Graduate studies at Western
Journal of Social Philosophy 37 (3):423–440 (2006)
|Abstract||Two of the most important theories in contemporary liberal egalitarianism are Ronald Dworkin’s equality of resources and Amartya Sen’s capability approach. Recently Dworkin has claimed that Sen’s capability approach does not provide a genuine alternative to equality of resources. In this article, we provide both an internal and an external critique of Dworkin’s claim. In the first part of the article we develop an internal critique by providing a detailed analysis of Dworkin’s claim. Andrew Williams has contested Dworkin’s claim, but he has failed to convince Dworkin of his objections. We analyze this debate, and offer an argument that, we hope, settles this dispute. In the second part of the article we argue that an analysis beyond the current parameters of the liberal-egalitarian debate points to three significant differences between Dworkin’s and Sen’s egalitarian theories: the degree to which they rely on an ideal-theoretical approach; their ability to judge social structures that are intertwined with people’s social endowments; and their endorsement of a well-defined criterion to demarcate morally relevant from morally irrelevant inequalities. This broader analysis not only reinforces our conclusion that Dworkin’s equality of resources and Sen’s capability approach are genuinely distinct, but it also suggests some more general insights that may be relevant for a better understanding of contemporary egalitarian thinking.|
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
|Through your library||Configure|
Similar books and articles
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.
Alexander Brown (2007). An Egalitarian Plateau? Challenging the Importance of Ronald Dworkin's Abstract Egalitarian Rights. Res Publica 13 (3):255-291.
Miriam Cohen Christofidis (2004). Talent, Slavery and Envy in Dworkin's Equality of Resources. Utilitas 16 (3):267-287.
Rasmus Hansen (2011). Equality of Resources and the Problem of Recognition. Res Publica 17 (2):157-174.
Richard Arneson (2004). Luck Egalitarianism Interpretated and Defended. Philosophical Topics 32 (1/2):1-20.
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.
Timothy Hinton (2002). Choice and Luck in Recent Egalitarian Thought. Philosophical Papers 31 (2):145-167.
Jude Browne & Marc Stears (2005). Capabilities, Resources, and Systematic Injustice: A Case of Gender Inequality. Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (3):355-373.
Rolans Pierik & Robeyns Ingrid (2007). Resources Versus Capabilities: Social Endowments in Egalitarian Theory. Political Studies 55 (1):133.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads7 ( #142,523 of 739,053 )
Recent downloads (6 months)1 ( #61,778 of 739,053 )
How can I increase my downloads?