  This paper seeks to explore the potential trade-off arising between the
theories of $\textit{Equality of Opportunity}$ and $\textit{Opportunity
Pluralism}$. Whereas the first theory has received much attention in the
literature on Welfare Economics, the second one has only recently been
introduced with the publication of the book by Joseph Fishkin,
$\textit{Bottlenecks: A New Theory of Equal Opportunity}$. After arguing
extensively that any notion of human flourishing is incompatible with
traditional theories of $\textit{Equality of Opportunity}$, the author proposes
an alternative theory squarely based on a broad notion of human development.
This paper seeks to formalize the argument made in this book through the lens
of economic theory. My analysis suggests that traditional theories of
$\textit{Equality of Opportunity}$ are not incompatible with
$\textit{Opportunity Pluralism}$.
