Tout le mal vient de l'inégalité…

Abstract

AbstractIn memory of Professor Louise Marcil, from the University of Montreal, who died prematurely in April 1995, this special issue ofDialogueis dedicated to Equality. In addition to presenting the various contributions, the Introduction traces the main strands of Louise Marcil's work on equality. The impressive corpus of her writings on the subject is characterized throughout by sensitivity to the historical and conceptual complexity of egalitarian theories and policies and by a depth of scholarship, the richness of which defies classification into traditional philosophical schools. Moreover, far from being merely abstract scholarship, this work was clearly intended to strengthen actual egalitarian social projects, to which Louise Marcil was passionately committed. The contributions to this special issue ofDialoguehave been selected in large part to reflect the diversity and scholarly standards of Louise Marcil's approach to equality as well as its engaged spirit.After a short personal testimony by Jean-Claude Guidon, from the University of Montreal, Charles Coutel presents Condorcet as an original thinker of democratic equality. Paule-Monique Vernes argues in favour of seeing Hegel as the first philosopher who, before Marx, engaged in an in-depth analysis of the contradictions of the Civil Society and denounced the inequalities stemming from liberalism. Roberto Miguelez discusses equality among participants as a formal condition for action coordination based on dialogue, which is crucial to the democratic model.Brenda Baker addresses a current trend by governments to shift responsibility for social services to the family. Among the deficiencies in grounds for such policies, she argues, are that they reinforce gendered inequalities. In his article, Kai Nielsen stengthens pro-egalitarian dimensions of John Rawls's theories by articulating a more sophisticated criterion of “reasonableness” than is found in Rawls's work. Analogously, Maurice Rickard defends Ronald Dworkin's link between liberty and equality, but argues that Dworkin's justification for this is insufficient, requiring, instead, a defence in terms of personal autonomy.