There are good inequalities and bad inequalities. A good inequality is a due inequality. A bad inequality is a condition where there is privation of a due equality. In this case we have to introduce equality to face the inequality. — IP060903

How can we recognize whether we are in a situation of positive or negative inequality?
Often, we may not be fully aware of the circumstances we find ourselves in.
This lack of awareness is why minor health issues can escalate into major ones, eventually culminating in fatal outcomes."

As I said, abstracts don’t work for me. Maybe you could demonstrate? — Tom Storm

:chin:

e.g.
For 'belong to',

If a 'giver' acknowledges that poor people also 'belong to' the category of humans, they can feel empathy or compassion towards them.
Alternatively, they may consider the possibility that one day they themselves could face financial struggles.

Many individuals perceive poor people as being similar to themselves, prompting them to support social policies.

Social policy exists because people have 'belong to' this concept, not because this world has lots of poor people.

:up:

It's Amazing you can see these logics from poor people's view.

‘It is more blessed to give than to receive.’

How about seeing these logics from the givers' view?
Will it help the givers to donate more of his money, instead of only keeping his money for his own children or family or his personal enjoyment?

Can you identify which of these logics corresponds to the 'social policy'? from the givers' view?


**Belong to:**
The white horse and the black horse both fall under the category of horses.
In essence, both the white and black horses are horses, highlighting their similarity.

**As a whole thing:**
In one scenario, a monkey receives 3 fruits in the morning and 4 fruits in the evening,
while in another scenario, it gets 4 fruits in the morning and 3 in the evening.
Regardless of the variation, both situations result in the monkey acquiring a total of 7 fruits a day, establishing the equivalence of both scenarios.

**Existence:**
Nothing on Earth existed in the past, and nothing will persist in the future.
Throughout time, only the universe or heaven endures.
Consequently, everything on Earth shares the same transitory nature.

**Compare to infinite space or time:**
When viewed from outer space, everything on Earth appears minute.
Similarly, considering the expansive timeframe from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on Earth virtually exists within an infinitesimally small span.
In this context, everything on Earth is alike, as each entity is extremely small or exists for an exceedingly brief period.

:up:

In the previous post, I delineated four logics for equality.
I believe the 'social policy' you mentioned is an application of at least one of the equality logics I listed. Can you identify which of these logics corresponds to the 'social policy'?


**Belong to:**
The white horse and the black horse both fall under the category of horses.
In essence, both the white and black horses are horses, highlighting their similarity.

**As a whole thing:**
In one scenario, a monkey receives 3 fruits in the morning and 4 fruits in the evening,
while in another scenario, it gets 4 fruits in the morning and 3 in the evening.
Regardless of the variation, both situations result in the monkey acquiring a total of 7 fruits a day, establishing the equivalence of both scenarios.

**Existence:**
Nothing on Earth existed in the past, and nothing will persist in the future.
Throughout time, only the universe or heaven endures.
Consequently, everything on Earth shares the same transitory nature.

**Compare to infinite space or time:**
When viewed from outer space, everything on Earth appears minute.
Similarly, considering the expansive timeframe from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on Earth virtually exists within an infinitesimally small span.
In this context, everything on Earth is alike, as each entity is extremely small or exists for an exceedingly brief period.

What are you referring to? — Tom Storm

I don't see how that works. — Vera Mont

his favorite philosopher was, he replied (after a bit of thought), Jesus Christ. — jgill

Equality is like the concept of perfection, totally unrealistic, but an ideal mark to shoot for, one which in fact will never be reached. — boagie

And the King shall answer and say unto them, ‘Verily I say unto you, inasmuch as ye have done it unto one of the least of these My brethren, ye have done it unto Me — Matthew 25:40

:up:


I summarized the core logic from Chuang Tzŭ about dealing with inequality. 
Maybe it will help answer your questions.

—-Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 2, The Identity of Contraries—
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Chuang_Tz%C5%AD_(Giles)/Chapter_2

*Belong to
White horse belongs to horse, black horse belongs to horse. 
White horse and black horse both are horses. 
So black house and white horse are the same.

*As a whole thing
A monkey gets 3 fruits in the morning & gets 4 fruits in the evening. 
V.S. gets 4 fruits in the morning & gets 3 in the evening. 
In both situations, the monkey gets a total of 7 fruits a day. 
So both situations are the same.

*Existence
Everything on the earth didn't exist before. In the future it'll not exist. 
All the time only the universe or heaven exists. 
So everything on the earth is the same.

*Compare to infinite space or time 
From outer space to looking at the earth, everything on the earth looks very small. 
Compare the time from the beginning of the universe until now, everything on the earth almost exists in a 0 time. 
So everything on the earth is the same, because all are super small or lasting in a very short time.


So if we apply this logic to Jesus’ verses.
‘the least of these My brethren’ belongs to a human. Jesus belongs to a human.
‘the least of these My brethren’ and Jesus are the same.
So things done to ‘the least of these My brethren’, is the same as things done to Jesus.

From Chinese civilization's view, Jesus provides many examples to apply these abstract equality logics in every aspect of our daily life, in the Gospel.

This logic is also applied to Chinese medicine to keep a peaceful mind.
If the emotions favor something too strong, it will trigger the unbalance of the Autonomic Nervous system and Endocrine system.

Chinese medicine is about philosophy, Qigong, acupuncture (healing power from our own body), and herbs (healing power from nature. e.g. forest).
It is a preventive medicine.
It thinks small sickness will accumulate to big sickness, then big sickness will lead to death.
Chinese medicine is very promised to prevent and treat small sicknesses.
But not that focus on treating big sickness as western medicine.
(I’m afraid the philosophy behind is:  ‘Life<->Death’ is the same. 
It actually doesn’t suggest taking too much extra effort to pursue ‘life’. 
It should go with nature, e.g. healthy lifestyles.)

There is lots of scientific research about how Chinese medicine treats the Autonomic Nervous system and Endocrine system.

I provided some history in our discussions, because Chinese civilization is from other older civilizations or races, reformed.
I think a similar concept is also in western philosophy.

Do you think equality will be easier to achieve, if we think it in a logical & scientific way, and apply it to daily life? 
instead of in a ‘law’ way?
Of course we need equality at the 'law' level.
Not everyone can have enlightenment in philosophy.

I always want to ask?
Where did westerners think that 'big' government or 'big' institute concepts come from?
Even the 'God' concept in religion is a 'big thing'.
But Chinese civilization doesn't have a religious concept.
'God' is 'Tao' or 'Enlightenment thinking', which is science.

That is interesting, Nietzsche says those who share their secrets are no longer in love with their knowledge. — Vaskane

True, sharing sounds better than argument.

I wish to be at any time hereafter only a yea-sayer!" — Vaskane

Maybe when Nietzsche said the above, he did keep his knowledge within him?

To Nietzsche that which annihilates contradictories, is the "redemption" a person feels when they are performing their "art." By that I mean, like a martial artist practices until their mind and body are like one, they do not have to think about their movements, the martial practitioner has taken their trade to the level of an art. Same goes with an author, or a computer engineer, a mathematician, a skateboarder, a chef. But for Nietzsche one does not want these contradictories to disappear fully, they are responsible for creating the tension, the suffering, in which one experiences to be motivated to overcome and achieve. — Vaskane

Do you think Nietzsche knew Chuang Tzŭ?
Chuang Tzŭ also has a similar concept in the following very popular allegory:

-------

MY life has a limit, but my knowledge is without limit. To drive the limited in search of the limitless, is fatal; and the knowledge of those who do this is fatally lost.

In striving for others, avoid fame. In striving for self, avoid disgrace. Pursue a middle course. Thus you will keep a sound body, and a sound mind, fulfil your duties, and work out your allotted span.

Prince Hui's cook was cutting up a bullock. Every blow of his hand, every heave of his shoulders, every tread of his foot, every thrust of his knee, every whshh of rent flesh, every chhk of the chopper, was in perfect harmony,—rhythmical like the dance of the Mulberry Grove, simultaneous like the chords of the Ching Shou.

[Commentators are divided in their identifications of these ancient morceaux.]

"Well done!" cried the Prince. "Yours is skill indeed."

"Sire," replied the cook; "I have always devoted myself to Tao. It is better than skill. When I first began to cut up bullocks, I saw before me simply whole bullocks. After three years' practice, I saw no more whole animals.

[Meaning that he saw them, so to speak, in sections.]

And now I work with my mind and not with my eye. When my senses bid me stop, but my mind urges me on, I fall back upon eternal principles. I follow such openings or cavities as there may be, according to the natural constitution of the animal. I do not attempt to cut through joints: still less through large bones.

[For a curious parallelism, see Plato's Phaedrus, 265.]

"A good cook changes his chopper once a year,—because he cuts. An ordinary cook, once a month,—because he hacks. But I have had this chopper nineteen years, and although I have cut up many thousand bullocks, its edge is as if fresh from the whetstone. For at the joints there are always interstices, and the edge of a chopper being without thickness, it remains only to insert that which is without thickness into such an interstice.

[These words help to elucidate a much-vexed passage in ch. xliii of the Tao-Tê-Ching. See The Remains of Lao Tzŭ, p. 30.]

By these means the interstice will be enlarged, and the blade will find plenty of room. It is thus that I have kept my chopper for nineteen years as though fresh from the whetstone.

"Nevertheless, when I come upon a hard part where the blade meets with a difficulty, I am all caution. I fix my eye on it. I stay my hand, and gently apply my blade, until with a hwah the part yields like earth crumbling to the ground. Then I take out my chopper, and stand up, and look around, and pause, until with an air of triumph I wipe my chopper and put it carefully away."

"Bravo!" cried the Prince. "From the words of this cook I have learnt how to take care of my life."

[Meaning that which informs life, sc. the soul.]

--Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 3, Nourishment of the Soul

-------


1. Why can a person annihilate contradictories, it will reflect to his career like 'art'?
I guess that's because he knows the way to deal with everything according to 'The Identity of Contraries'?

2. Why can a person do his career like 'art', he can annihilate contradictions?
I guess he learned the skill through practice?

Amor Fati, and Yea Saying?... From Nietzsche's Joyful Wisdom Aphorism 276:

"I have wished for myself today, and what thought first crossed my mind this year, a thought which ought to be the basis, the pledge and the sweetening of all my future life! I want more and more to perceive the necessary characters in things as the beautiful: I shall thus be one of those who beautify things. Amor fati: let that henceforth be my love! I do not want to wage war with the ugly. I do not want to accuse, I do not want even to accuse the accusers. Looking aside, let that be my sole negation! And all in all, to sum up: I wish to be at any time hereafter only a yea-sayer!" — Vaskane

This will work if we stop listening to the publicity and marketing. — L'éléphant

:up:


-----
"Before conditions existed, Tao was. Before definitions existed. Speech was. Subjectively, we are conscious of certain delimitations which are:

Right and⁠ Left
Relationship⁠ and Obligation
Division and Discrimination
Emulation and Contention
These are called the Eight Predicables."
...
"The true Sage," answered Tzŭ Ch'i, "keeps his knowledge within him, while men in general set forth theirs in argument, in order to convince each other. And therefore it is said that in argument he does not manifest himself."
[Others try to establish their own subjective view. The true Sage remains passive, aiming only at the annihilation of contraries.]

--Chuang Tzŭ (Giles)/Chapter 2 The Identity of Contraries [24]
-----

What did give Speech definitions? What can hide the truth by using speech?

What can annihilate contraries? Dialectic?

Did politicians already use 'Dialectic' in their talks?

I see now.
Equality has different kinds and levels.

Is that possible for you to describe 'Neon Genesis EvanHegellion' & 'Human instrumentality' you are talking about?
It may help us understand our OP by seeing different equality?

e.g.
I'd say that the western equality unenlightened post is 'equality by law'.

If I don't use Chinese medicine or Eastern Philosophy or Greeks' long life secret to describe the equality of our OP,
I'd say our OP is about : Matthew 19:21: Jesus said to him, “If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor, and you will have treasure in heaven; and come, follow me.” or Socrates' death.

Is your question how to be the same in a world of difference? — tim wood

I think so!
In Zhuang Zi, it is translated to 'The Identity of Contraries'.
But it's very hard to understand sometimes.
I hope the discussion here can make it easier to understand.
I heard a Taiwanese philosophy professor said western philosophy is very good at 'The Identity of Contraries'.

I offer here the most definitive, authoritative sources of the West on your topic, and my best interpretation of them, which will no doubt be disputed here. — unenlightened

I think for general Taiwanese and Chinese, even in ancient time illiterate people,
we study equality philosophy like Laozi ＆ Zhuang Zi because people are using Chinese medicine.
Studying the philosophy is for our health.
If people do inequality things or abusing others, we'll think that person will be short life or unhealthy.
(Maybe Greeks think as the same way as Chinese? If they claim their long life is because of their equal mind and society?)

Confucius is taught in the school, about moral.
School teachers don't let us understand Laozi ＆ Zhuang Zi too much when we are young.
Because teachers and parents will be afraid young students will think getting 0 scores in the exam is equal to getting 100 scores in the exam.

What is the motivation for westerners to do equality?
I think the most basic motivation for Taiwanese and Chinese to do equality is for health.

I would need a mountain of good scientific evidence to accept any claims of alternative medicine. — Tom Storm

Good! if so, we should focus on figuring out the philosophy.
The power behind the long life is philosophy.

If I understood the allegory correctly, the physical deformities do not excuse the man's act of morality and responsibility to his own welfare and the community where possible. Further, the man is not expected to perform duties that one with his deformity could not do. Sounds fair to me. I am of the opinion that every person find some way to make themselves of use in this world, no matter their deficiencies. In addition, we as society should serve where we can with everyone included in the benefits, not just a few or those deemed worthy. — Philosophim

:up:

But there is a way to deal with the inequalities [changes] and be peaceful & honest.
What is the way?
My guess: scientific understanding × nonzero sum practices. — 180 Proof

Inequality is much like the concept of change, for the fact that it is guaranteed, a constant, and that is why greed exists, jealousy, hatred, envy, capitalism and colonialism. Equality is like the concept of perfection, totally unrealistic, but an ideal mark to shoot for, one which in fact will never be reached. — boagie

:up:

I know when Zhuang Zi talked about inequality, he also talked about 'Change'.
Also ChungZi this book is always study with 'I Ching' (philosophy of change) for thousand years.

But I don't quite understand how to think about 'inequality' with 'change'.
I only know Zhuang Zi teaches: don't against the trend of the change.
e.g. In a bull stock market, don't do short or be very careful when we do short.
or when things happen, accept that must many reasons made it happen. So just go with it, not let it stir our peaceful mind.

I was not talking about Chinese medicine - I was talking about whether legends were true. E.g., People living to 100 without showing signs of aging. — Tom Storm

Great question!

Because the Yellow Emperor was talking about things before him.
Chinese words were created by his order.
I can not use Chinese history to prove history before 5,000 years.

But if the Yellow Emperor was talking about Greeks.
If I use the Bible time from Genesis 11: 10-26.
The Yellow Emperor is about The Tower of Babel time.
About Peleg time in the Bible.
If you can find Greek history before 5,000 years ago, maybe you can prove it.

But checking Greek history is out of my ability.
Since I always see English translations that misunderstand Chinese history or culture.
Many important Chinese histories are not translated into English.
I think only local people can best understand their own history.

But I think we don't need history to prove it.
Modern Greeks can also prove Chinese medicine is correct.
Please check this guy's picture in this interview video at 12:20.
He is 104 years old and still looks young !

https://youtu.be/BIWibXSOfNg?si=GwYMgUoiDwpRcaB_

I appreciate everyone take time to discuss history and reply that made this question clearer!

Chinese civilization loves history background check and already did it for 5,000 years.
We indeed need to talk about history for this question.

Where Chinese civilization's creator 'Yellow Emperor 'came from is a mystery.
But some archaeologists think he is Proto-Indo-Europeans.

In 'The Yellow Emperor's Classic of Medicine',
Yellow Emperor said he heard: 
in the past, everyone lived one hundred years without showing the usual signs of aging.

Because Yellow Emperor moved to China from somewhere else,
so he must not talk about people in China.
He must talk about people in older civilization areas.

Until I watched these long life people video series,
I finally understand what 'The Yellow Emperor's Classic of Medicine' says.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GP4ouNyTd0I

(in this video 30:45, 34:58, 35:50,
the Greek island people and researchers said their secret to live long & healthy is to have an equal mind and society.)
I'd guess what Yellow Emperor mentioned is Greeks.

I've put this video on the OP, so you may easily check it and find some philosophy for inequality!

----------------------------------

For thousands years, 'The Yellow Emperor's Classic of Medicine' is always studied together with philosophy 'I Ching' (philosophy of change), Laozi ＆ Zhuang Zi (philosophy of equal).
I guess when we talk about inequality, we need to talk about 'change'?

I guess Laozi ＆ Zhuang Zi are Jews after I background checked their history.
They all lived in a city 'Kaifeng', where many Jewish merchants lived in ancient time for silk road business.
All the ancient Chinese philosophers went to 'Kaifeng' to discuss philosophy.
Li & Zhuang are also Jews' last name in Chinese.

Chinese official history says Laozi went everywhere on the silk road to teach his philosophy.
He went to India and became Buddha's teacher.
I guess Laozi is also related to Greek philosopher Thales.

I'd take the apple in the metaphor to represent the knowledge of good and evil, distinguishing humans from the animals that lack such knowledge. I don't see the antidote is returning humans to that animal like state to where we become amoral.

If we're sticking with the metaphor, the question is how we should best respond to the serpent, which represents temptation to do evil.

That is, we know what is right and what is wrong and we have to respond by doing what is right. — Hanover

Great points!

If we take Chinese medicine that description as a clue.

Before Apple, humans were:
Simple body + Simple brain = Healthy

After Apple, humans became:
Simple body + Super complicated brain => Mental & Physical illness! The world is chaotic!

But divine beings look like they can handle super complicated knowledge and are still very healthy.

There are two possibilities here:
1. Divine beings' bodies are different.
2. Divine beings know how to think and exercise to deal with complicated knowledge in their brain.

But the human body can not be changed.
To solve the issue,
the prophets needed to teach humans how to think and exercise as the divine beings, to handle the complicated brain.
This is what you said: We should best respond to the serpent. We have to respond by doing what is right.
This is the antidote.

e.g. The philosophy about dealing with inequality - The Identity of Contraries; Socrates' and Plato's teachings

Also from great people's thinking as examples, the human brain can be great through thinking. We can level up our brains by correct thinking.

Good points!

Colonialism is not totally a bad thing.
The Chinese girls' Foot binding for 1,000 years ended because of Colonialism.

Since our discussion is related to Chinese medicine and philosophy (Daoism and other western
or eastern branches).
We can use our own body to try and feel it, if we figure out the philosophy ' The Identity of Contraries'.
Indeed we don't need to care if it's from tradition or history or not.
It can be scientifically proven or proven by ourselves, if it works to our health or career or we can be happier.
If it doesn't work, we can return it!

The Yellow Emperor's Classic of Medicine is the most foundation medical book in Chinese medicine for 2,000 years.
Everyone who uses Chinese medicine reads this book.
I only can quote it if I want to say something about it.

What makes you think any one culture has more or less truth than any other? Chinese chroniclers can't embellish, exaggerate, concentrate on one aspect of time while ignoring another? Ever hear of the cult of Chairman Mao? The whole China derail seems to me irrelevant to a current discussion. — Vera Mont

In another case, if a history can survive, it already means it's true.
Because in history, those cheating people were lazy to make wrong records, they just destroyed all the records.
The most famous case in China is our first emperor, Qin Shi Huang.
His ’Burning of books and burying of scholars‘ destroyed almost 3,000 years of books before him.
His goal was just wanting everyone stupid, so people would not be against him.

What makes you think any one culture has more or less truth than any other? Chinese chroniclers can't embellish, exaggerate, concentrate on one aspect of time while ignoring another? Ever hear of the cult of Chairman Mao? The whole China derail seems to me irrelevant to a current discussion. — Vera Mont

If the society is extremely unequal.
e.g. human sacrifice, slavery, bad government.
All these happened sometimes in Chinese history.
We can find out the cheating records through investigation.

We already discussed how 'inequality' will generate 'dishonesty'.
I only checked 5,000 years of Chinese history. I can prove it.
Chinese society is always sometimes good, sometimes bad.
We have many records to compare each different time.

So our discussion may be related to all other civilizations.
— YiRu Li

But how is it related to the OP? — Vera Mont

You are right!
Our history discussion let us find out the Chinese record is for all the civilizations and races.
Chinese itself is a big mix from all other civilizations and races.
Other societies that didn't have words also used Chinese to record things.
We are from the same source.
There is no inequality between nation or race or civilization in Chinese records.

Finding out 'We are from the same source', is another way to see things are equal.

The Identity of Contraries!

I added this 'The Identity of Contraries' in our OP.
This is the philosophy we need to figure out.

It's the philosophy thinking practice which is used in Chinese medicine to maintain a peaceful and concentrated mind.
It also can apply in our career or life difficulties. eg. disadvantage, addiction and mental ill health...
I heard many philosophers already use this 'The Identity of Contraries' way to discuss questions.

The selfish gene. In nature, animals that have some advantage over others of their species succeed at living longer and having more offspring than the others. This means that their [aggressive, ambitious] genes are passed on to more new members of the species. This is offset by the need to fit into a social group for the survival of those offspring, so that friendly and co-operative genes are also passed on. In humans, both traits are present and the notorious big brain serves both - not in the same proportion in each specimen. Everyone desires some advantage, some way to be better, smarter, faster, stronger, more talented, more charming or more beautiful than others of of our species. But we're not all willing to pay the same price or make the same amount of effort or take the same risks to achieve it. — Vera Mont

I think I can use your case with Socrates' death to describe equality.
When Socrates had a higher value 'dignity', that he wanted to accomplish.
He measured life and death before his death.
He thought death means going to a new place,
being born to the earth is also going to a new place.
He saw life as equal to death.
It was not that important to trace life but lose his dignity.

Also from your case,
If a person has a higher value like 'dignity' they want to pursue.
They may see 'better than others' is not that important to them, if they need to cheat to win a game.
For dignity, 'win a game' is playing a game, 'lose a game' is playing a game.
'Win<->Lose' here is the same for them.
Because they are all 'playing a game'.

As a small contribution, the word civilization implies a few things, such as written language. There were other societies before Chinese society of course, but none of them that we know would be classified as civilisation, as they had no written record. — Lionino

I do hear historians say when they study no word society, they will reference Chinese records.
Because the Chinese recorded those no word societies.
e.g. The Chinese record everything along the silk road.
Chinese even record what they looked like, eg. white skin, blue eyes, blond hair...

But how is it related to the OP? — Vera Mont

This we may need to ask Hanover, Lionino, Beverley, Tom Storm.
Maybe they see something we don't see.

The whole China derail seems to me irrelevant to a current discussion. — Vera Mont

Maybe somehow meaningful to our discussion.
Because Chinese civilization is from western and all other older civilizations.
The Chinese race itself is a big mix of all other races.
So our discussion may be related to all other civilizations.
Maybe somehow older knowledge was lost in other places, but got recorded in Chinese civilization.

Supposedly no unified China, just a collection of tribes, afaik. — Lionino

For this we can google Yellow Emperor.
When we know the Yellow Emperor, we also can see what China that land looked like.

What existed before the Yellow Emperor? — Beverley

Other older civilizations.
Chinese migrated from older civilizations.
If we study Chinese civilization, we will find out it's a reformation based on older civilizations.
Many issues in older civilizations got reformed in Chinese civilization.
Chinese need to study western and older civilizations, in order to understand Chinese civilizations.

Your choice of 5'000 thousand is for no reason (why not 6 or 3), — Lionino

Chinese genealogy and Chinese calendar records the years.
Chinese civilization was created by the Yellow Emperor.
It didn't exist even one day before Yellow Emperor.

The Chinese have countless ways to keep old things.
I really can not tell all of them too much here.
I suggest if we need, we use the old knowledge as a hint,
We are still back to our discussion.

I specified above that this is inaccurate. Chinese civilisation is not 5'000 years old, it is short of 3'400, — Lionino

3,400 years ago books did record earlier ancient books' things.
So 5,000 years ago knowledge is still kept inside the 3,400-year-old books.
Older books' materials can not keep too long.
So the Chinese will keep copy and quote the old books.

Chinese writing has a rule: every article must quote books before it.

But isn't this what all governments say? — Hanover

Glad you discussed it.

Will you tell your kids or students the wrong things?

Chinese things are passed by parents to kids, and masters to disciples.
Generation by generation for 5,000 years.
Sometimes the parents and teachers went through wars or countless difficult times, but they still did their best to keep the knowledge and passed it to their kids and students.

Are there any westerner ancestors who passed things to your generation nowadays and you know it is valuable?

For me the question you are asking involves how people manage psychologically and what the responsibility of a society is towards those on the margins and those who suffer. — Tom Storm

We can discuss both.
Especially if people only remember to have policy, but forget the philosophy thinking practice to see everyone is equal.
e.g. We can see from the hunchback Su allegory.
At least 2300 years ago, China already had a social policy to give hunchback Su donations.
But people will forget the way hunchback Su sees himself as equal as others.

As someone with social justice principles I would never educate people to be happy with their situation. I wouldn't be prefer mechanisms in place through social policy to help lift people out of poverty. — Tom Storm

Really?
I think people are poor because they didn't use their potential enough.
It's a potential issue.

Everyone is happy with their position after everyone uses their potential, that is pretty safe.

I always feel the homeless people in my neighborhood are very unhappy with themselves, so they give up their life?
Mental illness is triggered by unhappy feelings?

Maybe in different situations we need different solutions?

Thanks for the clarification!

I think our OP is to deal with the unequal feeling ( or unequal treatment and unequal experiences of life ) caused by the difference.
A psychological solution by using philosophy thinking practice, which Chinese medicine is using.

e.g. poor people rob rich people.
How can we educate people, so they can be happy with their position?
As the Chinese medicine says: they were happy with their position in life, they did not feel jealousy or greed.

Of course people will develop more social policies after their mind has changed.

Does the above make sense to you?
Can I still use 'inequality' to say it?

For example, if we feel getting birth in a rich family is not equal getting birth in a poor family. It is inequality. And this feeling of inequality, is the issue of the world.
— YiRu Li

Now we are back to actual inequality. Answers - democratic socialism, robust social policy. — Tom Storm

'born into a rich family or poor family' is 'inequality' to you?

How about this:
'Have' kids or 'Not Have' kids?
If a person is so sad because she can't have kids.
Is this 'have' & 'not have', 'inequality' to you or 'difference' to you?

For example, if we feel we are born into a rich family, it is not equal as we are born into a poor family. It is inequality. And this feeling of inequality, is the issue of the world.

Or let's back to the OP?
Which part of OP do you feel it's hard to understand?
I can try to explain to you?

Actually you are asking a good question.
It took me many many years to understand that this OP is a question.
A big issue in life.

I thought I already identified 'inequality' as

e.g. good <-> evil, rich <-> poor, beautiful <-> ugly, young <-> old, high <-> low, correct <-> wrong, have <-> not have, strong <-> weak, left <-> right, subjective <-> objective, absolute <-> relative, Life <-> Death

ok, if you think so.
I agree.

He is hypericin.
We posted this question together. He is the cohost.
But we did discuss your question in the beginning.
Let's try to describe it.

Ancient documents from the near east that have become central to Western civilization tell of a six day creation and a great flood. Does their antiquity and accessibility mean those things actually happened? — Hanover

Chinese history is only 5,000 years old.
If mapping to the Bible time, it's after 'Tower of the Babel'.
Before that, it's not included in Chinese history.
So Chinese history can not support six day creation and a great flood.

But it can support that Chinese civilization was from the west.
A reformation/new civilization of the older civilizations in the west.

We can find out many old issues in the older civilization, they got reformed in the Chinese civilization.

I am not American and don't live in America. I am referring to human history whether Chinese, Swedish or Australian. — Tom Storm

Chinese history has a very strong civilization and culture supports the truth.
But if other countries don't have that similar civilization and culture, I can't say the truth in history is there.
But what is that Chinese civilization and culture?
It takes me at least 12 years of school time to learn and I'm still learning it everyday.
It's very hard to describe.

I know when talking about inequality, in western philosophy, political philosophy is more famous.
Glad you'd like to identify it.
I'll let my friend reply to you.
He knows better about philosophy.

Also if anyone here knows it, please feel free to reply. Thanks!