I have seen it argued before that the ideal of human rights would be "equity" rather than "equality". "Equity", as defined here, would refer to an attitude of acknowledging that different people may have different ways of interacting with other people depending on such things as cultural background or may have different capabilities from each other, and so it advises interacting with people according to the style of interaction with which they are most familiar and being sensitive to what they are and are not capable of (it would be insensitive, for instance, to try and encourage someone who's legs have been permanently paralyzed as a result of an accident or some other cause to start learning to run a marathon, as this is a potentiality to which they have unfortunately lost access and likely won't regain access.) It still, however, acknowledges that all people are of equal worth as human beings, despite the fact that our experiences, actions, etc. are often fundamentally different. This is set in opposition to the idea of total equality, which would advise treating all people exactly the same, regardless of differences they may have in cultural background, social identity, etc. I haven't found any peer-reviewed works on this distinction, sadly, but I think that if you agree with this idea of promoting "equity" over "equality" your report may not be a bad place to start arguing for it in an academic context.

Thank you so much Christopher!

This has helped me give some direction to my report - I am advocating that equality as a concept does matter however it should be viewed through an equity lens; on an individual level. So not pinning one above the other (as all terms can be interpreted differently according to the individual) however I agree with your point that this should be explored - what is your opinion on egalitarianism? Christopher Zieske

Morgan Spencer Please elaborate on your question? Equality of what exactly?

Morgan Spencer I like that image—it represents the differences between the principles of equity and equality perfectly in a simple and entertaining way. You should definitely include something like it in your report, if you are able to.

As to your question on my views of egalitarianism, I view these principles of equality and equity as essentially being two differing approaches to egalitarianism (with equality promoting egalitarianism through equal treatment and equity promoting egalitarianism through treating each individual in what seems to be the most fair way for them.) In most cases, I would personally argue that equity tends to be the most authentically egalitarian option, although there are certain situations in which I believe that equality should take precedence over equity (for instance, I would disagree with many countries in their decision to only ever draft men into their military—I believe that we should either have everyone in a country sign up for the draft, regardless of gender, or dispose with the draft altogether, depending on how much a particular country may need to use the draft.) Of course, there are likely more approaches to egalitarianism that exist, but these are the ones that I am most familiar with. I hope this answers your question in the way you were hoping.

Roozbeh Bandpey

The question posed is the actual assignment question, I have found some direction within the scope of my argument that equality does matter as inequality is a prevalent issue with disastrous effects on society and the individual. It is completely up to you which way you want to explore the question :)

Morgan, presuming you are writing a submission on 'equality' as a University project it will have guidelines issued to you. Changing a project on equality to a project on equity could see penalty applied, in some instances, rejection. Some apologists explain "equity" as being provided with whatever extra resource it requires to achieve equality with others.

With class distinction, as one example, equality cannot be achieved through equity.. The 'nouveau riche' for example did not attain the status of 'old money'; in the fairy tale atmosphere of the present, however, a lascivious drug addicted alcoholic 'entertainer' poncing, promenading, and bellowing noise in smoke flames and racket can surpass the wealth, access, fame and adulation offered to say Angela Merckyl or Greta Thunberg...people who actually provide effort to implement universal equality.

Equity has moved into law but has other connotations. We buy a house together, you pay 70%, I pay 25% the state pays 'incentive' of say 5%. We all have equity but we do not have equality, even equality in access and use unless the higher equity allows it. Equity in practical terms means 'having right to'...or 'having a share-of'. Deriving from Chancery, courts in equity commonly look at and decide on fairness when the law as it stands fails to provide on fairness. Some look at courts in equity as providing 'equality', not so. The outcome in equity may appear to the judges as being (say) fair redistribution of circumstances but the appellants may not see the outcome as providing equality.

The 'law' holds that those who appear before its courts are seen as equal. That is reasonably described as nonsense... the rich, famous, adulated, icons, freemasons are only some of those who have an advantage in the eyes of the court. Equity is not exemplified when one party has a QC acting for them and the other side can only afford a junior barrister.

Do not confuse the terms. If your project is 'on' equality, focus on equality. A short paragraph explaining how equity may be provided to bring people closer to an imagined or politically enunciated equality,...but focus on 'equality'....there is a mass of information available in research...and say 20 references might be enough to support an argument.

Remember...this is not about your personal views on 'equality' it is your researching of the views of modern 'others' who deserve your attention, preferably 'peer reviewed' within reasonable time frame and within a certain number of words. What 'is' equality? can it exist? how is it expressed? what evidence can you find? to make a case for/against 'equality in the terms which the university must have provided...and which you should carefully read, unpick and incorporate... leading to a conclusion.

Whether you think equality exists or not. should exist or not is irrelevant. This is an exercise in the trade of research, writing and self discipline. Devise a beginning a body and a conclusion, how much space to allocate to each and the flow and material. Provide a contents list (not word counted) abbreviations list (not word counted) an introduction with scope. Your word count likely begins with the heading "Introduction'. The count includes 'in-text' referencing but not your reference list or appendix. One you know well the 'way it works' and your own university's requirements and limitations, you can focus your energy on the job, not on anxiety.

Your own university will direct you how it wants to see submissions laid out (ask them) and what referencing mode to use. Do not include references in an abstract and if you don't know how to present and limit an abstract and connect it to your conclusion it may be better not to attempt one. Abstracts are very useful not only to readers but as a guide and 'checklist' in maintaining a tight and orderly submission.

@Anthony Clancy

Thank you for bringing that up, I hasn’t thought about it when I posted my first answer... if such guidelines are placed, they should be followed. If not, equity can become a central topic. If in doubt, it would probably be best, in my opinion, just to ask the professor who had assigned the report.

Yes 'okey-dokey' Christopher. I have found some submissions (I'm alumni now but haven't changed my email) mysterious, pan-biguous, really perplexing and sought expert assistance at the University. That extremely competent person I eventually found also had some "???" . If you don't clearly understand all the requirements and concepts then...setting aside the need to be pretty perfect with referencing ...then it's a fluke if one achieves high grading. Some don't care about grading 'no one gives a stuff' I was often told by graduates 'about your grades...only whether you have the Certification'. For me it's my life I am putting into my years of study and I want it worthy of me...or I of it.

A dissertation on equity is not a dissertation on equality. There's a 'connect' but not a similarity or substitution. The student given the task on 'equality' should research it and might quickly find they are different streams which emerge from the same Latin root. Whilst I think the Lecturer would be kind (if it knows the difference itself) to tell students "don't get caught up with 'equity'....this is about 'equality'...that's what I want to see, so stick with that' ...he/she might instead leave the possible error/dichotomy to the student to resolve and judge the submissions on their ingenuity, research and clarity. My Regards.

Anthony Clancy I apologize; my advise in my last response was meant to be directed toward Morgan Spencer... I would have mentioned her, except that I cannot mention people on the RG app, as you saw in that response with my having to use the "@" sign to signify you rather than the traditional mention (I did not have access to my computer when posting that last response.)

Morgan Spencer My advise in my last response ("Follow the guidelines for the report on whether or not you can focus on equity as an alternative to equality; if in doubt, ask the professor") goes to you for this report... please do not allow me to cause you to receive a poor response to your report. Best of luck in writing it!

Oh my, both contributions gave me a perspective I had NOT considered, and so I appreciate both responses. I developed a fresh perspective from speaking with both of you and my research report draft is now ready should anyone want to proof read it :) Anthony Clancy Christopher Zieske

Morgan Spencer Very good work! If you need someone to proofread the paper, I would be happy to do so—you should be able to find my email address on my profile. Just make sure you let me know when you need my comments back.

Best of luck!

Hi Christopher i couldn't find your email address - it is due today! Might be cutting it short but if you can email me at [email protected] I will email you back a copy to read through. Thank you for the offer.

Kind Regards,

Morgan

Hi Morgan Spencer,

Assuming you are asking this question here to collect variety of subjective opinions for your research work. I will also state my opinion.

All human being should be considered equal, but it makes more sense to break down the definition of equality. For example, all human should have the equal opportunity in a society to explore their free will and choices. But you can never guarantee the equality of outcome (equity). In my opinion it is due to competitive nature of human being and statistical distribution of different people in a society. To be more precise, equality of genders or equality of people from different ethnicity, should mean equality of opportunity not equality of outcome. If you apply equality of choices, you can never control what people would choose. I believe what we see in practice when it comes to implementation of egalitarianism, equality is more applied to outcome rather than opportunity. Scandinavian countries are very good example of that, there are many researches that have shown as countries get more egalitarian the difference between people get larger and not smaller.

https://www.gu.se/english/research/news-detail//personality-differences-between-the-sexes-are-largest-in-the-most-gender-equal-countries.cid1587162

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11199-019-01097-x

Of course equality matters but the problem is how to realize it. Have a look at this read: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/273061839_What_Is_Social_Inequality_and_Why_Does_it_Matter_Evidence_from_Central_and_Eastern_Europe

Equality is important, but it always needs to be observed in the appropriate context. For example, it is wrong to insist on equality in capabilities of people. In other words, everybody is capable for something, but not for everything.

Equity matters more than equality.

Equity in science is a beautiful lie — and I’m done pretending

Science isn’t really moving towards equity; institutions are just perfecting the appearance of equity. We need to build an alternative system...

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-02916-w