CreateDebate


Debate Info

24
45
Equality of Outcome Equality of Opportunity
Debate Score:69
Arguments:64
Total Votes:75
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Equality of Outcome (22)
 
 Equality of Opportunity (41)

Debate Creator

WinstonC(1225) pic



Equality of Outcome or Equality of Opportunity?

Given that equality of outcome and equality of opportunity are mutually exclusive, which value should society hold? Is it possible to hold different forms of equality for different things? (e.g. equality of opportunity for our financial system but equality of outcome for sex and race quotas).

Equality of Outcome

Side Score: 24
VS.

Equality of Opportunity

Side Score: 45

Given that equality of outcome and equality of opportunity are mutually exclusive

I would like to see you prove this piece of complete nonsense. If everyone has the same opportunities then everyone is going to experience the same (i.e. similar) outcomes.

Side: Equality of Outcome
Dermot(5736) Disputed
1 point

Your recent destruction in your ridiculous conspiracy theory debate left you with no option but to ban me as it's the cowards way out of actually addressing questions , you had no valid answers to several questions and your failure to comprehend language used simply ( just for you ) demonstrates what a truly dense individual you are .

I'm sure you're probably working on your faked moon landing theory now and maybe that's more suitable for you as basic physics and science are certainly not your forte ......you're dismissed

Side: Equality of Opportunity
Quantumhead(749) Disputed
1 point

Your recent destruction in your ridiculous conspiracy theory debate

LOL. Buddy, you read a quote from William Rodruguez which said a bomb went off in the sub-basement, and then aggressively demanded I tell you how he heard explosions on the 90th floor if he was in the basement. You lack the ability to read and/or comprehend basic English, so it is not surprising you do not understand the word "destruction" either.

but to ban me

You were banned for childish personal attacks and for rewriting other people's quotes. Obviously you are a troll and not a serious debater, so you can't really complain about being banned, can you? Especially when you challenged me to ban you in the very post you are now complaining about being banned for.

your faked moon landing theory

I do not believe the Moon landings were faked. You are an idiotic troll who uses every logical fallacy in the book when arguing (in this case guilt by association) and that is why you were banned. Dishonesty has no place in a debate.

Side: Equality of Outcome
1 point

I really do get what you're saying about Quantum and the fact he bans about as many people as FromWithin for illegitimate reasons but please take this elsewhere it's nowhere near on topic.

Side: Equality of Opportunity
1 point

Duplicate

............................................................

Side: Equality of Opportunity
WinstonC(1225) Disputed
1 point

People (and groups) differ in temperament, skills, motivation and on many other variables. As such equality of opportunity unfailingly leads to inequality of outcome, because of natural variability.

Side: Equality of Opportunity
Quantumhead(749) Disputed
1 point

People (and groups) differ in temperament, skills, motivation and on many other variables

And?

As such equality of opportunity unfailingly leads to inequality of outcome

You have just told me there is INEQUALITY of opportunity because, "People (and groups) differ in temperament, skills, motivation and on many other variables". Are you fucking stupid, lad? If there is inequality of opportunity then there will be inequality of outcome. All you have done is provide an argument why equality of opportunity is more difficult to achieve than one might assume.

Side: Equality of Outcome
Anonnanners(4) Disputed
1 point

No equal opportunity does not land everyone in a same or similar place in life. Equal opportunity suggests that everyone gets the same chance and most people end up successful. Those that are not successful made a bad decision but because of equal opportunity they get as many attempts at being successful as they want. People that are permanently poor in the U.S are poor because they're drug addicts or awful with money therefore stay poor. Equal outcome takes money from hard working people and gives it to drug addicts and people that will blow their money on stupid stuff.

Side: Equality of Opportunity
Quantumhead(749) Disputed
1 point

No equal opportunity does not land everyone in a same or similar place in life.

Nobody said it did, so your straw man argument is pointless and shit.

Equal opportunity suggests that everyone gets the same chance and most people end up successful.

Most people do not "end up successful" you completely fucking shameless liar. There are 43 million people in America who live below the national poverty line. Seventy six percent of America's national wealth is owned by ten percent of its population. All of the facts demonstrate what you are saying is false, and you are saying it to encourage idiots to play a stacked game which they can only lose and you can only win.

Those that are not successful made a bad decision but because of equal opportunity

You do not have equal opportunities in America, so you are being stupid and ridiculous. A black teenage gang banger from Baltimore does not have opportunities equal to a public school educated, overprivileged son of a banker from Beverly Hills. Stop being a delusional fucking moron. A man who sells burgers on the street does not have opportunities equal to the people who own MacDonalds, because the people who own MacDonalds can outspend and undercut him until he goes bankrupt.

Side: Equality of Outcome
1 point

This is a classical argument of Socialism Vs Capitalism.

Equality of outcome means that the products of the society are distributed in the society based on needs. There is open access to these products , and thus alienation will reduce.

The need of this society is to first bring the people not equal at the same footing. This cannot be done by just access to equal opportunity , since the people receiving these opportunities would not even possess the skills to exploit it like the required education.

Reservation In India is a good case in point. India is a mixed economy , though bent towards capitalism, application of reservation for bringing people on an equal footing so that they can access and make use of equal opportunity.

Equality of Opportunity says giving jobs to the most abled people, but isnt that creating even more inequality in terms of economic and social benefits. I do not argue the point that able people should get jobs. But i argue the point that the upbringing that such people receive , that their children will receive will be a lot more different than a person who does not earn as much and cannot invest a lot in the education of his children thereby he inequality barrier increases.

Just saying that there will be no discrimination based on gender, religion, caste and making that particular exam available to all is not enough. For the rich keep getting richer and better educated and the poor folk remain poor. A maid's daughter becomes a maid but a businessman's daughter can become an engineer, an artist, a musician, the possibilities are limitless.

Thus, my point stands that equality of outcome precedes equality of opportunity.

Side: Equality of Outcome
WinstonC(1225) Disputed
1 point

"Equality of outcome means that the products of the society are distributed in the society based on needs."

In terms of equality of outcome as related to income, this is indeed true. My question to you then, is why would anyone bother to work if they were simply given what they needed?

"The need of this society is to first bring the people not equal at the same footing. This cannot be done by just access to equal opportunity , since the people receiving these opportunities would not even possess the skills to exploit it like the required education."

While people hold different opinions of what constitutes equality of opportunity, I and many others feel that access to a basic education is a requirement of equal opportunity.

"But i argue the point that the upbringing that such people receive , that their children will receive will be a lot more different than a person who does not earn as much and cannot invest a lot in the education of his children thereby he inequality barrier increases."

I can agree that certain educations are better than others. In western democracies, however, everyone has access to a reasonably good standard of education.

"For the rich keep getting richer and better educated and the poor folk remain poor. A maid's daughter becomes a maid but a businessman's daughter can become an engineer, an artist, a musician, the possibilities are limitless."

I assume this is describing how things are in India. It's horrible things are like that but if there was greater equality of opportunity, as there is here in England, that wouldn't be the case. Due to universal access to a good basic education and higher education, we don't have that problem here.

"Thus, my point stands that equality of outcome precedes equality of opportunity."

Under equality of outcome in the aspect of income there isn't equality of opportunity. One cannot earn more than anyone else by utilizing their merits under such a system. Also, as with communist Russia such systems inevitably collapse. To quote an old soviet joke about communism: "So long as the bosses pretend to pay us, we will pretend to work".

Side: Equality of Opportunity
Tejal1793(2) Clarified
1 point

"In terms of equality of outcome as related to income, this is indeed true. My question to you then, is why would anyone bother to work if they were simply given what they needed?"

I understand your point, this is where a concept of economics comes in handy. An equality of outcome supported by Punishments as in incentive for making people work is just an alternative. Though my point till now has been of equality of opportunity being strengthened by equality of income applied in measurable quantities to the suppressed classes.

The concerns I have raised are not fulfilled just by the existence of equality of opportunity.

Just an existence of opportunity does not mean that it is reaching out to everybody.

But a case in point would be the National Health Services or the G.I Bill for that matter.

The G.I Bill saw many students in England joining colleges, people who otherwise would not have were opening the doors of education. In a way this opportunity was made available to them by waiving away the need for money, or rather by bringing them on an equal footing. Rather than “ Careers opening to talents” , “Talents were being created for Careers”.

"While people hold different opinions of what constitutes equality of opportunity, I and many others feel that access to a basic education is a requirement of equal opportunity."

Granted, but the feasibility in less developed countries is big lacuna in this argument.

"I can agree that certain educations are better than others.In western democracies, however, everyone has access to a reasonably good standard of education.I assume this is describing how things are in India. It's horrible things are like that but if there was greater equality of opportunity, as there is here in England, that wouldn't be the case. Due to universal access to a good basic education and higher education, we don't have that problem here.

I appreciate your concern for India,yet there is a lot more to be said.

The equality of opportunity that the western democracies peg to a capitalistic society was itself funded by the colonies and the slave trade, essentially the equality of opportunity was borne out of inequality of income between England and its colonies. India contributed a 100 million pounds of money as tax to the British govt. for funding its wars and industries.

Side: Equality of Outcome
1 point

Equal opportunity, of course. Yet when one group consistently gets a better outcome it is valid to raise the question in open discussion of whether they truly started from a standpoint of equal opportunity or not.

Side: Equality of Opportunity

I would pick equality of opportunity in this case, what you do with the given opportunity is upto you, I also do believe equality of outcome is also essential in some cases, such as those in which people die due to their inability to make the most out of opportunities..

Side: Equality of Opportunity
1 point

When your giving equality of outcome there will be people on that side of the party who will take it as advantage and abuse it to the point where it becomes meaningless.So equality of Opportunity is better.

Side: Equality of Opportunity
1 point

In all aspects of life there has to be 'winners and losers' and those who will form the hierarchy in the society or environment in which they're competing.

Provided that everyone is extended genuine equality of opportunity at every stage of ''the competition' then it must be assumed that those who surpass their competitors do so as a result of their superior ability.

To me the term 'equality of outcome' is meaningless and contrary to nature's law of 'survival of the fittest'.

Side: Equality of Opportunity
1 point

I think both could be important in certain instances but equality of opportunity, for me, far supersedes outcome between the two. I do believe Equality of outcome can stifle creation and individual expression as well as deny the opportunity for those who are exceptional in something to further better themselves by giving their "place" to others under Outcome. If that makes sense, sorry I'm needing more coffee, I hope that made sense.

Side: Equality of Opportunity

This is a very good motion...............b..........…………………………………

Side: Equality of Opportunity
1 point

I'd say most people would agree that equality of opportunity is fair.

Imagine if there was a class that had to take a test, and if they passed they would be given a reward. Each student has different levels of intelligence, ability to absorb information, etc.

However, the material they are given differed from person to person. Some students are given several textbooks, and some have private tutors. Others have very little information, and others have to teach themselves.

It would be near impossible to have everyone get the same score, and if you did it would be through a lot of unfair means. It wouldn't seem right to have people with varying degrees of worth ethic end up with the same result.

If the students were given access to the same resources, they may not get the same scores but at least now we know it was not due to factors out of their control. Even the student that was bad at memorizing could pass, so now the only problem is figuring out how to get the rest of them to pass as well.

Life, of course, is not so simple. Even so, we make sure that people earn their place in society. In order to do that in real life we need to weed out the corruption so that people can truly have equal opportunity.

Side: Equality of Opportunity