Let
me get this straight. You are saying that there are actually two
different issues involved here:
- Knowing what factors or variables are relevant to
deciding whether cases are equal, and
- Knowing the value or the state of those variables.
|
For example, it is one thing to know that family income is relevant to the justice of
a certain decision and another thing to know the family incomes of the people involved. We can know that family income is relevant but not know the family
incomes of the people involved.
So Dee's interpretation of 'treat equal cases equally' tells us
that in the absence of the latter information, we should treat people
equally. I like it.
|