Equality of What: Welfare, Resources, or Capabilities?

Many of us have egalitarian concerns. To some extent, that is, at some cost, we prefer a world in which goods powers, liberties, opportunities, wealth, health are more equally distributed to one in which they are not. At least to some extent, we are willing to forego delivering a greater benefit to someone who is already better off in order to deliver a lesser benefit to someone who is worse off. Whether we are strictly concerned with equality or merely with giving priority to the claims of those who are worse off, we face the question, What is the ultimate target of our egalitarian concerns? Three apparently distinct targets have been proposed as answers to this question. First, when we urge specific egalitarian reforms, we are really trying to make people equally happy or satisfied, or at least to guarantee them equal opportunity for such welfare. This is the claim made by Richard Arneson and (with qualifications) by G. A. Cohen.3 Rejecting welfare-based targets, others say the target of our egalitarian concerns is assuring people greater equality in the resources needed to pursue their ends. Ronald Dworkin argues in this vein,4 and John Rawls' Difference