Nexilist Notebook

Some time ago I was in an online discussion group about the application of chaos theory to psychology. I made the acquaintance of Sandi Greer, a family therapist in St. Louis. We corresponded about many subjects and she shared her ideas about fairness. She had coauthored papers about the different types of fairness. I was quite intrigued by her ideas and, to this day, I regularly think and speak about the different types of fairness.

Fairness is one of those words that people seem to think refers to a single simple idea. However, it is like a painting that makes sense  from a distance but dissolves into confusion when you approach it. Sandi pointed out the following three distinct categories of fairness.

Equality:

This is the name I have given to the type of fairness that says that everyone should get a “fair” share or an equal portion of something. This idea is the basis of our democratic system that says everyone should be treated equally.

Mercy:

This is the name I have given to the idea that people should get what they need. Fairness here is getting something extra because you have a deficit when compared to most people. The old Marxist slogan “From each according to his ability, to each according to his need” echoes this type. Someone once said that you could judge a society by how it treated the worst off citizens.

Justice:

This is the name I have given to the concept of getting what you have coming to you. This can be positive such as being rewarded for your effort. Or it can be negative such as being punished for transgressing some rule or law. There is an old expression that says that you “reap what you sow”.
This model of three types of fairness has many applications:

Family:

The kids each get an equal portion of cake.

The baby gets more attention because of its needs.

The father gets more because he is working to support the family.

Nation:

Everyone is equal under the law.

The handicapped and poor get extra consideration.

People are paid for work and punished for breaking the law.

Religion:

God loves all equally.

God is merciful

God is just and there will be a final Judgment

When people argue over what is “fair”, it is often a matter of each person using a different meaning of fair.

I suggest that these three types of fairness can be seen as three dimensions and that a particular person’s attitude with respect to a situation could be indicated by a point in a three dimensional space represented by a cube. Another person’s attitude would be different point in the cube. A second cube with two points could be constructed by having each person indicate what they thought was the ideal situation.Finally, each party would rank the importance of the different types of fairness with respect to the situation in question.

Then, with things clarified in this way, a discussion could proceed on what should be done to bring the conflicting parties into greater harmony. Agreement is not guaranteed but at least a lot of confusion could be avoided.

The next time you hear someone say, “That’s not fair”, ask them what type of fairness they are talking about.