Essay talk:The Fallacy of Equality

From RationalWiki
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Please feel free to add comments on this page. The concept of equality is an important philosophical issue underlying how societies operate and it deserves to be more widely discussed.— Unsigned, by: AndyChrist / talk / contribs

๐—ก๐—ผ๐˜๐—ฒ & ๐—ฅ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—บ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฑ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ง๐—ผ ๐—ฅ๐—ช ๐—˜๐—ฑ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐˜€ (๐—”๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—”๐˜‚๐˜๐—ต๐—ผ๐—ฟ ๐—œ๐—ณ ๐—ข๐—ป๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ฒ) New user here, so I apologize if I'm not doing this right. I was reading through this essay and your article page of Equality, and you certainly make some good points on using the terms "equitably" rather than "equally", in terms of accommodations. I also came across the point of equal hiring opportunities for guards in prisons.

๐—ฆ๐˜‚๐—บ๐—บ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐˜‡๐—ฒ๐—ฑ ๐—œ๐—ฑ๐—ฒ๐—ฎ: I get the impression that argument under the ๐—™๐—ฒ๐—บ๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ถ๐˜€๐—บ ๐—ฐ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ๐—ด๐—ผ๐—ฟ๐˜† ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—˜๐—พ๐˜‚๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜† ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—น๐—ฒ regarding what you claim to be an accidental fallacy regarding prison hiring equality reduces complex human behavior to simplistic biological determinism. Human actions are influenced by a multitude of factors beyond biology, including socialization, individual morality, and institutional culture. By attributing potential misconduct solely to evolutionary traits, this perspective ignores the significant role of environmental factors and personal choice.

Discriminating against potential genders of candidates based on generalized assumptions about their behavior undermines principles of fairness and justice. All individuals could be evaluated on their own merits rather than generalizations associated with their gender.

A more effective approach could involve rigorous screening processes for all candidatesโ€”regardless of genderโ€”to ensure they are fit for duty in sensitive environments like female prisons. For this, ๐—œ'๐—ฑ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—บ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—ฎ๐—ป ๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฑ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐˜€๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ผ๐—ป ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—น๐—ฒ ๐—ฏ๐˜† ๐—ฒ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ๐—ฟ ๐˜†๐—ผ๐˜‚ ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ ๐—ฎ๐—ป๐˜†๐—ผ๐—ป๐—ฒ ๐˜„๐—ต๐—ผ ๐—ถ๐˜€ ๐˜„๐—ถ๐—น๐—น๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด ๐˜๐—ผ ๐˜๐—ฎ๐—ธ๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ถ๐—บ๐—ฒ.


๐— ๐˜† ๐— ๐—ฒ๐˜€๐˜€๐˜† ๐—ช๐—ฟ๐—ถ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ป๐—ด: While I certainly see your point regarding once again the equitably vs equally situation, I'd have to respectfully disagree with having male guards in female prisons to be the only problem within itself. While it has indeed been true that sexual assault from male guards has been a problem, I wouldn't go as far to say that this is purely due to biological brain differences in sexual behaviors between the sexes.

While there can be some biological influence affecting certain predisposed tendencies, I feel as though this neglects the psychosocial influences and overall societal and socialized attitudes that also result in such exhibited behaviors. While US prison itself may have its issues with sexual assault, particulalry from guards, I'm not sure I'd attribute this solely on a such behaviors being set. There have been some instances of female guards also displaying such activity on male inmates, but this is besides my point.

While I don't agree that not barring male guards from being employed to female prisons is the problem, I do agree that the issue in itself may still support your idea of equitably vs equally, as guards who undergo better training and and are thoroughly vetted on their conduct prior to hiring could be seen as one possible solution to this problem, and that wouldn't be equal par se since these male guards might still need training and evaluation specific to them to prevent such occurrences. However, in fairness, this is ONLY considering if US prisons so choose to implement such programs (Unfortunately, the problem in itself may be US Prisons, as they have their fair share of human rights issues: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/12/prisons-menstrual-pads-humiliate-women-violate-rights]).

I really do like the rest of the article on Equality, as it makes some Very good points on the fallacies of equitably vs equally and who gets to be considered eligible to be seen as equal. This topic on prisons was the only particular section that I'd say might be generalizing genders based solely upon biopsychological factors and thus failing to consider the implications of socialization combined with biology, variations in behavior, training and thorough vetting in the hiring process, so while the problem you present still stands since socialization still does happen, biology may still affect those who are not socialized in ways that negate or reduce such behaviors, and training and vetting is not necessarily implemented in every US Prison due to their human rights issues, I disagree that using purely genetic brain differences in gender is a very clear way to go about providing an example of this accidental fallacy without considering the other possible issues that connect and revolve around it.

This is, of course, not even going into the issues that transgender inmates face in US Prisons as a result of human rights issues. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/christopher-zoukis/promoting-prison-rape-sho_b_7554208.html and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/sandy-brown-transgender-inmate-legal-victory_us_5603160be4b0fde8b0d12518).

Of course, there is the possibility I may have misinterpreted what you were trying to say. If I didn't misinterpret this, ๐—œ'๐—ฑ ๐—ฟ๐—ฒ๐—ฐ๐—ผ๐—บ๐—บ๐—ฒ๐—ป๐—ฑ ๐—ฎ๐—ป ๐˜‚๐—ฝ๐—ฑ๐—ฎ๐˜๐—ฒ ๐˜๐—ผ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—ฏ๐—ผ๐˜๐˜๐—ผ๐—บ ๐—ผ๐—ณ ๐˜๐—ต๐—ฒ ๐—˜๐—พ๐˜‚๐—ฎ๐—น๐—ถ๐˜๐˜† ๐—ฎ๐—ฟ๐˜๐—ถ๐—ฐ๐—น๐—ฒ. I really do think that the philosophical Underpinnings of the concept of equality are something we should explore.

JiminyCricket (talk), 24 February 2025