Equality: What Is It and How Is It Different from Equity?

Author: Daniel Weltman
Category: Social and Political Philosophy, Ethics
Word Count: 997

Many say that we should make society more equal.^[1] But what should we equalize?

Philosophers have many ideas about what we should make equal. This essay explains two of the most important ones: equality of outcome and equality of opportunity.

1. Equity and Equality

In discussions about equality, some say that we should reject equality and focus on equity. For example, the picture above depicts equality as giving three people an equal number of boxes, so that a short person can’t see over a fence. It depicts equity as giving the short person two boxes and the tall person zero boxes, leaving both equally able to see over the fence.^[2]

According to the picture, equality is silly. Equity is clearly better! Obviously the tall person does not need any boxes to stand on, and the short person needs two boxes.

Philosophers have a different understanding of equality and equity. Philosophers say that both refer to the same kind of idea: making people equal along some kind of dimension.

For example, the picture with the boxes says that everyone should be equally able to see over the fence, and this kind of equality is better than giving each person an equal number of boxes. Both sides of the picture depict a type of equality. The question is: equality of what?

2. Equality of Outcome

One kind of equality that philosophers talk about is called equality of outcome.^[3] Equality of outcome means that people are made equal to each other in terms of what the end result is.

In the fence example, the end result is being able to see over the fence or not. To make everyone equal with respect to this end result, the short person needs two boxes and the tall person needs no boxes.

In real life we are concerned not with boxes and fences, but with things like health care, education, and income.

If we want to aim for equality of outcome in health care, we will give more health care to sick people than healthy people. To aim for equal outcomes for everyone—by aiming to make each person as healthy as they can be—sick people need more health care than healthy people.

If we want to ensure equality of education, we will try to make sure everyone ends up equally educated. We would try not to have a society where men receive more education than women, or rich people have more education than poor people, or people belonging to one race or religion have more education than people of other races or religions.

One objection to equality of outcome is that sometimes we think the outcomes of our actions should be unequal. If you and I each get a loaf of bread, and then I throw mine in the trash, this leads to unequal outcomes in how much bread we get to eat. To make the outcomes equal, we would have to devote more resources to me than to you by making more bread for me. That seems like the wrong thing to do: if I threw my bread away, I shouldn’t get to eat as much bread as you: I should have to get by without bread.

For reasons like this, many philosophers think equality of outcome is not the kind of equality we should implement.

3. Equality of Opportunity

Another kind of equality that some philosophers prefer is equality of opportunity. Equality of opportunity means that each person has equal chances at achieving that good outcome if they pursue that outcome.^[4]

For example, equality of opportunity in terms of health care means that each person has an equal chance at being healthy if they work towards it. If someone decides to smoke, while another person does not smoke, they might end up with different levels of health. Equality of opportunity would imply it is okay that they end up differently healthy. They both had the same opportunity to be healthy: one person pursued health by avoiding smoking, and the other did not.

Imagine instead that neither person smokes. One person might still need more health care than the other in order for their opportunities to be equal. For example, one person might get unlucky and develop a disease that is not their fault. In order for both people to have the opportunity to be healthy, the unlucky person needs more health care.

In both cases, whether the two people end up equally healthy depends on their choices. If they both choose to be healthy, both will be equally healthy, even if this requires unequal resources, like giving more health care to the unlucky person. If one chooses to be unhealthy, then they will be less healthy, and we won’t give them extra resources to try to make them as healthy as the person who chose to be healthy.

Equality of opportunity can also be applied to education. Imagine a society where a child born to rich parents and a child born to poor parents have an equal chance of securing an education as long as they pursue it. To achieve this, the society might tax rich people and use this money to provide education to poor people. This society has achieved equality of opportunity for education for people born in differently wealthy families.

Ensuring equality of opportunity is not the same as ensuring equality of outcome. If people choose to ignore the opportunities they are given, their lives will turn out worse. Some will have better lives than others. If I throw my bread away, my life will be worse than yours. So, equality of outcome and equality of opportunity are different.

4. Conclusion

Equality of outcome and equality of opportunity are not the only kinds of equality philosophers discuss. There are other conceptions of equality too.^[5] We can also ask what should be equalized: health? Education? Wealth? Happiness? And should we even be seeking equality anyway? These questions and others are all part of the extensive philosophical discussion of equality.

Notes

^[1] For discussion of other things we might pursue, see Distributive Justice: How Should Resources be Allocated? by Dick Timmer and Tim Meijers, John Rawls’ ‘A Theory of Justice’ by Ben Davies, On Karl Marx’s Slogan “From Each According to their Ability, To Each According to their Need” by Sam Badger, and Robert Nozick’s “Wilt Chamberlain” Argument for Libertarianism by Daniel Weltman.

^[2] For a history of this picture see (Froehle 2016). For discussion of the picture in the context of philosophy, with an emphasis on how philosophers reject the difference between equality and equity, see (Heath 2025).

^[3]  For a defense of equality of outcome see Phillips (2004).

^[4]  For a defense of equality of opportunity see Arneson (1989).

^[5] Two examples are relational equality (making sure people have enough resources to relate to each other as equals) and equality of resources (giving people equal shares of the world’s resources). For defenses of these views see (respectively) Anderson (1999) and Dworkin (1981a; 1981b).

References

Anderson, E. (1999). “What Is the Point of Equality?” Ethics 109(2): 287-337.

Arneson, R. (1989). “Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare.” Philosophical Studies 56(1): 77-93.

Dworkin, R. (1981a). “What is Equality? Part 1: Equality of Welfare.” Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10(3): 185-246.

Dworkin, R. (1981b). “What is Equality? Part 2: Equality of Resources”. Philosophy and Public Affairs, 10(4): 283-345.

Froehle, C. (2016). “The Evolution of an Accidental Meme.” Medium.

Heath, J. (2025). “Why philosophers hate that ‘equity’ meme.” Substack.

Phillips, A. (2004). “Defending Equality of Outcome.” Journal of Political Philosophy 12(1): 1-19.

Related Essays

Distributive Justice: How Should Resources be Allocated? by Dick Timmer and Tim Meijers

John Rawls’ ‘A Theory of Justice’ by Ben Davies

On Karl Marx’s Slogan “From Each According to their Ability, To Each According to their Need” by Sam Badger

Robert Nozick’s “Wilt Chamberlain” Argument for Libertarianism by Daniel Weltman

Feminism Part 1: The Sameness Approach by Annaleigh Curtis

Translation

Turkish

PDF Download

Download this essay in PDF. 

About the Author

Daniel Weltman is an associate professor of philosophy at Ashoka University, India. He works primarily on topics in social and political philosophy and in ethics. DanielWeltman.com

Follow 1000-Word Philosophy on Facebook, Bluesky, Instagram, Twitter / X, Threads, TikTok, and LinkedIn, and subscribe to receive email notifications of new essays at 1000WordPhilosophy.com.