Most arguments about social justice are not disagreements about facts — they are two people using one word for five or six different ideas. Pick a case, then swing each conception of equality over it and read the verdict it delivers. Pin one lens against another to find exactly where they part company, and then follow the redlining cascade below to see why a rule can stop while the distribution it produced does not.
1 · Choose a case
2 · Swing a lens over it
Why this matters. Formal equality and relational equality can both be sincerely held and still deliver opposite verdicts on the same ward policy. Naming which one a speaker is using resolves more arguments than any amount of extra data.
The case
The cascade: injustice with no one at the wheel
Click any link to see the documented mechanism. Then repeal the practice and watch which links go dark.