# Fairness and the Individuality Frame of Reference By:: [[Brian Heath]] 2024-06-21 Does one wish for equity or equality? Equity implies that everyone receives the resources they need to be successful. So, some will receive more or less resources based on one's definition of success and the starting position of the individuals. Equality implies that everyone is treated equally regardless of individual needs or differences. Everyone is given the same resources and opportunities, which likely means some individuals will need more to achieve whatever is defined as success. It also means that some will receive more than they need to succeed. So, what does one wish for equity or equality? What does one believe in? Should everyone be treated the same? Perhaps one thinks absolutely they should. But shouldn't also people who need more help get it? Maybe one also strongly agrees with this position. However, by accepting equity, one rejects equality and vice versa. One cannot have it both ways. Treating everyone equally categorically means those with more significant needs don't get enough, and those with lesser needs get too much. One may sidestep the issue and consider the current state of affairs. Which policy (equity or equality) will provide the greatest good right now and be the easiest to implement? Given the recency of slavery, genocides, and gender and sexuality discrimination, one could make a strong case that equality is the best policy. Treating everyone the same way is undoubtedly a better state of affairs than many experience. Additionally, it is likely a much easier policy to implement. With equity, someone must define success and develop methodologies to individually assess the level of need and deploy the appropriate resources in the correct dosages. This is a monumental and existentially wrought task. So, one says, "Let's just go with equality." But does an equality policy result in more fairness in the long run? If one already has enough and is given more, are they not more likely to continue being on top? If one already doesn't have enough and isn't given enough, are they not more likely to continue being on the bottom? Even if all were equal in the beginning and all given the same amount, some would make it to the top, and some would end up on the bottom. Then, those on the bottom would, in all likelihood, remain there as their hole gets deeper and they never get enough to catch up. It's easy to say we should all be equal, but it's quite another to figure out how to do so. Perhaps one is thinking about the problem all wrong. Possibly, one is overthinking it. Or, maybe individuality is a poor frame of reference for the future of progress. #### Related Items [[Individuals]] [[Equity]] [[Inequality]] [[Equality]] [[Metamodernism]] [[Society]] [[Discrimination]]