Graduate studies at Western
Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 7 (4):433 - 451 (2004)
|Abstract||In this paper, we challenge the usual argument which says that competition is a fair mechanism because it ranks individuals according to their relative preferences between effort and leisure. This argument, we claim, is very insufficient as a justification of fairness in competition, and we show that it does not stand up to scrutiny once various dynamic aspects of competition are taken into account. Once the sequential unfolding of competition is taken into account, competition turns out to be unfair even if the usual fairness argument is upheld. We distinguish between two notions of fairness, which we call U-fairness, where U stands for the usual fairness notion, and S-fairness, where S stands for the sequential aspect of competition. The sequential unfairness of competition, we argue, comprises two usually neglected aspects connected with losses of freedom: first of all, there is an eclipse of preferences in the sense that even perfectly calculating competitors do not carry out a trade-off between effort and ranking; and second, competitive dynamics leads to single-mindedness because the constraints on the competitors choices always operate in the sense of increased competitiveness and, therefore, in the direction of an increased effort requirements. We argue (1) that competition is S-unfair even if it is U-fair, (2) that as S-unfairness increases, the ethical relevance of U-fairness itself vanishes, so that (3) by focusing as they usually do on U-fairness alone, economists neglect a deeper aspect of unfairness|
|Keywords||alienation ethics and economics fairness of competition freedom normative economics philosophy of economics winner-take-all|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
R. A. Spinello (2005). Competing Fairly in the New Economy: Lessons From the Browser Wars. [REVIEW] Journal of Business Ethics 57 (4):343 - 361.
Jeremy Snyder (2010). Multiple Forms of Exploitation in International Research: The Need for Multiple Standards of Fairness. American Journal of Bioethics 10 (6):40-41.
Angela Ballantyne (2008). 'Fair Benefits' Accounts of Exploitation Require a Normative Principle of Fairness: Response to Gbadegesin and Wendler, and Emanuel Et Al. Bioethics 22 (4):239–244.
Steven Skultety (2011). Categories of Competition. Sport, Ethics and Philosophy 5 (4):433 - 446.
Giacomo Bonanno (1998). Intensity of Competition and the Choice Between Product and Process Innovation. International Journal of Industrial Organization 16 (4):495-510.
Jonathan Wolff (2009). Rational, Fair, and Reasonable. Utilitas 8 (03):263-.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads12 ( #101,444 of 750,737 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #62,995 of 750,737 )
How can I increase my downloads?