actions in general.

    My first contention is thus: In the absence of equality, liberty can not truley exist.

    Subpoint A: In a society where all have the liberty to do whatever they want and there is no regulation of actions to try to keep all equal, people can do most anything they want. Person A could force Person B into slavery through use of physical force and thus eliminate Person B's liberty to do what he wants, thus negating the principle of liberty throughout the society.

    Subpoint B: With no enforcements of equality, employers could act however they want. They could refuse to pay their employees and the employees could become poor and loose all of their financial liberty. They would have no money to buy food, clothing or pay for any nessecity of life and could, as a result, die.

    Me second contention is thus: Liberty without equality is anarchy.

    An anarchistic society can not be one which also has just social order. Without equality there is no order and people can do whatever they want, including killing of people en masse, which is hardly a sign of just social order.

    In conclusion: Justice and order cannot be accomplished with the people of a society having liberty and not equality, as they would have the liberty to destroy the freedoms of others and thus liberty would not exist.
    Last edited: Dec 22, 2003
  2. jcsd
  3. Dec 22, 2003 #2
    Liberty without equality means that some people can take away other's liberties. It means some people control other people- which really isn't anarchy but government, isn't it?
  4. Dec 22, 2003 #3
    When I said anarchy I meant a lack of a national government responsible for governing all the people of the nation.
  5. Dec 22, 2003 #4
    Since liberty without equality = no liberty, you've essentially proved liberty without equality impossible, not just ineffective.
  6. Dec 22, 2003 #5
    Its been a while since I last saw a Lincoln-Douglas debate...

    By the way, Utilitarianism (the theory that actions are deemed morally right if they bring the greatest good to the greatest number) is not as intelligent as it sounds, instead I recommend a value such as Pragmaticism...
  7. Dec 22, 2003 #6


    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Gold Member
    Dearly Missed

    I just can't resist this. WasteofO2 is begging the question in the correct sense, since his fix for equality has precisely the fault (coercion) that required the fix in the first place.
  8. Dec 22, 2003 #7
    Yeah, I agree.
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook