In this paper, Anderson endeavours to oppose the proponents of Luck egalitarianism. Egalitarians believe that the fate of an individual is dependent on the choices that they make. They believe that everybody has got equal chances to be as great as any other person. What makes one becomes a servant and the other a lord is the choice they made at one point of their life (Anderson, 2007). Egalitarians believe that people make some conscious choices that define what they become in future. Those who make good choices end up being successful than the others who made wrong conscious steps at one point of their life. In this paper, Anderson opposes this proponent arguing that there is never equality in life.
Anderson believes that no two people are equal. No two people can ever have the equal chances to success. The fate of an individual’s success or failure depends much more on where they were born, who were their parents and the social status upon which they grew. Anderson therefore supports the proponent that the pursuit for equality will always be futile, (Anderson, 2010).
Equality is a controversial topic. According to my understanding, there will never be an absolute equality. People can never have equal chances to success. On the other hand, we cannot entirely blame the unsuccessful, saying that at one point in their life they made some conscious mistake. The society attaches benefit to the performance of an individual. Taking an example of a physically handicapped individual, the society will not judge them according to who they are, but according to what they cannot do. A man in a wheelchair will not be judged according to the fact that they are on the chair, but according to the fact that they can’t run, or walk, or do something a normal person can do. The endeavour to achieve equality therefore can never be successful. This is because, in one way or the other, people will always be different. Taking an example of people who were just born dumb, or those born ugly or those who are just untalented, they have no choice; they will always be who they are. Equality should therefore be subjective. It should entirely depend on the nature’s construct and “blessing” of an individual.
Reference
Anderson, E. Fair Opportunity in Education: A Democratic Equality Perspective*. Ethics, 117(4), (2007): 595-622.
Anderson, E. (2010). Justifying the capabilities approach to justice. Measuring justice: Primary goods and capabilities, (2010): 81-100.
