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:
98 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Sort by:
1 — 50 / 98
  1. Elizabeth Anderson (2007). Fair Opportunity in Education: A Democratic Equality Perspective. Ethics 117 (4):595-622.
  2. R. J. Arneson (1999). Equality of Opportunity for Welfare Defended and Recanted. Journal of Political Philosophy 7 (4):488–497.
    Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen’s interesting criticisms of the ideal of equality of opportunity for welfare provide a welcome occasion for rethinking the requirements of egalitarian distributive justice.1 In the essay he criticizes I had proposed that insofar as we think distributive justice requires equality of any sort, we should conceive of distributive equality as equal opportunity provision. Roughly put, my suggestion was that equality of opportunity for welfare obtains among a group of people when all would have the same expected welfare over (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  3. Richard Arneson, Equality of Opportunity. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  4. Richard J. Arneson (1999). Against Rawlsian Equality of Opportunity. Philosophical Studies 93 (1):77-112.
    According to John Rawls, "Justice is the first virtue of social institutions."1 Like Gaul, justice is tripartite. Rawls affirms an Equal Liberty Principle that guarantees equal basic or constitutional liberties for all citizens and a Difference Principle that requires inequalities in the distribution of certain social and economic benefits, the primary social goods, to be set so that the long-term holdings of primary social goods are maximized for the citizens whose holdings are least. Sandwiched between these two principles is a (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  5. Richard J. Arneson (1989). Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophical Studies 56 (1):77 - 93.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  6. Andrew Askland (1996). Conflicting Accounts of Equal Opportunity. International Journal of Applied Philosophy 10 (2):35-44.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  7. Yonathan Reshef Avner de-Shalit (2009). Levelling the Playing Field: The Idea of Equal Opportunity and its Place in Egalitarian Thought – Andrew Mason. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (237):756-760.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  8. John Baker (2004). Review of Lesley A. Jacobs, Pursuing Equal Opportunities: The Theory and Practice of Egalitarian Justice. [REVIEW] Notre Dame Philosophical Reviews 2004 (5).
    Remove from this list | Direct download  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  9. Jan H. Blits (1990). Equality of Opportunity and the Problem of Nature. Educational Theory 40 (3):309-319.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  10. Bernard R. Boxil (1987). Global Equality of Opportunity and National Integrity. Social Philosophy and Policy 5 (01):143-.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  11. Harry Brighouse (2007). Equality of Opportunity and Complex Equality: The Special Place of Schooling. [REVIEW] Res Publica 13 (2):147-158.
    This paper is an engagement with Equality by John Baker, Kathleen Lynch, Judy Walsh and Sara Cantillon. It identifies a dilemma for educational egalitarians, which arises within their theory of equality, arguing that sometimes there may be a conflict between advancing equality of opportunity and providing equality of respect and recognition, and equality of love care and solidarity. It argues that the latter values may have more weight in deciding what to do than traditional educational egalitarians have usually thought.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  12. Harry Brighouse & Adam Swift (2008). Putting Educational Equality in its Place. Educational Policy and Finance 3 (4):444-466.
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  13. Harry Brighouse & Adam Swift (2008). Putting Educational Equality in its Place. Educational Policy and Finance 3 (4):444-466.
  14. Gillian Brock (2005). The Difference Principle, Equality of Opportunity, and Cosmopolitan Justice. Journal of Moral Philosophy 2 (3):333-351.
    What kinds of principles of justice should a cosmopolitan support? In recent years some have argued that a cosmopolitan should endorse a Global Difference Principle. It has also been suggested that a cosmopolitan should support a Principle of Global Equality of Opportunity. In this paper I examine how compelling these two suggestions are. I argue against a Global Difference Principle, but for an alternative Needs-Based Minimum Floor Principle (where these are not co-extensive, as I explain). Though I support a negative (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  15. Alexander Brown (2006). Equality of Opportunity for Education: One-Off or Lifelong? Journal of Philosophy of Education 40 (1):63–84.
  16. Les Burwood (1992). Equality of Opportunity as a Sensible Educational Ideal. Journal of Philosophy of Education 26 (2):257–259.
  17. Daniel Butt (2012). Global Equality of Opportunity as an Institutional Standard of Distributive Justice. In Chi Carmody, Frank J. Garcia & John Linarelli (eds.), Global Justice and International Economic Law: Opportunities and Prospects. Cambridge University Press.
  18. Clare Chambers (2009). Each Outcome is Another Opportunity: Problems with the Moment of Equal Opportunity. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 8 (4):374-400.
    This article introduces the concept of a Moment of Equal Opportunity (MEO): a point in an individual’s life at which equal opportunity must be applied and after which it need not. The concept of equal opportunity takes many forms, and not all employ an MEO. However, the more egalitarian a theory of equal opportunity is, the more likely it is to use an MEO. The article discusses various theories of equal opportunity and argues that those that employ an MEO are (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  19. Matthew Clayton (2001). Rawls and Natural Aristocracy. Croatian Journal of Philosophy 1 (3):239-259.
    The author discusses Rawls’s conception of socioeconomic justice, Democratic Equality. He contrasts Rawls’s account, which includes the difference principle constrained by the principle of fair equality of opportunity, with Natural Aristocracy, which constrains the difference principle only by the principle of careers open to talents. According to the author, many of Rawls’s own arguments support NaturalAristocracy over Democratic Equality. In particular, Natural Aristocracy appears well placed to avoid a challenge that naturally arises in consideration of Democratic Equality, with respect to (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  20. Tyler Cowen (2002). John E. Roemer, Equality of Opportunity:Equality of Opportunity. Ethics 112 (3):637-639.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  21. Rowan Cruft (2005). Against Equality of Opportunity. Philosophical Books 46 (1):59-65.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  22. Norman Daniels (1985). Fair Equality of Opportunity and Decent Minimums: A Reply to Buchanan. Philosophy and Public Affairs 14 (1):106-110.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  23. Avner de-Shalit & Yonathan Reshef (2009). Levelling the Playing Field: The Idea of Equal Opportunity and its Place in Egalitarian Thought - Andrew Mason. Philosophical Quarterly 59 (237):756-760.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  24. Mary Ellen Devereux (1984). Equal Employment Opportunity Under Title VII and the Exclusion of Fertile Women From the Toxic Workplace. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 12 (4):164-172.
  25. Speranta Dumitru (2012). Skilled Migration: Who Should Pay for What? Diversities 14 (1):8-23.
    Brain drain critiques and human rights advocates have conflicting views on emigration. From a brain drain perspective, the emigration harms a country when emigrants are skilled and the source country is poor. From the human rights perspective, the right "to leave any country, including one's own" is a fundamental right, protected for all, whatever their skills. Is the concern with poverty and social justice at odds with the right to emigrate? At the beginning of the l970s, the economist Jagdish Bhagwati (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  26. Speranta Dumitru (2012). Migration and Equality: Should Citizenship Levy Be a Tax or a Fine? Les Ateliers de l'Éthique / the Ethics Forum 7 (2):34-49.
    It is often argued that development aid can and should compensate the restrictions on migration. Such compensation, Shachar has recently argued, should be levied as a tax on citizenship to further the global equality of opportunity. Since citizenship is essentially a ‘birthright lottery’, that is, a way of legalizing privileges obtained by birth, it would be fair to compensate the resulting gap in opportunities available to children born in rich versus poor countries by a ‘birthright privilege levy’. This article sets (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    | Direct download (2 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  27. Speranta Dumitru (2009). Emigración, talentos y justicia: un argumento feminista sobre la fuga de cerebros. Isonomía: Revista de Teoría y Filosofía Del Derecho 30:31-52.
  28. Kenneth M. Ehrenberg (1999). Social Structure and Responsibility. Loyola Poverty Law Journal 5:1-26.
    We now live in a world with unprecedented possibilities. Technology is quickly reaching the point at which it will be within our grasp to cure any ailment: medical, psychological, or social. Yet we are already falling behind in the curative use of our newfound abilities. With our new technologies we have it within our means to feed the world and to eradicate sicknesses common only in developing countries. However, the use of these *2 abilities is governed by a social system (...)
    Remove from this list |
    Translate to English
    |
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  29. Gideon Elford (2013). Equality of Opportunity and Other-Affecting Choice: Why Luck Egalitarianism Does Not Require Brute Luck Equality. [REVIEW] Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (1):139-149.
    The luck egalitarian view famously maintains that inequalities in individuals’ circumstances are unfair or unjust, whereas inequalities traceable to individuals’ own responsible choices are fair or just. On this basis, the distinction between so-called brute luck and option luck has been seen as central to luck egalitarianism. Luck egalitarianism is interpreted, by advocates and opponents alike, as a view that condemns inequalities in brute luck but permits inequalities in option luck. It is also thought to be expressed in terms of (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (8 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  30. John R. Evans (1993). International Challenges and Opportunities in Health. Journal of Law, Medicine and Ethics 21 (1):10-15.
  31. Ovadia Ezra (2007). Equality of Opportunity and Affirmative Action. Philosophy in the Contemporary World 14 (1):22-37.
    This paper deals with the policy of affirmative action as an additional means for achieving equality of opportunity in society. It assumes that in modem society-at least in principle-the superior positions are distributed according to merit, and on the basis of fair competition. I argue that formal equality of opportunity injects apparently neutral requirements, such as experience, into the selection procedure for top positions, that, in fact, act particularly against women, since they allow the past employment situation to affect the (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  32. Oliver Feeney (2006). Equality of Whom? A Genetic Perspective on Equality (of Opportunity). Res Publica 12 (4):357-383.
    Rawls’ principle of fair equality of opportunity has been regularly discussed and criticized for being inadequate regarding natural inequalities. In so far as this egalitarian goal is sound, the purpose of the paper is to see how the prospect of radical genetic intervention might affect this particular inadequacy. I propose that, in a post-genetic setting, an appropriate response would be to extend the same rules regulating societal inequalities to a regulation of comparable genetic inequalities. I defend this stance against recent (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  33. Luara Ferracioli & Rosa Terlazzo (2014). Educating for Autonomy: Liberalism and Autonomy in the Capabilities Approach. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 17 (3):443-455.
    Martha Nussbaum grounds her version of the capabilities approach in political liberalism. In this paper, we argue that the capabilities approach, insofar as it genuinely values the things that persons can actually do and be, must be grounded in a hybrid account of liberalism: in order to show respect for adults, its justification must be political; in order to show respect for children, however, its implementation must include a commitment to comprehensive autonomy, one that ensures that children develop the skills (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  34. M. Fleurbaey (2001). Egalitarian Opportunities. Law and Philosophy 20 (5):499-530.
  35. Marc Fleurbaey (2012). Equal Opportunity, Reward and Respect for Preferences: Reply to Roemer. Economics and Philosophy 28 (2):201-216.
    This rejoinder to Roemer (this issue) examines Roemer's amendment to his EOp criterion, explains the similarities and differences between Roemer's approach to equality of opportunity and the economic literature inspired by the fair allocation theory, and proposes some clarifications on the compensation principle and the role of the reward principle in the definition of a responsibility-sensitive social criterion. It highlights the power of the ideal of respect for individual preferences with respect to the reward issue and the concern for potential (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  36. Charles Frankel (1971). Equality of Opportunity. Ethics 81 (3):191-211.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  37. Paul Gomberg (1995). Against Competitive Equal Opportunity. Journal of Social Philosophy 26 (3):59-73.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  38. Ronald M. Green (2001). Access to Healthcare: Going Beyond Fair Equality of Opportunity. American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):22 – 23.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  39. S. J. D. Green (1989). Competitive Equality of Opportunity: A Defense. Ethics 100 (1):5-32.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  40. Barry R. Gross (1987). Real Equality of Opportunity. Social Philosophy and Policy 5 (01):120-.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (5 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  41. Matthias Hild & Alex Voorhoeve (2004). Equality of Opportunity and Opportunity Dominance. Economics and Philosophy 20 (1):117-145.
    All conceptions of equal opportunity draw on some distinction between morally justified and unjustified inequalities. We discuss how this distinction varies across a range of philosophical positions. We find that these positions often advance equality of opportunity in tandem with distributive principles based on merit, desert, consequentialist criteria or individuals' responsibility for outcomes. The result of this amalgam of principles is a festering controversy that unnecessarily diminishes the widespread acceptability of opportunity concerns. We therefore propose to restore the conceptual separation (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (12 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  42. Robert K. Fullinwider (2003). Matt Cavanagh, Against Equality of Opportunity:Against Equality of Opportunity. Ethics 113 (4):869-871.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  43. Robert K. Fullinwider (2003). Matt Cavanagh, Against Equality of Opportunity:Against Equality of Opportunity. Ethics 113 (4):869-871.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (3 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  44. Frances M. Kamm (2001). Health and Equality of Opportunity. American Journal of Bioethics 1 (2):17 – 19.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  45. Stephen Kershnar (2004). Why Equal Opportunity is Not a Valuable Goal. Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (2):159–172.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (7 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  46. 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)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  47. Carl Knight (2013). The Injustice of Discrimination. South African Journal of Philosophy 32 (1):47-59.
    Discrimination might be considered unjust on account of the comparative disadvantage it imposes, the absolute disadvantage it imposes, the disrespect it shows, or the prejudice it shows. This article argues that each of these accounts overlooks some cases of unjust discrimination. In response to this state of affairs we might combine two or more of these accounts. A promising approach combines the comparative disadvantage and absolute disadvantage accounts.
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  48. Carl Knight (2013). Egalitarian Justice and Expected Value. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):1061-1073.
    According to all-luck egalitarianism, the differential distributive effects of both brute luck, which defines the outcome of risks which are not deliberately taken, and option luck, which defines the outcome of deliberate gambles, are unjust. Exactly how to correct the effects of option luck is, however, a complex issue. This article argues that (a) option luck should be neutralized not just by correcting luck among gamblers, but among the community as a whole, because it would be unfair for gamblers as (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (6 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  49. Carl Knight (2013). Luck Egalitarianism. Philosophy Compass 8 (10):924-934.
    Luck egalitarianism is a family of egalitarian theories of distributive justice that aim to counteract the distributive effects of luck. This article explains luck egalitarianism's main ideas, and the debates that have accompanied its rise to prominence. There are two main parts to the discussion. The first part sets out three key moves in the influential early statements of Dworkin, Arneson, and Cohen: the brute luck/option luck distinction, the specification of brute luck in everyday or theoretical terms and the specification (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (9 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
  50. Carl Knight (2012). Distributive Luck. South African Journal of Philosophy 31 (2):541-559.
    This article explores the Rawlsian goal of ensuring that distributions are not influenced by the morally arbitrary. It does so by bringing discussions of distributive justice into contact with the debate over moral luck initiated by Williams and Nagel. Rawls’ own justice as fairness appears to be incompatible with the arbitrariness commitment, as it creates some equalities arbitrarily. A major rival, Dworkin’s version of brute luck egalitarianism, aims to be continuous with ordinary ethics, and so is (a) sensitive to non-philosophical (...)
    Remove from this list | Direct download (4 more)  
     
    My bibliography  
     
    Export citation  
1 — 50 / 98