Yeah, talk of equality is sophistry, in the bad sense of the word. But, NOT being a postmodernist, myself, I read *through* the word to a constellation of ideals behind it, including dyed in the wool socialism, if not anarchism. But unlike Nick's creation myth, I tend to think of it in terms of Respect for Persons ... or simply Respect: https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/respect/
In fact, one place the righties have it right is that to equalize everything in a single dimension (e.g. redistribution of money) is ultimately disrespectful and, hence, a violation of the principle of equality (if understood as respect). Where they go wrong is in rejecting the idea of equalizing according to a large fabric of variables, which is what motivates equalization by money ... because ... wait for it ... money is a good, reductive, singular candidate for hyper-reduction ... well, fiat money anyway. So, only because we live in a largely capitalist society, does equalization via money make sense ... because money is a medium, not a thing, in itself. Obviously, I have my doubts about money as a fluid medium. But we've argued that to death already. On 8/26/21 1:22 PM, Steve Smith wrote: > Marcus wrote: >> >> You are made of matter following some trajectory that was initiated with the >> big bang, and you will go where you will go. There is no “deserve”. >> > > "The universe is flux, all else is opinion" - M. Aurelius > > and... > "they're merely talking to hear themselves speak" - G. Ropella -- ☤>$ uǝlƃ - .... . -..-. . -. -.. -..-. .. ... -..-. .... . .-. . FRIAM Applied Complexity Group listserv Zoom Fridays 9:30a-12p Mtn GMT-6 bit.ly/virtualfriam un/subscribe http://redfish.com/mailman/listinfo/friam_redfish.com FRIAM-COMIC http://friam-comic.blogspot.com/ archives: http://friam.471366.n2.nabble.com/
