The Metaphysical Case for Luck Egalitarianism
Social Theory and Practice 32 (2):173-189 (2006)
| Abstract | Some critics of luck egalitarianism have suggested that its reference to responsibility leaves it either assuming metaphysical libertarianism or (in the inevitable absence of a resolution of the free will problem) practically impotent. This paper argues that luck egalitarianism need not fall into either trap. It may in fact be sensitive to the possibility that libertarianism is false, and would not be undermined were this the case. Here luck egalitarianism actually fares better than outcome egalitarianism, which assumes, in just the way luck egalitarianism allegedly does, a controversial metaphysical position. There is, moreover, little difficulty in applying luck egalitarianism in practical contexts on the basis of our best guess about the relevant metaphysical questions. This solution is, of course, non-ideal, but appears preferable to the alternatives, such as simply assuming that metaphysical account of responsibility that offers the best fit with our favored theory of distributive justice | |||||||||
| Keywords | No keywords specified (fix it) | |||||||||
| Categories | ||||||||||
| Options |
|
|||||||||
Download options| PhilPapers Archive |
Upload a copy of this paper Check publisher's policy on self-archival Papers currently archived: 5,705 |
| External links |
  Try with proxy. |
| Through your library | Configure |
Similar books and articlesRyan Long (2011). The Incompleteness of Luck Egalitarianism. Social Philosophy Today 27:87-96.
Gideon Elford (2013). Equality of Opportunity and Other-Affecting Choice: Why Luck Egalitarianism Does Not Require Brute Luck Equality. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (1):139-149.
Carl Knight & Roger Knight (2012). Equality and Information. Ethical Perspectives 19 (3):469-499.
Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen (2005). Hurley on Egalitarianism and the Luck-Neutralizing Aim. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (2):249-265.
Carl Knight (2012). Distributive Luck. South African Journal of Philosophy 31 (2):541-559.
Carl Knight (2005). In Defence of Luck Egalitarianism. Res Publica 11 (1):1-10.
Carl Knight (2009). Luck Egalitarianism: Equality, Responsibility, and Justice. Edinburgh University Press.
Carl Knight (forthcoming). Egalitarian Justice and Expected Value. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice:1-13.
Martin E. Sandbu (2004). On Dworkin’s Brute-Luck–Option-Luck Distinction and the Consistency of Brute-Luck Egalitarianism. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 3 (3):283-312.
Matthew Lister (2012). Review of Carl Knight, Luck Egalitarianism. [REVIEW] Journal of Moral Philosophy 9 (1):127-30.
Carl Knight (2011). Inequality, Avoidability, and Healthcare. Iyyun 60:72-88.
Carl Knight (2012). In Defence of Global Egalitarianism. Journal of Global Ethics 8 (1):107-116.
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.
Patrick Tomlin (2013). Choices Chance and Change: Luck Egalitarianism Over Time. Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):393-407.
Patrick Tomlin (2012). Can I Be a Luck Egaliatarian and a Rawlsian? Ethical Perspectives 19 (3):371-397.
Analytics
Monthly downloads |
Added to index2011-01-09Total downloads32 ( #37,982 of 549,196 )Recent downloads (6 months)7 ( #10,444 of 549,196 )How can I increase my downloads? |
My notes
Discussion
