Abstract

Building on the more general considerations of the concept of justice from the previous lecture, this session provides an overview of the principal arguments and counterarguments in the Why-Equality debate to acquaint you with the egalitarian and prioritarian perspectives on the relationship between justice and equality—the essence of moral egalitarianism. The principle of egalitarianism has been extensively debated within social and political philosophy. In the last century, this debate extended into ethics and moral philosophy, where the notion of moral egalitarianism was intensely explored. The discourse on moral egalitarianism centered on two distinct trends: the Equality-of-What trend, which addresses what should be distributed (resources, equality of opportunity for welfare, etc.) and the criteria for distribution; and the more recent Why-Equality trend. Over the past four or five decades, the pivotal question has been whether equality represents a crucial component of justice, or if it holds little to no significance in the nature of justice. Egalitarians argue for a strong link between justice and equality, whereas prioritarians challenge this connection, asserting that the two concepts are not necessarily related.