Philosophical Paper 1

.docx

School

Boston College *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

PL070

Subject

Arts Humanities

Date

Apr 3, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

Uploaded by madisongwalker on coursehero.com

Philosophical Paper 1 Madi Walker Critically investigate Friedman's argument that capitalism and equality of opportunity are consistent. Introduction In this philosophical paper, I am addressing Friedman’s argument that capitalism and equality of opportunity are consistent. Friedman’s argument on capitalism is that equality of opportunity is achieved through personal freedom and limited government intervention. This claim suggests that equal opportunities are inevitable in a capitalist society because individuals have the freedom to succeed through personal interests and work ethics. Friedman's argument connects equality of opportunity as the outcome of capitalism, but he fails to address systemic inequalities that are not solved through personal freedom and need further solutions to guarantee equality opportunity for individuals who began life lacking opportunities. Exposition Friedman argues that capitalism creates an environment where individuals in the capitalist society have personal freedom and equality of opportunity is rooted in capitalism because of the individual freedom to pursue their interests. His argument is based on the idea that individuals have equal opportunity in a free market due to the opportunities for economic growth in a free market and not from inherited benefits. He argues that there is a difference between equality of opportunity and equality of outcome (Hinton, 2024). In ideal capitalism, there are wealth and economic inequalities; however, Friedman argues that is because of personal interests and not because of unequal opportunities. Unequal opportunities do not stem from capitalism, but capitalism is consistent with equal opportunities because of personal freedom and limited government interference. Friedman believes that government interference in the economy reduces individual freedom and economic growth and needs to be dispersed (Vorster, 2010). He explains that income inequalities are the result of equalizing differences and not a product of unequal opportunities. Equalizing differences are an individual’s preference for leisure and work, the individual’s talent, and accounts for luck in various elements such as a lottery (Hinton, 2024). Between talent, personal interests, and luck, Friedman believes that wealth inequalities are acceptable and economic growth with increased opportunities. Friedman’s argument, while addressing the opportunities in a capitalist society, fails to address systemic inequalities that are responsible for the origin of unequal opportunities due to race and gender (Vorster, 2010). Systemic discrimination against certain groups of people decreases opportunities because of access to resources and education. This eliminates equal opportunity from these groups because they do not have equal opportunity, in the beginning, to even participate in the free market. Friedman doesn’t acknowledge that the lack of available opportunities and resources in capitalism drives the inequality of opportunity in the market. Friedman argues through a classical liberal perspective that limited government interference and

individual freedom are necessary for equality of opportunity. Increasing government presence in the economy, he believes will limit the individuals’ freedoms and require them to participate in a system that is against their personal interests. In order to protect personal freedoms, Friedman argues that a limited government presence is necessary and personal freedom in a free market drives the equality of opportunity. This is because if everyone has the freedom to pursue what they want economically, this is the equality of opportunity and even though wealth inequalities are a result, it is not because of unequal opportunities, but because of choices made through an individual’s personal freedom. Objections and Replies An objection to Friedman’s argument is that capitalism leads to an unequal distribution of resources, wealth, and opportunities. In a capitalist society, wealth begins to concentrate in certain organizations and individuals creating an inevitable wealth inequality. The objection to Friedman is that this wealth inequality does lead to an inequality of opportunities because individuals are not equally competing due to poverty and social exclusion (Vorster, 2010). A capitalist society will create wealth inequalities for the future generation controlling the level of opportunities available to the following generations. Regardless of the economic opportunities in the capitalist society, the disparity between access to resources and education directly affects the equality of opportunities. Another criticism of Friedman's argument is that government intervention is necessary to provide equal opportunities to address systemic inequality. In situations where people come from disadvantaged backgrounds, without government intervention, these individuals do not have the resources to maximize their opportunities, creating inequalities of opportunity. Friedman responds to this criticism by arguing that individuals have equal opportunity regardless of their economic background because in a capitalist society, individuals have equal opportunity to succeed, and you cannot redistribute someone’s talents without violating their bodily integrity (Hinton, 2024). He argues that capitalism provides opportunities for anyone to succeed, and it is their decision to use their talents and skills to choose their area of work. They have the personal freedom to take advantage of the opportunities provided in a capitalist society and therefore they have equal opportunities. Friedman also replies to objections to limited government intervention by arguing that government intervention in capitalism limits personal freedom to advance in the free market and therefore affects the opportunities. Conclusion In conclusion, I believe that Friedman’s argument has important elements when understanding the equality of opportunity and brings insight into the work ethic and personal freedom involved in distribution practices. However, even though some may not maximize their opportunities, others are not given equal opportunities from the start, and this cannot be solved in a capitalist

Your preview ends here

Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version

Access to all documents
Unlimited textbook solutions
24/7 expert homework help