I have decided to make known my definitions of equality for those with whom I have had heated conversations on this controversial topic once and for all. However, I must stress that the following definitional propositions are two be viewed as complementary concepts rather than that which allows definitive shifts for the sake of fitting or justifying one's agenda.
I propose two theories: The equation theory and the compensation theory. Both theories are quite self-explanatory based on its terms. Equation theory refers to human equality by virtue of having equal opportunities to the benefits and consequences of life; this is based on the principle of justice and fairness. Compensation theory, on the other hand, refers to how everyone is equal by virtue of being able to compensate others' weaknesses with individual strengths that others may not possess. That is, our being as equally strong and weak as others allows the complementing of each other's existence by being strong for others in areas they are weak at and vice versa. In other words, human existence is based on interdependence; hence, it is equal.
Suffice to say, as far as I'm concerned, that we are all not without our own biases regardless of what they are on whichever issue it is. Hence, it is not about how right or wrong we are. It's not about exerting our rights to freedom and our freedom to rights; had this happened our world would be in greater chaos than it already is. However, it is also not about how much sacrifice we can make. Two reasons. Firstly, subjective objectivism is merely a contradiction while objective subjectivism is barely achievable; or, should I say, impossible in the height of postmodernism's deconstruction. Secondly, love is the essence of life. Living and loving is about being, not doing. If you were to place every bipolar or tripolar construct across each other, a spherical singularity is formed; that sphere is therefore the beauty of life, and we are its center. Life is not based solely on fairness or perfection or rightness or goodness or advancement or any humanly constructs, for that matter; for if it was, God would have destroyed us all if He insisted on His constructions which are far beyond our capabilities of reaching.
I propose two theories: The equation theory and the compensation theory. Both theories are quite self-explanatory based on its terms. Equation theory refers to human equality by virtue of having equal opportunities to the benefits and consequences of life; this is based on the principle of justice and fairness. Compensation theory, on the other hand, refers to how everyone is equal by virtue of being able to compensate others' weaknesses with individual strengths that others may not possess. That is, our being as equally strong and weak as others allows the complementing of each other's existence by being strong for others in areas they are weak at and vice versa. In other words, human existence is based on interdependence; hence, it is equal.
Suffice to say, as far as I'm concerned, that we are all not without our own biases regardless of what they are on whichever issue it is. Hence, it is not about how right or wrong we are. It's not about exerting our rights to freedom and our freedom to rights; had this happened our world would be in greater chaos than it already is. However, it is also not about how much sacrifice we can make. Two reasons. Firstly, subjective objectivism is merely a contradiction while objective subjectivism is barely achievable; or, should I say, impossible in the height of postmodernism's deconstruction. Secondly, love is the essence of life. Living and loving is about being, not doing. If you were to place every bipolar or tripolar construct across each other, a spherical singularity is formed; that sphere is therefore the beauty of life, and we are its center. Life is not based solely on fairness or perfection or rightness or goodness or advancement or any humanly constructs, for that matter; for if it was, God would have destroyed us all if He insisted on His constructions which are far beyond our capabilities of reaching.
Bear this in mind, reader, despite how arrogant or self-righteous you may think of me in making this concluding statement: If after taking a step back to reflect on what you feel about the misery and inequality of this world while setting aside your own problems and feelings you feel compassionate for those whose needs and sufferings are more dire than yours, then please start realizing that the entirety of your problems is measured based on the diameter of the smallest coin you can find and how close your vision is to that coin. In other words, think beyond yourself and start seeing how you can contribute in easing the suffering of those around you rather than exerting your rights to what you deserve to have, and while doing so pretending that others do not deserve as much as you do. Ask yourself, "How far is the coin from my eye? What am I blinding myself from?" You are not the center of the universe; everyone is equally as miserable or happy as you are in their own right. In as much as I am telling you this I am to myself as well - just to prove my point.
