When Equality Forgets Humility
Equal dignity doesn't mean equal credibility
I am an egalitarian.
I believe in extending dignity, compassion, and mutuality to every relational sphere that I occupy space within. Some of my deepest discomforts in life have come in the context of being denied legitimacy arbitrarily.
So I advocate for equality, fairness, and listening.
When I describe this, I am describing a communal exchange: a group, an organization, even a whole society. Most of us prefer this kind of arrangement, where everybody can express and be heard.
However, I stumbled upon a phrase that caught my attention and caused me to reflect more deeply about dynamics that I see happening on the regular. The phrase is malignant egalitarianism.
I took that phrase to mean that even our good-hearted, generous attempts to include a variety of perspectives on any given dynamic or topic can result in creating dynamics in which everyone, regardless of education or experience, is expected to retain the same amount of credibility as anyone else.
This is dangerous.
It is dangerous because it foregrounds or prioritizes voices being heard over, and often against, expertise. Expertise is sublimated to the value of equal voices.
Of course, we know this is not an actually legitimate way of interacting in a group. Take parents, for example. Parents, because of their experience and education, have more authority and therefore more decision-making capacity than children do. That is not a statement about the intrinsic value of children. It is rather an estimation of the competence of adults.
Similarly, in an age in which information is easily accessible to all, we may not recognize that apprehending a piece of data is not the same as the experience and education of someone who has devoted their whole life to understanding and articulating certain assertions.
Tom Nichols names this confusion directly: “Having equal rights does not mean having equal talents, equal abilities, or equal knowledge.”1 That distinction matters. The problem is not broad participation. The problem is the assumption that participation makes formation unnecessary.
This is where I find myself needing to be more careful. I do not want to abandon egalitarianism. I do not want to baptize hierarchy as wisdom. I do not want to excuse people who use expertise as a way to dominate or dismiss others.
But I also do not want to confuse equal dignity with equal credibility.
My model, of course, is Jesus.
Jesus submitted himself to his parents. Jesus, though God, submitted himself to the form of a human, even a servant. And in his authority, he included those who were far less socially or religiously authorized than he was.
Philippians 2 gives this its Christological center: Jesus does not cling to status, but takes “the form of a servant.”2 Mark 8 gives the discipleship shape: if we want to follow Jesus, we deny ourselves, take up the cross, and follow him.3
That means spiritual maturity cannot be measured only by a person’s ability to lead. It must also be measured by a person’s ability to follow. A mature Christian can exercise authority without grasping for superiority, and receive authority without collapsing into passivity or resentment. To lead well, one must also know how to be led.
That seems important. Jesus does not show us authority without humility. But he also does not show us humility as the erasure of authority.
When it comes to understanding the body, medicine, and healthcare, for example, I am no expert. I listen, humble myself, and assume I have a lot to learn.
In this, I am upholding healthy egalitarianism. In this, I am practicing healthy differentiation.
My status as the lesser-formed person in a given area actually gives place for me to uphold humility, which is the glue of a healthy, democratic, egalitarian society.
Experts do not need to be sublimated to non-experts in a false humility.
And non-experts do not need to pretend they know less than they do. But they do need to know the difference between being included and being equally competent, between being heard and being equally authoritative, between having dignity and having expertise.
Tom Nichols, "The Death of Expertise", The Federalist, January 17, 2014.
Philippians 2:3-8.
Mark 8:34.
Very well said, Isaac! Jesus came to serve, yet He was called Master. True humility is not the measure of how one regard themselves, but rather how they are are regarded by others; they regard. I have no regard for the opinions of those I don't regard, this may sound arrogant, but it is not. Our Lord came to serve, not win favor of fools. The most unequal thing we can do is treat all equally, and neither did Jesus, as he called some to serve with Him, and called others fools, and took a whip to others. Yet He still came and served all, equally, so that even a fool like myself can be saved because of His sacrificial service, and spared the whip. His love is equal for all, but His reward won't be. Those who reject, will be rejected, those who accept will be accepted.
An important point to make, Isaac. You reminded me of the way the Apostle Paul talked about spiritual gifts -- that the community is made up of diverse talents and abilities but one Spirit. I find it a relief to know that I do not have to be an expert in everything, that I can rely on others to know more than I do. Hopefully they will use their expertise humbly for the greater good as you rightly suggest.