It is well known that plurality is a cornerstone of Arendt’s conception of human life on earth. Since, according to Arendt, men exist only in the plural (cf. The Human Condition, 7; The Origins of Totalitarianism, 613; The Life of the Mind, 19; Introduction into Politics, 94-96), it seems that plurality always involves, in some way, the presence of other, and the relationship with this other. Thus, relationality emerges as one of the fundamental conditions of human existence, which accounts for the fact that Arendt herself has been already pointed out as a relational thinker (Topolski, Arendt, Levinas and a Politics of Relationality, 2015). If action and speech, which constitutes the realm of human affairs—proper to politics—absolutely requires the presence of others (The Human Condition, 22-23), the activity of thinking also seems to bear significant traces of relationality, as developed by Arendt in a series of lectures given toward the end of her life and published in the first volume of The Life of the Mind. However, since “human plurality, the basic condition of both action and speech, has the twofold character of equality and distinction” (The Human Condition, 175), Arendt’s conception of plurality seems to be permeated by a strong paradox: the simultaneous coexistence of equality and distinction, which was possible in the polis and has become one of the major challenges of the political community.

Although we are addressing some of Arendt’s major contributions in Political Theory, it does not seem that the issues of action, speech, and thinking have been jointly examined from a relational perspective that draws on the dual character of equality and distinction proper to human plurality.  Thus, this paper aims to explore the relational character that emerges in the activities of thinking, action and speaking, as addressed by Arendt in some of her major works. It does so in order to examine how the twofold character of equality and distinction unfolds in these activities, particularly in relation to political life. Through this exploration, we hope to deepen our understanding of the notions of equality and difference as advanced by the author, as well as highlight her contributions to addressing a dialectical approach that tends to reinterpret the tension between equality and difference as a zero-sum game between two mutually exclusive opposing forces.