Justice requires equal rules and resources.
Decisions remain transparent and impartial, but unequal starting conditions may be reproduced.
Political philosophy
Does fairness mean equality or equity?
The problem in miniature
The same examination
Three pupils sit the same timed examination. One has had years of specialist teaching, one has recently learned the language of the paper, and one uses assistive technology that takes extra time to operate. Giving all three identical conditions looks impartial. Adjusting time or support responds to different barriers, but means the pupils are no longer treated alike. Some differences are relevant to fair opportunity; others may reflect choices, luck or social advantage. A principle of equity therefore needs more than the instruction to give people what they need: it must decide which needs justice should answer.
Why this is difficult
The pressure comes from more than one direction.
Justice should secure fair opportunity or capability.
Different support can be justified, though institutions must judge which disadvantages count.
People are entitled to holdings acquired without injustice.
Redistribution can itself appear unfair even when outcomes remain sharply unequal.
Philosophers in the conversation
Different routes through the same problem.
Aristotle
Aristotle distinguishes treating equal cases equally from treating relevantly unequal cases differently. The formula does not decide which differences matter; that depends on the purpose of the distribution. His approach exposes why fairness cannot be settled by identical treatment alone.
John Rawls
Rawls asks which principles people would choose without knowing their own place in society. Equal basic liberties have priority, while social and economic inequalities require justification, including benefit to the least advantaged and fair equality of opportunity under institutions they could accept as free equals.
Robert Nozick
Nozick challenges patterned distributions that continually adjust holdings to fit an ideal outcome. If people acquire and transfer resources justly, their entitlements matter even when the result is unequal. The focus shifts from a snapshot of distribution to the history that produced it.
Amartya Sen
Sen argues that equal resources can translate into very unequal real freedoms because people differ in circumstances and needs. The capabilities approach asks what individuals are actually able to do and be, widening the assessment of justice beyond identical goods or reported satisfaction.
Key ideas
Language for thinking more precisely.
- Equality
- Providing the same status, rule, opportunity or resource to each person.
- Equity
- Responding to relevant differences so people have fairer opportunities or capabilities.
- Distributive justice
- Principles governing how benefits and burdens should be shared.
- Fair opportunity
- A chance not unfairly limited by irrelevant social or personal disadvantage.
- Capability
- A person's real freedom to achieve valuable activities and ways of living.
- Structural injustice
- Disadvantage produced by interacting institutions and norms rather than one isolated decision.
Follow the question through the curriculum
Continue with a unit or lesson.
Reconsider your answer
The opening question has changed.
Every correction redistributes some cost, attention or opportunity. A policy that removes one barrier can create a new burden for someone who did not cause the original disadvantage.
When does responding to disadvantage become unfair treatment of someone else?