El igualitarismo a la luz del marco teórico de Derek Parfit: una discusión / Egalitarianism and the Parfitian Equality-Priority Framework

Una herramienta metodológica central en la teoría política es el análisis conceptual, el cual consiste en definir términos políticos y evaluar críticamente definiciones alternativas. La definición conceptual sobre el significado de la igualdad propuesta por Derek Parfit hace más de veinte años ha ejercido una influencia significativa sobre el curso de las discusiones sobre el igualitarismo hasta nuestros días. El debate de igualdad-prioridad, y el surgimiento otras visiones sobre los criterios de prioridad, ha caracterizado las discusiones teóricas sobre el igualitarismo desde entonces. Sostengo que esta influencia se debió a un paso engañoso en el análisis conceptual en el que se definió una versión demasiado débil de la "igualdad", la cual se convirtió en la versión más aceptada para gran parte del debate generado desde entonces. Aunque la discusión sobre la igualdad-prioridad, tal como se la describe normalmente, parece el marco dominante para debatir la naturaleza y el valor de la igualdad, sostengo que tal argumento resulta inconducente, perdiendo así relevancia normativa.

A central methodological tool in political theory is conceptual analysis which involves defining political terms and critically assessing alternative definitions. A conceptual definition on the meaning of equality proposed by Derek Parfit over twenty years ago has exerted a significant influence over the trajectory of egalitarian discussions to this day. The equality-priority debate, and the emergence of the distinct view of prioritarianism, has characterised theoretical discussions on egalitarianism since. I contend that this influence was due to a misleading step in the conceptual analysis where an overly weak version of 'equality' was defined and became the most accepted version for much of the debate since. Although the equality-priority debate as normally portrayed seems the dominant framework to discuss the nature and value of equality, I argue that it is so misguided, it loses normative relevance.

Liberalismo, justiça social e responsabilidade individual / Liberalism, social justice, and individual responsibility / Libéralisme, justice sociale et responsabilité individuelle

The study examines the contemporary normative debate on social justice from the perspective of the normative political theory of “egalitarian liberalism”. Contrary to an anti-egalitarian liberal political theory, or “libertarianism”, the argument is that a notion of “effective freedom”, and not negative freedom, is central to egalitarian liberalism. Additionally, in contrast to a theoretical current of egalitarianism known as “luck egalitarianism”, the article further argues that although egalitarian liberalism assigns special importance to individual responsibility, it does so (unlike “luck egalitarianism”) without implying any concession to the conservative critique of egalitarianism and the state’s redistributive action.

Dans cet article, on examine le débat normatif contemporain sur la justice sociale dans l’optique de la théorie politique normative du “libéralisme égalitaire”. En opposition avec une théorie politique libérale anti-égalitaire, le libertarianisme, on propose que la notion de “liberté effective” et non pas de liberté négative, est centrale pour le libéralisme égalitaire. Et, en opposition avec un versant théorique de l’égalitarisme nommé luck egalitarianism, on soutient que, bien que le libéralisme égalitaire donne une importance particulière à la responsabilité individuelle, il le fait de façon que, à l’inverse de ce qui se passe avec l’”égalitarisme de la fortune”, cela n’implique aucun renoncement à la critique conservatrice à propos de l’égalitarisme et de l’action redistributive de l’État.

Considering the roles of Culture and Social Status: The Protestant Work Ethic and Egalitarianism / Considerando el papel de la Cultura y el Estatus Social: Ética Protestante y Egalitarismo

The Protestant work ethic (PWE) is prevalent in many cultures. Abundant work in social psychology, primarily in the U.S., suggests that people use PWE to justify their own prejudice and society's differential treatment of less successful or disadvantaged persons. Recent theorizing suggests that PWE's intergroup meaning can be influenced by people's age, social status, and culture such that PWE not only has an intolerant or "justifier"-of-inequality meaning (disadvantaged persons deserve their disadvantage), but also a tolerant or equalizer meaning (effort is a social equalizer). The main goal of the present investigation was to show that PWE does not necessarily develop a justifier meaning within or across cultures. Past work shows that among the majority group, European Americans, PWE is positively related to egalitarianism among children but less so with increasing age, presumably because the justifier meaning becomes increasingly salient and group relevant (justifies their groups' high status). In Study 1, we show that among the majority group in Colombia, Mestizos, PWE is positively related to egalitarianism (and negatively related to social dominance orientation) across age groups, presumably because the justifier meaning is less salient and relevant in a culture where people tend to blame others less for their disadvantage. In Study 2, we show that among African Americans, who have historically been a disadvantaged and stigmatized group, PWE is positively related to egalitarianism across age groups, presumably because the justifier meaning is less relevant and salient to their group. The implications of these findings are discussed.

La Ética Protestante del Trabajo (PWE) es común en muchas culturas. Investigaciones en psicología social, principalmente en EUA, sugieren que la gente usa la PWE para justificar sus prejuicios y el trato diferencial hacia las personas en desventaja. Teorías recientes sugieren que la edad, el estatus social y la cultura influyen sobre las implicaciones de la PWE, de tal manera que ésta no solo justifica la inequidad (las personas merecen su desventaja), sino también la igualdad (por medio del esfuerzo). Esta investigación evaluó la emergencia de las implicaciones intolerantes de la PWE en dos culturas. Investigaciones pasadas muestran que entre el grupo mayoritario en EUA, Euro Americanos, la PWE se relaciona positivamente con el igualitarismo en niños, pero menos a medida que aumenta la edad, presumiblemente porque las implicaciones justificadoras de la PWE adquieren mayor saliencia y relevancia (justificando el estatus alto de algunos grupos). El primer estudio, sugiere que entre el grupo mayoritario en Colombia, Mestizos, la PWE se relaciona positivamente con el igualitarismo (y negativamente con la Orientación a la Dominancia Social) en todos los grupos de edad, presumiblemente porque las implicaciones justificadoras tienen menos saliencia y son menos relevantes en una cultura donde las personas tienden menos a culpar a los otros por su desventaja. El segundo estudio sugiere que entre Afroamericanos, un grupo históricamente estigmatizado y en desventaja, la PWE se relaciona positivamente con el igualitarismo, posiblemente porque las implicaciones justificadoras tienen menor relevancia y saliencia para el grupo. Las implicaciones de estos hallazgos son discutidas.

Gender Role Identity and Egalitarianism Consciousness among Adolescents

PURPOSE: This study intends to investigate gender role identity and egalitarianism consciousness among adolescents and to determine the relationship between the two factors. METHOD: Data were collected from 376 middle and high school students in U City. Tools used were the Korean Sexual Role Identity (Kim, J. H., 2005) and the Gender Egalitarianism Consciousness among Adolescents (Kim, 2002). Data were analyzed using SPSS 12.0 for t-test, one-way ANOVA and Pearson correlation coefficient. RESULTS: There was no significant difference between boys and girls in gender role identity. Boys' gender role identity was different according to school grade (t=-3.19, p=.00), frequency of mother's hugging (t=-2.28, p=.02) and girls' according to religion (t=-2.24, p=.03), mother's job (F=3.59, p=.02), father's education level (F=3.20, p= .04), mother's education level (F=3.24, p=.04), family harmony (F=7.28, p=.00), and frequency of mother's hugging (t=-2.41, p=.02). There was significant difference in egalitarianism consciousness according to gender (t=-12.70, p=.00). Boys' egalitarianism consciousness was different according to school type (t=.02, p=.00) and father's education level (F=4.97, p=.02), and girls' according to school grade (t=-4.21, p=.00), school type (t=-3.12, p=.00), father's level of education (F=3.78, p=.02), decision maker of important domestic matter (F=4.95, p=.00) and frequency of mother's hugging (t=2.53, p=.01). In Girls, sexual role identity and gender egalitarianism consciousness were significantly correlated with each other (r=.01, p=.04). CONCLUSION: Through the study, it was found that boys' concern for sexual equality of was remarkably lower than girls. Therefore, it is necessary to offer curriculums for boys and to start social education for parents.

A Study on Korean Gender Egalitarianism among High School Students / 아동간호학회지

This study was conducted to measure the degree of Korean Gender Egalitarianism among the students from six different high schools(132 girls, 127 boys) in Sunchon si, Chunnam province from Dec. 7th to Dec. 15th in 1999. The survey on gender egalitarianism was done in relation to the public understanding of the subject matter, parents' hug times, and parent's communication skills. Korean gender egalitarianism scale was standardized by Korea Woman Developmental Institutes in 1999. The data was analyzed by SAS program. Results were as follows: 1) Generally, girls are more conscious of gender egalitariannism than boys(t=-13.79, p < .001). Above all, the younger the students are, the more they feel equal(F=8.01, p < .01). In sibling cases, two sisters have the highest level of gender egalitarianism while two brothers have the lowest level of gender egalitarianism(F=9.20, p < .001). Students who come from religious families are more inclined to demonstrate gender equality(t= 2.42, p < .05). However, there is no diffrence in relation to the parents' ages or academic background or harmony within the family. 2)There is no difference that girls and boys generally communicate with their parents. In ages, 17 years old students communicate more than 18, 19 with parents(father F=3.97 p < .05?mother F=5.31, p < .01). That is, the younger students can communicate with their mothers more often than the older ones. In sibling cases, two sisters have more openly communication to parents while two brothers have(F=2.84, p < .05). Students communicate with their parents regardless of parents' academic background. But those from the family in harmony have more open chance to communicate than those who are not in hamony(father F=21.66, p < .001?mother F=13.37, p < .001). They can comm -unicate with their parents better when their fathers hug them than when they didn't get hugs(father t=-4.76, p < .001? mother t=-2.34, p < .05). They can also communicate with their patents better when their mothers hug them once or more than when they didn't get hugs(father t=-3.78, p < .001?mother t=-5.64, p < .001). 3) There is no diffrence whether the father hugs or not, but the mother's hug is very important because students whose mothers hug them once or more have significantly more gender egalitarianism than those students whose mothers didn't do(t=-3.98, p < .001). Based upon these results, it is recommended that we reconsider the role of gender in the socialization of high school students and also include gender egalitarianism in sex education. In this context, further study should be done for the improvement of students' communication within the framework of egalitarianism based upon parents' hugs(semi-language). Continued study is especially important in regards to the mother's hug and its enhancement of the students' gender egalitarianism.

A Study on Korean Gender Egalitarianism among High School Students / 아동간호학회지

This study was conducted to measure the degree of Korean Gender Egalitarianism among the students from six different high schools(132 girls, 127 boys) in Sunchon si, Chunnam province from Dec. 7th to Dec. 15th in 1999. The survey on gender egalitarianism was done in relation to the public understanding of the subject matter, parents' hug times, and parent's communication skills. Korean gender egalitarianism scale was standardized by Korea Woman Developmental Institutes in 1999. The data was analyzed by SAS program. Results were as follows: 1) Generally, girls are more conscious of gender egalitariannism than boys(t=-13.79, p < .001). Above all, the younger the students are, the more they feel equal(F=8.01, p < .01). In sibling cases, two sisters have the highest level of gender egalitarianism while two brothers have the lowest level of gender egalitarianism(F=9.20, p < .001). Students who come from religious families are more inclined to demonstrate gender equality(t= 2.42, p < .05). However, there is no diffrence in relation to the parents' ages or academic background or harmony within the family. 2)There is no difference that girls and boys generally communicate with their parents. In ages, 17 years old students communicate more than 18, 19 with parents(father F=3.97 p < .05?mother F=5.31, p < .01). That is, the younger students can communicate with their mothers more often than the older ones. In sibling cases, two sisters have more openly communication to parents while two brothers have(F=2.84, p < .05). Students communicate with their parents regardless of parents' academic background. But those from the family in harmony have more open chance to communicate than those who are not in hamony(father F=21.66, p < .001?mother F=13.37, p < .001). They can comm -unicate with their parents better when their fathers hug them than when they didn't get hugs(father t=-4.76, p < .001? mother t=-2.34, p < .05). They can also communicate with their patents better when their mothers hug them once or more than when they didn't get hugs(father t=-3.78, p < .001?mother t=-5.64, p < .001). 3) There is no diffrence whether the father hugs or not, but the mother's hug is very important because students whose mothers hug them once or more have significantly more gender egalitarianism than those students whose mothers didn't do(t=-3.98, p < .001). Based upon these results, it is recommended that we reconsider the role of gender in the socialization of high school students and also include gender egalitarianism in sex education. In this context, further study should be done for the improvement of students' communication within the framework of egalitarianism based upon parents' hugs(semi-language). Continued study is especially important in regards to the mother's hug and its enhancement of the students' gender egalitarianism.