Inquiry 53 (4):309-325 (2011)
|Abstract||In this paper I criticize the standard argument for deontological egalitarianism, understood as the thesis that there is a moral claim to have an equal share of well-being or whatever other good counts. That argument is based on the idea that equals should be treated equally. I connect the debate over egalitarianism with that over comparative justice. A common theme is a general skepticism against comparative claims. I argue (i) that there can be no claim to equality based simply on the fact of equal worth as that fact itself does not have any value for the supposed claim holder; and (ii) intuitions that suggest otherwise can be explained away without appealing to comparative claims|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
Thom Brooks (2007). Equality and Democracy. Ethical Perspectives 14 (1):3-12.
Pablo Gilabert (2012). Comparative Assessments of Justice, Political Feasibility, and Ideal Theory. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (1):39-56.
Peter Vallentyne (2003). Justice in General: An Introduction. In Peter Vallentyne (ed.), Equality and Justice: Justice in General. Routledge.
Sagar Sanyal (2012). A Defence of Democratic Egalitarianism. Journal of Philosophy 109 (7):413-34.
Gillian Brock (2005). Egalitarianism, Ideals, and Cosmopolitan Justice. Philosophical Forum 36 (1):1–30.
Alan Thomas (2012). Giving Each Person Her Due: Taurek Cases and Non-Comparative Justice. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (5):661-676.
Richard Arneson (2008). Justice is Not Equality. Ratio 21 (4):371-391.
David Miller (2005). Against Global Egalitarianism. Journal of Ethics 9 (1-2):55 - 79.
Michael Weber (2007). Is Equality Essentially Comparative? Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 10 (2):209 - 226.
Added to index2010-08-11
Total downloads34 ( #35,263 of 548,972 )
Recent downloads (6 months)3 ( #25,799 of 548,972 )
How can I increase my downloads?