This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Siblings:
19 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
  1. Christian Barry, Redistribution. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  2. Luc Bovens (2015). Concerns for the Poorly Off in Ordering Risky Prospects. Economics and Philosophy 31 (3):397-429.
    The Distribution View provides a model that integrates four distributional concerns in the evaluation of risky prospects. Starting from these concerns, we can generate an ordering over a set of risky prospects, or, starting from an ordering, we can extract a characterization of the underlying distributional concerns. Separability of States and/or Persons for multiple-person risky prospects, for single-person risky prospects and for multiple-person certain prospects are discussed within the model. The Distribution View sheds light on public health policies and provides (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Luc Bovens (2015). Evaluating Risky Prospects: The Distribution View. Analysis 75 (2):243-253.
    Risky prospects represent policies that impose different types of risks on multiple people. I present an example from food safety. A utilitarian following Harsanyi's Aggregation Theorem ranks such prospects according to their mean expected utility or the expectation of the social utility. Such a ranking is not sensitive to any of four types of distributional concerns. I develop a model that lets the policy analyst rank prospects relative to the distributional concerns that she considers fitting in the context at hand. (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Thom Brooks (ed.) (2015). Current Controversies in Political Philosophy. Routledge.
    First published in 2013. Routledge is an imprint of Taylor & Francis, an informa company.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. Thom Brooks (2010). Punishment. Oxford Bibliographies Online.
    The punishment of criminals is a topic of long-standing philosophical interest since the ancient Greeks. This interest has focused on several considerations, including the justification of punishment, who should be permitted to punish, and how we might best set punishments for crimes. This entry focuses on the most important contributions in this field. The focus will be on specific theoretical approaches to punishment including both traditional theories of punishment (retributivism, deterrence, rehabilitation) and more contemporary alternatives (expressivism, restorative justice, hybrid theories, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  6. Thom Brooks, Climate Change and Negative Duties.
    It is widely accepted by the scientific community and beyond that human beings are primarily responsible for climate change and that climate change has brought with it a number of real problems. These problems include, but are not limited to, greater threats to coastal communities, greater risk of famine, and greater risk that tropical diseases may spread to new territory. In keeping with J. S. Mill's 'Harm Principle', green political theorists often respond that if we are contributing a harm to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Annette Dufner (2012). Überraschende Thesen des klassischen Utilitarismus: Henry Sidgwicks vernachlässigte Vollendung der klassischen britischen Moralphilosophie. Archiv für Rechts- Und Sozialphilosophie 98 (4):510-534.
    This paper argues that Henry Sidgwick's theory of the good is a form of enlightened preference hedonism. In order to support this conclusion, the paper argues that the correct interpretation of his notorious passage about the 'ideal element' of the good should get tied to his views about weakness of the will. Sidgwick believes that reaching your own good requires overcoming weakness of the will. An applied section illustrates the practical significance of this finding. In cases in which shooting down (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
     
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Maria Paola Ferretti (2009). Exemptions for Whom? On the Relevant Focus of Egalitarian Concern. Res Publica 15 (3):269-287.
    Granting differential treatment is often considered a way of placing some groups in a better position in order to maintain or improve their cultural, economic, health-related or other conditions, and to address persistent inequalities. Critics of multiculturalism have pointed out the tension between protection for groups and protection for group members. The ‘rule-and-exemption’ approach has generally been conceived as more resistant to such criticism insofar as exemptions are not conceded to minorities or ethical and religious groups as such, but to (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Marc Fleurbaey & Alex Voorhoeve (2013). Decide As You Would With Full Information! An Argument Against Ex Ante Pareto. In Ole Norheim, Samia Hurst, Nir Eyal & Dan Wikler (eds.), Inequalities in Health: Concepts, Measures, and Ethics. Oxford University Press
    Policy-makers must sometimes choose between an alternative which has somewhat lower expected value for each person, but which will substantially improve the outcomes of the worst off, or an alternative which has somewhat higher expected value for each person, but which will leave those who end up worst off substantially less well off. The popular ex ante Pareto principle requires the choice of the alternative with higher expected utility for each. We argue that ex ante Pareto ought to be rejected (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Peter Higgins (2013). Immigration Justice. Edinburgh University Press.
    By what moral standards must nation-states select immigration policies? A central contention of Immigration Justice is that the justice of an immigration policy can be ascertained only through consideration of the pervasive, systematic, and unjust inequalities engendered by the institutions that constitute our social world. Immigration policies affect people primarily as members of social groups demarcated from each other by members’ gender, race, and class. For this reason, this book argues that states’ selection of immigration policies is a matter of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  11. Peter Higgins (2008). Open Borders and the Right to Immigration. Human Rights Review 9 (4):525-535.
    This paper argues that the relevant unit of analysis for assessing the justice of an immigration policy is the socially-situated individual (as opposed to the individual simpliciter or the nation-state, for example). This methodological principle is demonstrated indirectly by showing how some liberal, cosmopolitan defenses of "open borders" and the alleged right of immigration fail by their own standards, owing to the implicit adoption of an inappropriate unit of analysis.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  12. Carl Knight (2014). Theories of Distributive Justice and Post-Apartheid South Africa. Politikon 41 (1):23-38.
    South Africa is a highly distributively unequal country, and its inequality continues to be largely along racial lines. Such circumstances call for assessment from the perspective of contemporary theories of distributive justice. Three such theories—Rawlsian justice, utilitarianism, and luck egalitarianism—are described and applied. Rawls' difference principle recommends that the worst off be made as well as they can be, a standard which South Africa clearly falls short of. Utilitarianism recommends the maximization of overall societal well-being, a goal which South Africa (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. Michael Moehler (2015). Rational Cooperation and the Nash Bargaining Solution. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 18 (3):577-594.
    In a recent article, McClennen (2012) defends an alternative bargaining theory in response to his criticisms of the standard Nash bargaining solution as a principle of distributive justice in the context of the social contract. McClennen rejects the orthodox concept of expected individual utility maximizing behavior that underlies the Nash bargaining model in favor of what he calls full rationality, and McClennen’s full cooperation bargaining theory demands that agents select the most egalitarian strictly Pareto-optimal distributional outcome that is strictly Pareto-superior (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  14. David T. Risser (2003). The Moral Problem of Nonvoting. Journal of Social Philosophy 34 (3):348–363.
    The meaning and moral implications of voting and nonvoting in a representative democracy are outlined and discussed. A conception of voting as a forward-looking, conditional shared responsibility is developed and defended. This conception reflects an understanding of democratic politics in which the supreme strategic advantage is power to affect "the conflict of conflicts", that is, the ability to influence the shape and content of the dominant political agenda. This conception is also shown to support a consequentialist approach to distributive justice (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  15. Re'em Segev (2009). Second-Order Equality and Levelling Down. Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (3):425 – 443.
    Many think that equality is an intrinsic value. However, this view, especially when based on a consequential foundation, faces familiar objections related to the claim that equality is sometimes good for none and bad for some: most notably the levelling down objection. This article explores a unique (consequential) conception of equality, as part of a more general conception of fairness concerning the resolution of interpersonal conflicts, which is not exposed to these objections.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  16. Re'em Segev (2005). Well-Being and Fairness in the Distribution of Scarce Health Resources. Journal of Medicine and Philosophy 30 (3):231 – 260.
    Based on a general thesis regarding the proper resolution of interpersonal conflicts, this paper suggests a normative framework for the distribution of scarce health resources. The proposed thesis includes two basic ideas. First, individual well-being is the fundamental value. Second, interpersonal conflicts affecting well-being should be resolved in light of several conceptions of fairness, reflecting the independent value of persons and the moral significance of responsibility of individuals for the existence of interpersonal conflicts. These ideas are elaborated in several principles (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  17. Alex Voorhoeve (forthcoming). Why One Should Count Only Claims with Which One Can Sympathize. Public Health Ethics:phw006.
    When one faces competing claims of varying strength on public resources for health, which claims count? This paper proposes the following answer. One should count, or aggregate, a person’s claim just in case one could sympathize with her desire to prioritize her own claim over the strongest competing claim. It argues that this principle yields appealing case judgments and has a plausible grounding in both sympathetic identification with each person, taken separately, and respect for the person for whom most is (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. Alex Voorhoeve (2014). Review of Matthew D. Adler: Well-Being and Fair Distribution. Beyond Cost-Benefit Analysis. [REVIEW] Social Choice and Welfare 42 (1):245-54.
    In this extended book review, I summarize Adler's views and critically analyze his key arguments on the measurement of well-being and the foundations of prioritarianism.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. Alex Voorhoeve & Marc Fleurbaey (forthcoming). Priority or Equality for Possible People? Ethics.
    Suppose that you must make choices that may influence the well-being and the identities of the people who will exist, though not the number of people who will exist. How ought you to choose? This paper answers this question. It argues that the currency of distributive ethics in such cases is a combination of an individual’s final well-being and her expected well-being conditional on her existence. It also argues that this currency should be distributed in an egalitarian, rather than a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography