Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-dnltx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-25T00:38:03.526Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Justified Inequality?

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 May 2010

David Gauthier
Affiliation:
University of Pittsburgh

Extract

The overall objective of my current researches is to formulate and defend a variant of contractarian moral and social theory. Only a contractarian theory is, I claim, compatible with—and indeed required by—the theory of rational choice. I say “a variant” of contractarian theory because, for reasons I sketch in my paper “The Social Contract as Ideology”, there is a deep danger inherent in contractarian theory, the danger that it may be supposed that all human relationships are to be rationalized as contractual. The prevalence of this view—and it is, I believe, increasingly prevalent—would return us to the natural condition of humankind envisaged by Thomas Hobbes, the war of all against all. But this is contractarianism carried to excess; I want to argue, although assuredly not here, that satisfaction of a contractarian requirement is not only rationally necessary, but also necessary if our moral and social practices are to yield that true and complete human sociability integral to any life worth living, and fundamental to a community of free and equal persons.

Type
Articles
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Philosophical Association 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 See The Social Contract as Ideology”, Philosophy and Public Affairs 6/2 (1977), especially 134–138 and 159–164.Google Scholar

2 I have used different terminology in different accounts; I should now prefer relative benefit. But here I shall conform to Braybrooke's relative advantage.

3 Roth, Alvin, Axiomatic Models of Bargaining (Berlin, 1979), 105107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

4 The marginal productivity theory of distribution is assumed. Note that each person may be said to receive the fruits of his/her own labours and no more than these fruits only in the absence of factor rent. I shall not pursue this complication here.

5 See Roth, Axiomatic Models of Bargaining, for an up-to-date discussion of the theory of bargaining.

6 This journal, 423.

7 This journal, 412.

8 Nozick, Robert, Anarchy, State, and Utopia (New York, 1974), 175.Google Scholar

9 Morris, Christopher, “A Liberal Theory of the State”, unpublished MS.Google Scholar

10 Buchanan, James, The Limits of Liberty (Chicago, 1975), 6870.Google Scholar

11 Nozick, , Anarchy, State, and Utopia, 90.Google Scholar