Equality

I'll say that equality is the easiest to defend for the obvious, grey area, and labels that create moral cases. The example in class was a perfect example and being apart of it I understood what was going on. I would say this is a great example to portray equality. I will be referring to that example many times in this defense, along with arguing why it may be weak at certain times. So to start it off I will talk about World A and World B when the people weren't given titles (Mother Teresa, Nazi Guards).

I think this was an easy decision. The more well-being there is divided among the population the better the world is because everyone is equal in well-being instead of one person drowning in his well-being. Both worlds had equal total well-being, but B had more equality among it's people. As B decreased in overall well-being, I and other classmates became more reluctant to pick B and crossed into the grey area.  

The grey area depends on one's level of tolerance. When B got to a well-being of 50, that became a much less prosperous world, but it is still better off due to a slightly better well-being divided among the population. The grey area becomes apparent when we knock each of the 10 people down 1 more peg. I'd have to say 4 or lower is when people would start saying A is better because everyone in B is essentially the same as everyone in A well-being wise, but just a tad better off. I'd much rather have someone who has 91 and 9 others have 1 compared to 10 people with a well-being of 3. This is when equality will not win in the end. Any sane person will pick A over B if A was unchanged and B had all people at 1 and it being equal. Then equality will not win in this case of well-being. But when the decision is easy, like 10 people with a well-being of 10. Then we are fine and one should go with B based off of equality among the people. As you lower everyone equally in well-being, people will eventually move to world A over B. But then it becomes a different story when labels are used.

Now when you put labels on the people, like with Mother Teresa and the Nazi guards, then the argument against equality starts being attacked with the obviousness of morality. Someone who truly views everyone as equal and would look over the atrocities of the guards, then that person would pick B over A. All if not most morally "correct" people will pick A because they would think Mother Teresa is much more deserving of a better well-being compared to Nazi guards.

I wouldn't say equality is the easiest to positively defend seeing that clear cut cases are a small percent of the overall picture, but when it comes to the grey area, and labels due to the clashing of ideals and such, thats when the decision will be determined based on tolerance and moral standings, if any in the situation.