Related categories
Siblings:
69 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 69
  1. Anne Alstott, Is the Family at Odds with Equality? The Legal Implications of the Egalitarian Family.
    The family seems to pose an insoluble dilemma for liberal society, because it pits liberal values of freedom and equality against each another. When family life privileges adult freedom, children's life chances become unequal, due to their parents' different choices and unequal circumstances. But any effort to enact equality of opportunity for children, it seems, would demand such heavy-handed state regulation of the family that it would end family life as we know it. This is an old problem, and theorists (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  2. Chris Armstrong (2011). Citizenship, Egalitarianism and Global Justice. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (5):603-621.
    Many of the foremost defenders of distributive egalitarianism hold that its scope should be limited to co-citizens. But this bracketing of distributive equality exclusively to citizens turns out to be very difficult to defend. Pressure is placed on it, for instance, when we recognize its vulnerability to ?extension arguments? which attempt to cast the net of egalitarian concern more widely. The paper rehearses those arguments and also examines some ? ultimately unsuccessful ? responses which ?citizenship egalitarians? might make. If it (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. Chris Armstrong (2009). Global Egalitarianism. Philosophy Compass 4 (1):155-171.
    To whom is egalitarian justice owed? Our fellow citizens, or all of humankind? If the latter, what form might a global brand of egalitarianism take? This paper examines some recent debates about the justification, and content, of global egalitarian justice. It provides an account of some keenly argued controversies about the scope of egalitarian justice, between those who would restrict it to the level of the state and those who would extend it more widely. It also notes the cross-cutting distinction (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  4. Richard Arneson, Egalitarianism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  5. Christian Barry & Pablo Gilabert (2008). Does Global Egalitarianism Provide an Impractical and Unattractive Ideal of Justice? International Affairs 84 (5):1025-1039.
    In his important new book National responsibility and global justice, David Miller presents a systematic challenge to existing theories of global justice. In particular, he argues that cosmopolitan egalitarianism must be rejected. Such views, Miller maintains, would place unacceptable burdens on the most productive political communities, undermine national self-determination, and disincentivize political communities from taking responsibility for their fate. They are also impracticable and quite unrealistic, at least under present conditions. Miller offers an alternative account that conceives global justice in (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Christian Barry & Laura Valentini (2009). Egalitarian Challenges to Global Egalitarianism: A Critique. Review of International Studies 35:485-512.
  7. Gillian Brock (2005). Egalitarianism, Ideals, and Cosmopolitan Justice. Philosophical Forum 36 (1):1–30.
    Cosmopolitans believe that all human beings have equal moral worth and that our responsibilities to others do not stop at borders. Various cosmopolitans offer different interpretations of how we should understand what is entailed by that equal moral worth and what responsibilities we have to each other in taking our equality seriously. Two suggestions are that a cosmopolitan should endorse a 'global difference principle' and a 'principle of global equality of opportunity'. In the first part of this paper I examine (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (11 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  8. Thom Brooks (ed.) (2011). Ethics and Moral Philosophy. Brill.
    Ethics and moral philosophy is an area of particular interest today. This book brings together some of the most important essays in this area.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  9. Alexander Brown (2007). An Egalitarian Plateau? Challenging the Importance of Ronald Dworkin's Abstract Egalitarian Rights. Res Publica 13 (3):255-291.
    Ronald Dworkin’s work on the topic of equality over the past twenty-five years or so has been enormously influential, generating a great deal of debate about equality both as a practical aim and as a theoretical ideal. The present article attempts to assess the importance of one particular aspect of this work. Dworkin claims that the acceptance of abstract egalitarian rights to equal concern and respect can be thought to provide a kind of plateau in political argument, accommodating as it (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  10. Stijn Bruers, Towards a Coherent Theory of Animal Equality.
    In this article I want to construct in a simple and systematic way an ethical theory of animal equality. The goal is a consistent theory, containing a set of clear and coherent universalized ethical principles that best fits our strongest moral intuitions in all possible morally relevant situations that we can think of, without too many arbitrary elements. I demonstrate that impartiality with a level of risk aversion and empathy with a need for efficiency are two different approaches that both (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. Simon Caney (2015). Coercion, Justification, and Inequality: Defending Global Egalitarianism. Ethics and International Affairs 29 (3):277-288.
  12. Simon Caney (2005). Justice Beyond Borders: A Global Political Theory. Oxford University Press.
    Which political principles should govern global politics? In his new book, Simon Caney engages with the work of philosophers, political theorists, and international relations scholars in order to examine some of the most pressing global issues of our time. Are there universal civil, political, and economic human rights? Should there be a system of supra- state institutions? Can humanitarian intervention be justified?
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   50 citations  
  13. Dong-Ryul Choo (2014). Equality, Community, and the Scope of Distributive Justice: A Partial Defense of Cohen's Vision. Socialist Studies 10 (1):152-173.
    Luck egalitarians equalize the outcome enjoyed by people who exemplify the same degree of distributive desert by removing the influence of luck. They also try to calibrate differential rewards according to the pattern of distributive desert. This entails that they have to decide upon, among other things, the rate of reward, i.e., a principled way of distributing rewards to groups exercising different degrees of the relevant desert. However, the problem of the choice of reward principle is a relatively and undeservedly (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  14. Dong-Ryul Choo (2014). EQUALITY, COMMUNITY, AND THE SCOPE OF DISTRIBUTIVE JUSTICE: A PARTIAL DEFENSE OF COHEN's VISION. Socialist Studies 10 (1):152-173.
    Luck egalitarians equalize the outcome enjoyed by people who exemplify the same degree of distributive desert by removing the influence of luck. They also try to calibrate differential rewards according to the pattern of distributive desert. This entails that they have to decide upon, among other things, the rate of reward, i.e., a principled way of distributing rewards to groups exercising different degrees of the relevant desert. However, the problem of the choice of reward principle is a relatively and undeservedly (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Thomas Christiano (2010). The Constitution of Equality: Democratic Authority and its Limits. OUP Oxford.
    Today the question of the moral foundations of democracy is more important then ever. In this book the author helps to explain when and why democracy is important and also gives us guidance as to how democracies ought to be shaped.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   14 citations  
  16. Alan M. S. J. Coffee (2013). Freedom as Independence: Mary Wollstonecraft and the Grand Blessing of Life. Hypatia (1):908-924.
    Independence is a central and recurring theme in Wollstonecraft’s work. Independence should not be understood as an individualistic ideal that is in tension with the value of community but as an essential ingredient in successful and flourishing social relationships. I examine three aspects of this rich and complex concept that Wollstonecraft draws on as she develops her own notion of independence as a powerful feminist tool. First, independence is an egalitarian ideal that requires that all individuals, regardless of sex, are (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Adam Cureton (2014). Justice and the Crooked Wood of Human Nature. In Alexander Kaufman (ed.), Distributive Justice and Access to Advantage: G. A. Cohen's Egalitarianism. 79-94.
    G.A. Cohen accuses Rawls of illicitly tailoring basic principles of justice to the ‘crooked wood’ of human nature. We are naturally self-interested, for example, so justice must entice us to conform to requirements that cannot be too demanding, whereas Cohen thinks we should distinguish more clearly between pure justice and its pragmatic implementation. My suggestion is that, strictly speaking, Rawls does not rely on facts of any kind to define his constructive procedure or to argue that his principles of justice (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  18. Benjamin Davies (2015). Dennis McKerlie: Justice Between the Young and the Old. [REVIEW] Czech Sociological Review 51 (3):562-565.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  19. 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 (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. 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.
  21. Karánn Durland (2008). The Prospects of a Viable Biocentric Egalitarianism. Environmental Ethics 30 (4):401-416.
    At a minimum, a satisfactory biocentric egalitarianism must satisfy three constraints: (1) it must demand enough to deserve the name biocentric; (2) it must not require so much that it makes a worthwhile or at least a recognizably human life impossible; and (3) it must not be incoherent or internally inconsistent. Neither rule-based forms of biocentric egalitarianism nor virtue theory versions meet all three requirements. The rule-based accounts that Paul Taylor and James Sterba introduce contain serious defects, and many of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. 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  
  23. William C. French (1995). Against Biospherical Egalitarianism. Environmental Ethics 17 (1):39-57.
    Arne Naess and Paul Taylor are two of the most forceful proponents of the principle of species equality. Problematically, both, when adjudicating conflict of interest cases, resort to employing explicit or implicit species-ranking arguments. I examine how Lawrence Johnson’s critical, species-ranking approach helpfully avoids the normative inconsistencies of “biospherical egalitarianism.” Many assume species-ranking schemes are rooted in arrogant, ontological claims about human, primate, or mammalian superiority. Species-ranking, I believe, is best viewed as a justified articulation of moral priorities in response (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  24. Anca Gheaus & Lisa Herzog (2016). The Goods of Work. Journal of Social Philosophy 47 (1):70-89.
    The evaluation of labour markets and of particular jobs ought to be sensitive to a plurality of benefits and burdens of work. We use the term 'the goods of work' to refer to those benefits of work that cannot be obtained in exchange for money and that can be enjoyed mostly or exclusively in the context of work. Drawing on empirical research and various philosophical traditions of thinking about work we identify four goods of work: 1) attaining various types of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Pablo Gilabert (2015). Global Moral Egalitarianism and Global Distributive Egalitarianism. Ethics and International Affairs 29 (3):269-276.
    Michael Blake claims that liberal principles ground egalitarian distribution domestically but not globally. This paper raises some worries about these claims. It challenges the argument for domestic distributive equality based on a concern for autonomy, noting that a broader concern for wellbeing is required. And it suggests that a concern for everyone’s autonomy and wellbeing supports the progressive pursuit of global distributive equality rather than only the pursuit of global sufficiency.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Pablo Gilabert (2012). From Global Poverty to Global Equality: A Philosophical Exploration. Oxford University Press, UK.
    Machine generated contents note: -- Acknowledgments -- 1. Introduction: The complexity of the debate on global justice -- Part I: Beyond Global Poverty -- 2. Basic positive duties of justice: A contractualist defense -- 3. Negative duties and the libertarian challenge -- 4. The feasibility of global poverty eradication in nonideal circumstances -- Part II: Toward Global Equality -- 5. Humanist versus associativist accounts of global equality -- 6. A humanist defense of global equality -- 7. The feasibility of global (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  27. Pablo Gilabert (2011). Cosmopolitan Overflow. The Monist 94 (4):584-592.
  28. S. D. Hampson, The Grounds and Scope of Egalitarian Justice.
    The main problem that the thesis is concerned with is: in which contexts is the maintenance of inequalities in the distribution of social goods unjust, and why is it unjust in these contexts? The thesis has three main sections. In the first section I reject Thomas Nagel's argument that, even when applied to only the coercive institutions of the state, egalitarian principles could be reasonably rejected on the grounds that they would be overly demanding on those who could be better (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  29. Nils Holtug (2009). Equality, Priority and Global Justice. Journal of Global Ethics 5 (3):173 – 179.
    Derek Parfit has argued that prioritarianism “naturally” has global scope, i.e. naturally applies to everyone, irrespective of his or her particular national, state or other communal affiliation. In that respect, it differs from e.g. egalitarianism. In this article, I critically assess Parfit's argument. In particular, I argue that it is difficult to draw conclusions about the scope of prioritarianism simply from an inspection of its structure. I also make some suggestions as to what it would take to argue that prioritarianism (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  30. Adam Hosein, Fairness, Distributive Justice and Global Justice.
    In this paper I discuss justice in the distribution of resources, both within states and across different states. On one influential view, it is always unjust for one person to have less than another through no fault of her own. State borders, on this account, have no importance in determining which distributions are just. I show that an alternative approach is needed. I argue that distributions of wealth are only unjust in so far as they issue from unfair treatment. It (...)
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. Adam Hosein & Adam Cox, Immigration and Equality.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Ian Hunt (2011). How Egalitarian is Rawls's Theory of Justice? Philosophical Papers 39 (2):155-181.
    Gerald Cohen's critique of John Rawls's theory of justice is that it is concerned only with the justice of social institutions, and must thus arbitrarily draw a line between those inequalities excluded and those allowed by the basic structure. Cohen claims that a proper concern with the interests of the least advantaged would rule out 'incentives' for 'talented' individuals. I argue that Rawls's assumption that the subject of justice is the basic structure of society does not arbitrarily restrict the concerns (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. Kyle Johannsen (2015). On the Conceptual Status of Justice. Dissertation, Queen's University
    In contemporary debates about justice, political philosophers take themselves to be engaged with a subject that’s narrower than the whole of morality. Many contemporary liberals, notably John Rawls, understand this narrowness in terms of context specificity. On their view, justice is the part of morality that applies to the context of a society’s institutions, but only has indirect application to the context of citizens’ personal lives. In contrast, many value pluralists, notably G.A. Cohen, understand justice’s narrowness in terms of singularity (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Robert Jubb (2011). On the Significance of the Basic Structure: A Priori Baseline Views and Luck Egalitarianism. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 14 (1):59-79.
    This paper uses the exploration of the grounds of a common criticism of luck egalitarianism to try and make an argument about both the proper subject of theorizing about justice and how to approach that subject. It draws a distinction between what it calls basic structure views and a priori baseline views, where the former take the institutional aspects of political prescriptions seriously and the latter do not. It argues that objections to (...) egalitarianism on the grounds of its harshness can in part be explained by this blindness to relevant features of institutions. Further, it may be that luck egalitarianism cannot regard its own enactment as just. A related objection to Ronald Dworkin's equality of resources, which claims that it cannot pick a particular institutional background to set the costs of resources and so is radically indeterminate, is also presented. These results, I argue, give us good reason to reject all a priori baseline views. (shrink)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  35. Robert Jubb (2011). Rawls and Rousseau: Amour-Propre and the Strains of Commitment. [REVIEW] Res Publica 17 (3):245-260.
    In this paper I try to illuminate the Rawlsian architectonic through an interpretation of what Rawls’ Lectures on the History of Political Philosophy say about Rousseau. I argue that Rawls’ emphasis there when discussing Rousseau on interpreting amour-propre so as to make it compatible with a life in at least some societies draws attention to, and helps explicate, an analogous feature of his own work, the strains of commitment broadly conceived. Both are centrally connected with protecting a sense of self (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Carl Knight (2012). In Defence of Global Egalitarianism. Journal of Global Ethics 8 (1):107-116.
    This essay argues that David Miller's criticisms of global egalitarianism do not undermine the view where it is stated in one of its stronger, luck egalitarian forms. The claim that global egalitarianism cannot specify a metric of justice which is broad enough to exclude spurious claims for redistribution, but precise enough to appropriately value different kinds of advantage, implicitly assumes that cultural understandings are the only legitimate way of identifying what counts as advantage. But that is an assumption always or (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen (2015). Luck Egalitarianism. Bloomsbury Academic.
  38. Matthew Lister (2012). Review of Carl Knight, Luck Egalitarianism. [REVIEW] Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (1):127-30.
  39. Dennis Mckerlie (2001). Dimensions of Equality. Utilitas 13 (3):263.
    The egalitarian values of equality and priority are standardly given maximal scope in that they are applied to the overall condition of peoples' lives and to temporally complete lifetimes. They are also standardly restricted to interpersonal choices. This paper argues that egalitarian values can also reasonably be applied to particular dimensions of lives, to people at particular times, and to choices made about one person's life. It contends that these special applications of egalitarianism are easier to defend in the case (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  40. Dennis McKerlie (1997). Priority and Time. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 27 (3):287 - 309.
  41. Dennis McKerlie (1989). Equality and Time. Ethics 99 (3):475-491.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  42. Dennis McKerlie (1988). Egalitarianism and the Separateness of Persons. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 18 (2):205 - 225.
  43. Christian Miller (2015). Distributive Justice and Empirical Moral Psychology. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy:none.
    Bargaining games typically involve two players distributing a specific payoff (usually money), and will be our focus here, as they are especially helpful for examining the moral psychology of justice. Examples include the ultimatum game and dictator game. We will also look at a novel twist on the dictator game by the psychologist Daniel Batson, which has fostered a large experimental literature on what he calls ‘moral hypocrisy.’ Finally we will connect this discussion of economic games to the virtue of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. David Miller (2005). Against Global Egalitarianism. Journal of Ethics 9 (1-2):55 - 79.
    This article attacks the view that global justice should be understood in terms of a global principle of equality. The principle mainly discussed is global equality of opportunity – the idea that people of similar talent and motivation should have equivalent opportunity sets no matter to which society they belong. I argue first that in a culturally plural world we have no neutral way of measuring opportunity sets. I then suggest that the most commonly offered defences of global egalitarianism – (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  45. 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  
  46. Darrel Moellendorf (2006). Equal Respect and Global Egalitarianism. Social Theory and Practice 32 (4):601-616.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  47. Jan Narveson (1997). Egalitarianism: Partial, Counterproductive, and Baseless. Ratio 10 (3):280–295.
    Egalitarians hold that some good things should, in principle, be distributed equally among all people. Which good things? Why just those and not others? Why are they to be equalized only among humans and not, say, between humans and cats? And why is the equalization to be confined within the borders of the author's State, rather than practiced over the whole human race (at least)? Those are all matters for the particular egalitarian to explain, as best he can. None, I (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (12 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. Rekha Nath (2015). On the Scope and Grounds of Social Equality. In Fabian Schuppert and Ivo Wallimann-Helmer Edited by Carina Fourie (ed.), Social Equality: Essays on What It Means to be Equals. Oxford University Press 186-208.
    On social equality, individuals ought to relate on terms of equality. An important issue concerning this theory, which has not received much attention, is its scope: which individuals ought to relate on egalitarian terms? The answer depends on the theory’s grounds: the basis upon which demands of social equality arise when they do. In this chapter, I consider how we ought to construe the scope and the grounds of social equality. I argue that underlying the considerations social egalitarians advance for (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  49. Rekha Nath (2014). Against Institutional Luck Egalitarianism. Journal of Ethics and Social Philosophy 8 (1):1-19.
    Kok-Chor Tan has recently defended a novel theory of egalitarian distributive justice, institutional luck egalitarianism (ILE). On this theory, it is unjust for institutions to favor some individuals over others based on matters of luck. Tan takes his theory to preserve the intuitive appeal of luck egalitarianism while avoiding what he regards as absurd implications that face other versions of luck egalitarianism. Despite the centrality of the concept of institutional influence to his theory, Tan never spells out precisely what it (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Rekha Nath (2010). The Commitments of Cosmopolitanism. Ethics and International Affairs 24 (3):319-333.
    Gillian Brock's "Global Justice: A Cosmopolitan Account" and Darrel Moellendorf's "Global Inequality Matters" present carefully crafted accounts of the obligations we have to non-compatriots and offer practical proposals for how we might get closer to meeting these obligations.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 69