EQUALITY
SUMMARY
The concept of human equality has a history and an application in the era of
the Society. Both are discussed. It is concluded that all earlier uses of
the concept were flawed or mistaken in that it is difference, rather than
equality, that is the essential unifying characteristic of humankind.
Many past and existing human societies have listed equality either as a
fundamental aspiration or as an achievement. However, no such claim is free
of detractors or critics, and the lack of demonstrable progress toward equality
among humankind is truly remarkable. Even as these founding books of the
Society are being written, the debate about whether it is possible for equality
between individuals to exist at all, let alone whether or not it has ever been
achieved in any form of human society, remains open. In the light of that
long lack of success, no discussion of the views of the Society of HumanKind on
the subject can be either simple or short.
On this issue the Society of HumanKind rests on the Axioms and Dogma. The
First Axiom says that chance accounts for the origin of our species. The
Treatise on Knowledge extends the application of that Axiom to include the
range and nature of the characteristics and attributes of humanity. Such
absolute uncertainty about both our origins as a species and our attributes as
individuals leaves the Society with no basis for any assumption that mere
common membership of the human species implies, or gives rise to, equality
between individuals. The Society must therefore find its ground or
justification for equality elsewhere.
The First Axiom gives rise to the Principle of Unity which states that, during
our mortal lives, we can have no independent standard or measure of the
relative worth of individuals. However, the Second and Third Axioms and the
Principle of Peace derived from them give us the prospect of being able to make
just such judgements, if only in retrospect, in the immortal era that will
follow the achievement of the Aim of the Society. Achievement of the
Objective of the Dogma will put humanity in possession of an ability to review
and assess the value and worth of every individual with the comprehensive
insight available as a consequence of our reunification in our immortal era.
The measure of relative worth used in that immortal era will be the
contribution made by each individual to our escape from the constraints of
death and, if the Aim of the Society is then realised, to the subsequent
salvation of the whole of humankind.
These necessarily complex ideas and their implications for the Society of
HumanKind are first set out in the Treatise on the Individual. There it is
concluded that an assessment of the worth or value of the contribution of any
individual to the achievement of the Objective of the Dogma and Aim of the
Society can properly extend to a comparison of the value of each of the
separate attributes they possess or display. The Treatise then reminds us
however, of the conclusion now reached in this Essay. That measure cannot be
used during our mortal epoch, nor can we base wider comparisons of the value of
the contribution of each individual to our history on it.
Drawing these threads together, the first conclusion to be reached on the
issue of equality as it is understood by the Society of HumanKind is that,
prior to the achievement of its Aim, the Society must accept that every
individual, and all and any of their abilities or characteristics, must be
regarded as of equal value and worth. In the judgement of the Society the
best to be found amongst all individuals, and in any of their attributes,
will always be equal in value to the worst in any other. There can be no
losers or winners, and no prize list, in that contest. The careful reader
should now realise that this important proposition is summarised in the
Principle 2.2.
The problem with this definition of equality is however, that it leaves the
Society in some difficulty if it tries to apply its concept of equality during
its mortal era, particularly if it seeks to promote or apply its views on that
issue in human communities other than those composed of its own members. The
earlier discussion of this Essay has shown that the equality arising from the
Axioms depends on the choice of the Objective of the Dogma as the purpose of
our lives. The definition and criterion of an equal society advocated by the
Society is therefore neither available nor applicable to individuals unless
they make that choice.
Where no such choice has been made, any action by the Society to foster or
encourage the adoption of its view of equality in any human community, other
than those composed of its own members, will amount to an attempt to impose
its belief in the Objective of the Dogma on others. And that course of
action is forbidden for the reasons set out in the Treatise on Tolerance,
confirmed by the Principle of Progress at 3.3 and further discussed in these
Essays under the title 'Essay on Evangelism'. It would seem therefore, that,
prior to the achievement of the Objective of the Dogma, the Society may be
required to tolerate the existence of the grossest of inequalities and accept
the most oppressive of hierarchical tyrannies.
That however, would be to ignore the proviso attached to the Principle of
Progress. That caveat on the Principle makes any tolerance shown by the
Society toward other communities dependent on their presenting no threat to the
maintenance of the Conditions of the Dogma. The overall effect is therefore,
that while the Principle of Progress requires the Society to tolerate any
present or proposed set of social relationships even if their individual or
combined effect is to generate injustice or inequality as between individuals,
such indulgence is strictly limited. Indifference by the Society will not
extend to human communities whose establishment or continuance presents any
substantial threat to the maintenance of either of the Conditions of the Dogma.
The important principle that emerges from this discussion is that, during its
mortal era, the Society will not take it upon itself to demand or create
equality in human society, nor will it attempt to design or construct systems
of social relationships intended have that effect. Rather the Society will
pursue equality by publicising, and drawing attention to, its Axioms and
Dogma, so that the commonalty and interdependence of all humanity set out in
the Principle of Unity is more widely recognised and accepted, and with it a
greater acknowledgement of the essential equality of all humankind. Such an
approach fully accords with the general prohibition on proselytising by the
Society described in the Essay on Evangelism.
That strategy is also compatible with the Axiomatic uncertainty of human
knowledge and skills, described in the Treatise on Knowledge. For the reasons
set out in that Treatise the Society will accept that it may not be possible to
eliminate inequalities and injustices from human society even if the Society of
HumanKind and its Principles and prescriptions is universally accepted. In
addition, such are the Axiomatic imperfections and inadequacies of our species
that the Society itself may be unable to create and maintain equal
relationships, even among and between its own members. Indeed, the Society
may, at times, judge that inequality is necessary to the maintenance of the
Conditions of the Dogma in the circumstances then obtaining. That
proposition is more fully explored elsewhere in these Essays, particularly in
the Essay on the Poor.
Drawing together now, the whole of the discussion of this Essay, the general
conclusion must be that acceptance of the Axioms and choice of the Dogma
destroys all previous definitions of equality without offering any guarantee
that it will be re-created in human society as a result of the establishment,
or even the universal acceptance of, the Society of HumanKind. The Society
itself may have to accept and tolerate inequality among its own membership
where that remains essential to the maintenance of the Conditions of the Dogma.
Is there therefore, any fragment of the earlier concepts of universal
equality to be salvaged from the wreckage wrought by this Essay? In
particular, is there any aspect of the attributes of our species that the
Society can regard as being inherently or unalterably the birthright of all
humanity, as was the status of equality in much earlier thinking?
The reader may be thankful to find that just such a possibility is discoverable
by bringing together three seemingly disparate parts of its founding
literature. First, the discussions and conclusions of this Essay. Second,
the discussion in the Treatise on Peace on the application of 3.1 of the
Principle of Progress to the problems of our infinite survival, where the
conclusion was reached that no single member of humanity can ensure their own
survival; the perpetuation of the human species; or the continuous growth of
human skills and knowledge. And third, the discussion in the Essay on Race,
where the range and diversity of human society is identified as its chief
strength, and our best hope of meeting and overcoming the unforeseeable hazards
that threaten our infinite survival.
Put together, these three sources lay the foundation of the view of the Society
of HumanKind on the question of equality. It is that our value and worth as
individuals is only realised when we comply with the Principle of Progress and
combine our individual and unique set of qualities, characteristics and
abilities with those of others in a stable social order. By so doing we
create the society on which the survival of the whole of humanity, and
therefore an achievement of both the objective of the Dogma and the Aim of the
Society, ultimately depend. In short, the Society will hold that both our
value as individuals and our equality arise solely and only from our being
unique examples of humanity. From that new perspective the Society of
HumanKind will recognise that the principal duty of human society is to
preserve and encourage difference between individuals, and will identify our
individuality as the characteristic that makes us valuable to each other, as
well as all that we are.
In this new light the record of failure in our search for equality in the past,
and the lack of success in all our attempts to create it in human society have
been due, at least in part, to a fundamental misunderstanding. Difference
creates, justifies and unites human society, not equality.
|