Equality cannot exist, so why do people want equality?

Author: Best.Korea

Posts

Total: 13
Topic's author
#1
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,534
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
There is actually no way for any equality to exist, if you really think about it for longer than 20 seconds.

Thinking of entire huge text to say that equality is good is simply like saying "It would be good if everyone had everything he wants" and writing bunch of nonsense to support said claim.

Sure, it would be good if equality existed, but the fact that it cannot possibly ever exist makes it kinda pointless to want.

Like, some people always have better life than others, better brain structure than others...

Thus, if you say that non-equality is bad, you are saying that everything is bad since no two things in the world are equal.

Thus, this logic follows:

Equality = good
Lack of equality = bad
All people = have lack of equality
All people = bad

There is actually no way to solve this problem, because word "equality" can only happen if all people are equal, and since all people will never be equal, all people will always be bad.

Further, equality morality makes every action bad. For example, if you are helping a homeless person, that is bad because you are not helping equally all homeless people that ever existed.

Thus, to make it simple, equality morality is nonsense, because there is no "goal" in it which you can actually realize.
#2
TwoMan
TwoMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 376
1
2
3
TwoMan's avatar
TwoMan
1
2
3
-->
@Best.Korea
It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game.
Equality may never be achieved but one can always strive to attain it. That way you are making the world more equal. That should be the goal. Nothing is perfect but that doesn't mean it can't be better. Don't make better the enemy of perfect.
#3
Double_R
Double_R's avatar
Debates: 3
Posts: 5,227
3
2
5
Double_R's avatar
Double_R
3
2
5
-->
@Best.Korea
Black or white fallacy. Equality is not an either/or, it's a spectrum.

The possibility of perfection is not necessary to determine good from bad. Good is simply that which gets us closer to perfection. If 50/50 is perfect, then that provides is with the basis we need to determine that 51/49 is better than 80/20. So unless your point is that the inability to achieve perfect equality within our society means it doesn't matter if the top 1% hold 99% of the nation's wealth, then there absolutely is value in continuing to strive for equality regardless of whether we could ever achieve it.

Whether perfect equality should be the goal is of course an entirely different conversation.
Topic's author
#4
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,534
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@TwoMan
It's not whether you win or lose, it's how you play the game.
No. If goal is never achieved, then there is no point in having it.

Equality may never be achieved but one can always strive to attain it.
One can, but its pointless because one will never attain it.

That way you are making the world more equal.
There is no "more equal", nor does "more equal" achieve any equality. Things are either equal either not equal.

That should be the goal.
This topic is about equality, not about whatever other goal you want to set or debate.

Not equality = bad

Closer to equality =/= Equality

Closer to equality = Not equality

Closer to equality = bad

Thus, if one holds belief that lack of equality is bad, and coming closer to equality is a lack of equality, then coming closer to equality is bad.

Nothing is perfect but that doesn't mean it can't be better. Don't make better the enemy of perfect.
Sadly, when the goalpost is equality, the only way for it to be better is if equality exists, and since it cannot ever exist, it will never be better.
#5
TwoMan
TwoMan's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 376
1
2
3
TwoMan's avatar
TwoMan
1
2
3
-->
@Best.Korea
You are entitled to your opinion, however illogical it may be. That refers to each response in your previous post.
#6
Tarik
Tarik's avatar
Debates: 1
Posts: 2,481
3
3
5
Tarik's avatar
Tarik
3
3
5
-->
@TwoMan
You are entitled to your opinion, however illogical it may be.
Is that the pot calling the kettle black? Remember our previous discussion on irrationality?
Topic's author
#7
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,534
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@Double_R
Equality is not an either/or, it's a spectrum.
No, its not a spectrum. Equality either exists or doesnt.

The possibility of perfection is not necessary to determine good from bad.
Irrelevant.

Good is simply that which gets us closer to perfection.
This is false. If goal is equality, then goal will never be achieved. Thus, if equality is good, then equality will never be achieved.

I understand that people here want to change the topic to "Getting closer to equality", but that is still lack of equality, thus bad, plus irrelevant when topic isnt "getting closer to equality".


If 50/50 is perfect, then that provides is with the basis we need to determine that 51/49 is better than 80/20.
If anything that is not 50/50 is bad, then 51/49 is bad. This cannot be denied in any way, unless your goal isnt equality. Thus, "better" doesnt mean "good", contrary to popular belief.

So unless your point is that the inability to achieve perfect equality within our society means it doesn't matter if the top 1% hold 99% of the nation's wealth, then there absolutely is value in continuing to strive for equality regardless of whether we could ever achieve it.
Why would you try to achieve something which logically cannot be achieved?

Whether perfect equality should be the goal is of course an entirely different conversation.
Its not an entirely different conversation. Its literally the topic. But I guess trying to change the topic when you cant attack it in other way is a popular strategy on this forum site.
Topic's author
#8
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,534
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
Now, since it seems that the only two people attacking the topic are the ones just trying to change topic and attack a strawman, I must attack my own topic because given how this is going, I doubt it will meet serious challenge any time in the future.

To put it simply, the clue was in original post.

Actions can never be equal to all, thus all actions will always lack equality and will always be bad since lack of equality is considered bad.

However, lack of action is equal to all, since lack of action affects everyone equally in a sense that it doesnt affect anyone at all. It is not an action or even existing, thus cannot contain any non-equality. This relates to negative rights theory based on lack of actions.

As much as I hate making arguments against my own topic, it seems that no one else will.

#9
FLRW
FLRW's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 6,550
3
4
8
FLRW's avatar
FLRW
3
4
8
-->
@Best.Korea

My father didn't leave me anything and Trump's father left him $400 million. OMG, is that why I'm an Atheist?
Topic's author
#10
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,534
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@FLRW
My father didn't leave me anything and Trump's father left him $400 million
My father never even gave me anything. I dont even know him. So yeah, I am not like Trump unless someone gives me all those millions to make me equal to Trump.
#11
ADreamOfLiberty
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
Debates: 0
Posts: 4,127
3
2
2
ADreamOfLiberty's avatar
ADreamOfLiberty
3
2
2
-->
@Best.Korea
Its not an entirely different conversation. Its literally the topic. But I guess trying to change the topic when you cant attack it in other way is a popular strategy on this forum site.
He didn't change the topic, he picked one way in which you were wrong without addressing the others. A subtopic.
Topic's author
#12
Best.Korea
Best.Korea's avatar
Debates: 354
Posts: 10,534
4
6
10
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
4
6
10
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
He didn't change the topic
I understand that not everyone on this site is Einstein,

but

If topic is "Equality cannot exist",

I think its very obvious that "We are closer to equality =/= we have equality".

Trying to change goalpost from "Equality" to "Closer to equality" is changing the topic, since those two goalposts arent same.
#13
zedvictor4
zedvictor4's avatar
Debates: 22
Posts: 12,051
3
3
6
zedvictor4's avatar
zedvictor4
3
3
6
-->
@Best.Korea
Yep, that's also the point I've been making about anarchy.