Is justice the same as equality?
IS JUSTIC THE SAME AS EQUALITY?
Cl. Mario D’Couto SDB
Is
justice the same as equality? As the title suggests, I must acknowledge that
this short reflection on the aspect of justice in human life comes from a
seminar which I had attended some time ago. This is based on a talk given by a
certain professor named Mr. Trevor Allis, who teaches at Sophia’s College,
Bombay. The title of his speech was “Conceptualizing
Justice”. Apparently, the title of this speech may give one the impression that
this is just another inter-play of words but actually it is not.
In
order to arrive at an answer to the above question, we should note that there
are two approaches to this problem. The first is the egalitarian approach while the other is a need-based approach. When we speak about the “egalitarian” approach the basic stand on the issue of ‘justice’
and ‘equality’ is based on one phrase, “same
measure for all.” This would imply that irrespective of what may be the
background, whether a person’s stomach is full or if he or she is starving,
everybody is going to get the same amount or measure. Hence, in this sort of an
approach, there would be no difference between a person who is “floating in riches” and a person who is
dying to make ends meet; precisely, because
they are supposed to be treated equally.
The
“need-based” approach, on the other
hand, is on a different stand. According to this approach, each person should
be given his or her due according to his or her own needs. Hence, in this kind
of an approach, the amount to be distributed can vary from person to person.
Now
coming back to the question that was stated in the beginning, “Is justice the same as equality?” We
will be able to answer this question by comparing the two approaches. Justice is
not the same as equality! Why? Because if one were to go by the egalitarian approach,
then he or she would not be taking the person’s background into consideration. Such
an approach would certainly be “inhuman” as in that case, there would be no
difference between a rich man and a beggar, precisely, because they are
supposed to be treated equally.
A
more practical approach to this problem of justice is to keep in mind that each
person’s needs are different. Hence, it is important to keep in mind the
background of the person.
This
approach is indeed noble. Yet, on further examining the approach, there are a
few hitches which one would come across,
1.
The
first is, if justice is to be imparted by keeping in mind each and every one’s
need, how then does one define ‘need’ or how does one distinguish a person’s ‘need’
from ‘want’?
2.
If
such an approach is to be adopted, then there would be no credit for merit. In such
a case, a person’s hard work would then go unnoticed. Worst of all, such an
approach cold make people overtly dependent as Jean Paul Sartre would put it, “Charity
limits a man’s potentials.”
Thus,
we see that there are two sides to the same coin. I guess what is important is
to cultivate a balance which is brought about through prudence. Prudence comes
with experience; mistakes are part of it but it is important to learn from it else
there will not be any growth.