We live in a society where people from every class live together. Some are rich, while some are poor. And the aspirations of people from different classes are different.

But one thing is worth noticing. People who come from middle-class and poor families often have aspirations that remain limited to getting a secure job and earning a decent salary.

Now the question is: why don’t they dream of becoming great philosophers, statesmen, judges, professors, or vice-chancellors?

Why is it that only people from the upper class, or in some countries, people from particular castes or races, reach positions like vice-chancellors, judges, and other high positions?

One reason is that these people see such possibilities around them. They see these aspirations, and their circumstances allow them to pursue them.

But people who come from middle-class and poor families often don’t even see these aspirations. They know that their circumstances are not such that they can afford to dream about these things.

I think there is an important reason for this. Think about someone who comes from a very poor family. For that person, getting two proper meals a day may itself be heaven.

They may have never even thought about becoming a philosopher or a scientist. Forget about achieving such a position; they may not have even imagined it.

People may say that we live in a free economy, and with merit and hard work, a person can achieve anything. If a poor person is not dreaming big, that’s their choice. What can the state do? What can the government do?

But here, I want to challenge this view.

The circumstances of a poor person can be so difficult that they shape their aspirations. When a person does not have the resources to fulfil their basic needs, how can we expect them to dream such ambitious dreams?

Here, the failure is not only of the individual. It is also the failure of the state and society, which keep a person trapped in hardship and eventually take away even their aspiration to flourish and grow in life.

I believe that a person’s dreams and ambitions are shaped by their circumstances. They are shaped by their social and economic circumstances.

If we genuinely want to give people from every class a genuine opportunity to flourish, then the state has to create a welfare system that allows people to develop their lives.

Now some people may say, “Can the state really do everything? Is all of this really the state’s responsibility?”

My answer to them is: then why does the state exist in the first place?

If people are living in a modern democracy and are still struggling even for their basic needs, and are living a life that feels like hell, then what is the purpose of creating the state?

Aristotle also argued that the state was formed to make human life better and better. One of the main purposes of the state should be to ensure that every person gets at least a minimum threshold of basic needs, so that they can develop their capabilities.

And education is the most important capabilities.

I believe that until a person gets access to high-quality education, at least up to graduation, they may never even know how many possibilities exist in the world. They may never discover what they can become or in which field they can flourish.

I can give my own example.

When I started reading thinkers like Ambedkar, Plato, Martin Luther King, and Epicurus, I started dreaming of becoming a philosopher and a writer.

Before that, I wanted to live a very ordinary life. I simply wanted to get a small job.

Why?

Because the circumstances I came from did not even allow me to dream of becoming a philosopher. I had never seen that possibility clearly enough to imagine it for myself.

There is one last thing I want to say.

The state’s job does not end simply by providing resources. The state also has to create social conditions where people develop the aspiration to use those resources.

For example, if people believe that becoming a judge, teacher, or professor is possible only through bribery, recommendations, connections, or because you belong to the certain group then people will give up even before they try.

They will think, “People like us cannot reach these positions.”

And the result will be what we often see: only people from elite, upper-class, or dominant caste groups continue to occupy important positions in institutions.

So, the conclusion of the whole argument is this: if we want to genuinely expand people’s choices and aspirations, we need to improve both their internal capabilities and their external circumstances.

This is where Martha Nussbaum’s idea of combined capabilities becomes important.

A person needs not only the internal capability to do something, but also the external social, political, and economic conditions that allow them to actually use that capability.

Only then can we create a society where people are not merely surviving, but are able to imagine, choose, and pursue a life in which they can genuinely flourish.