人類歷史的演變過程雖然是錯綜複雜，但它的方向總是朝向提高「人」的價值而行，西方自法國大革命後，人權逐漸從潛藏的因素浮顯出來而成為普世價值，在普世價值之中，自由與平等又佔據核心的地位。晚清孫中山的革命亦標舉平等自由的旗幟，且人權的觀念與主張貫徹於學說之中，本文遂以其學說與西方最著名之三位學者：盧梭、恩格斯及羅爾斯做比較研究，以探其彼此之間對於平等權的主張及其優劣。盧梭曾列出兩種不平等，認為自然的不平等受到人為的不平等而更為加深，但導致人為不平等的根源，是社會中出現了私有財產，並因此導致分配的不平等。孫中心的平等論卻只從政治角度觀察，目標只在政治改革，其對平等權的理解，只偏向於政治民權的解釋，忽略社會、經濟與文化中的不平等。恩格斯曾提出三大分工說，分工雖然強化了生產力，但也造成貧富差距的加大，貧富懸殊成為工業革命後須迫切解決的難題，平等論的重要性也因此而生。孫中山的平等論忽略了三大分工說，只回歸到純農業時代的分配方法，企圖以共耕、均田的傳統政策加以改良，但這些方法只能治標，不能治本。且就其平均地權的主張而論，其平等觀念又傾向於平均主義，這種主義限制了個人能力發揮的上限，亦非「真平等」。孫中山《民權主義》的「真平等」是人類平等思想的精義，但真平等的結果並非人人所獲得的成就都相同，而是要在保障基本生存權，獲得基本教育及醫療照顧後，任人發揮才智，努力者多得，才是符合於人心、公道的、正義的平等思想。

While the evolutionary course of human history is complex, the direction has been towards elevating the worth of the human being. Since the French Revolution, human rights emerged as a universal value, with Liberty and Equality as its core concepts. The Late-Qing Dynasty revolutionary Sun Yat-Sen preached equality and liberty, and the slogan of human rights was a constant theme in his proposals. This paper compares and evaluates the rights of equality put forth by Sun, Rousseau, Engels and Rawls. Rousseau proposed that there are two types of inequality: natural inequality and ethical inequality. The latter is caused by the appearance of private property, which would cause redistributive inequality, and aggravate natural inequality. Sun Yat-Sen’s theory of equality only takes the political aspect, with political reform as its only goal. His explanations regarding the concept of equality only tends toward political civil rights, and ignores social, economic and cultural aspects of inequality. Engels proposed three divisions of labor to explain how divisions of labor strengthened productivity, but caused increased wealth inequality. Extreme wealth inequality became a problem after the industrial revolution. The importance of the theory of equality thus became of importance. Sun Yat-Sen’s theory of equality ignored Engel’s analysis of the three divisions of labor, and only considered the methods of distribution in the pre-industrial, agricultural society. Sun attempts to improve methods such as collective farming and equal distribution of land, but these improved methods could only provide short term remedies instead of long term solutions. His policy of equal distribution of land demonstrates equalitarianism, which limits the fulfillment of the individual potential, and hence not true equality. Sun Yat-Sen’s civil rights principle preaches “true equality,” which is indeed a core concept of equality. Yet, true equality does not mean that everyone’s achievements and rewards are the same. True equality lies in protecting basic right of survival, providing essential education and healthcare, allow individuals to fulfill their potentials, more reward for more work.