159 found
Order:
  1. Richard J. Arneson (1989). Equality and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophical Studies 56 (1):77 - 93.
  2. Richard J. Arneson (2000). Luck Egalitarianism and Prioritarianism. Ethics 110 (2):339-349.
    In her recent, provocative essay “What Is the Point of Equality?”, Elizabeth Anderson argues against a common ideal of egalitarian justice that she calls “ luck egalitarianism” and in favor of an approach she calls “democratic equality.”1 According to the luck egalitarian, the aim of justice as equality is to eliminate so far as is possible the impact on people’s lives of bad luck that falls on them through no fault or choice of their own. In the ideal luck egalitarian (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   44 citations  
  3. Richard J. Arneson (1989). Introduction. Ethics 99 (4):695-710.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  4. Richard J. Arneson (1999). Against Rawlsian Equality of Opportunity. Philosophical Studies 93 (1):77-112.
  5. Richard Arneson (1999). Human Flourishing Versus Desire Satisfaction. Social Philosophy and Policy 16 (1):113-142.
    What is the good for human persons? If I am trying to lead the best possible life I could lead, not the morally best life, but the life that is best for me, what exactly am I seeking? This phrasing of the question I will be pursuing may sound tendentious, so some explaining is needed. What is good for one person, we ordinarily suppose, can conflict with what is good for other persons and with what is required by morality. A (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  6.  13
    Richard J. Arneson (2016). Extreme Cosmopolitanisms Defended. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 19 (5):555-573.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  7. Richard Arneson (2011). Luck Egalitarianism–A Primer. In Carl Knight & Zofia Stemplowska (eds.), Responsibility and Distributive Justice. Oxford University Press 24--50.
  8. Richard Arneson (2008). Justice is Not Equality. Ratio 21 (4):371-391.
    This essay disputes G. A. Cohen's claim that John Rawls's argument for the difference principle involves an argument from moral arbitrariness to equality and then an illicit move away from equality. Moreover, the claim that an argument from moral arbitrariness establishes equality as the essential distributive justice ideal is found wanting.
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  9. Richard Arneson (2005). Joel Feinberg and the Justification of Hard Paternalism. Legal Theory 11 (3):259-284.
    Joel Feinberg was a brilliant philosopher whose work in social and moral philosophy is a legacy of excellent, even stunning achievement. Perhaps his most memorable achievement is his four-volume treatise on The Moral Limits of the Criminal Law, and perhaps the most striking jewel in this crowning achievement is his passionate and deeply insightful treatment of paternalism.1 Feinberg opposes Legal Paternalism, the doctrine that “it is always a good reason in support of a [criminal law] prohibition that it is necessary (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  10.  60
    Richard J. Arneson (2000). Perfectionism and Politics. Ethics 111 (1):37-63.
    Philosophers perennially debate the nature of the good for humans. Is it subjective or objective? That is to say, do the things that are intrinsically good for an agent, good for their own sakes and apart from further consequences, acquire this status only in virtue of how she happens to regard them? Or are there things that are good in themselves for an individual independently of her desires and attitudes toward them? The issue sounds recondite, but has been thought to (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  11. Bruce Ackerman, Richard J. Arneson, Ronald W. Dworkin, Gerald F. Gaus, Kent Greenawalt, Vinit Haksar, Thomas Hurka, George Klosko, Charles Larmore, Stephen Macedo, Thomas Nagel, John Rawls, Joseph Raz & George Sher (2003). Perfectionism and Neutrality: Essays in Liberal Theory. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    Editors provide a substantive introduction to the history and theories of perfectionism and neutrality, expertly contextualizing the essays and making the collection accessible.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  12. Richard Arneson (2004). Luck Egalitarianism Interpretated and Defended. Philosophical Topics 32 (1/2):1-20.
    In recent years some moral philosophers and political theorists, who have come to be called “luck egalitarians,” have urged that the essence of social justice is the moral imperative to improve the condition of people who suffer from simple bad luck. Prominent theorists who have attracted the luck egalitarian label include Ronald Dworkin, G. A. Cohen, and John Roemer.1 Larry Temkin should also be included in this group, as should Thomas Nagel at the time that he wrote Equality and Partiality.2 (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  13. Richard J. Arneson (1990). Liberalism, Distributive Subjectivism, and Equal Opportunity for Welfare. Philosophy and Public Affairs 19 (2):158-194.
  14.  37
    Richard J. Arneson (2015). Nudge and Shove. Social Theory and Practice 41 (4):668-691.
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  15. Richard J. Arneson (2010). Good, Period. Analysis 70 (4):731-744.
    (No abstract is available for this citation).
    No categories
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  16.  61
    Richard Arneson (2015). Justice for Earthlings. Analysis 75 (2):324-332.
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  17. Richard J. Arneson (2003). Defending the Purely Instrumental Account of Democratic Legitimacy. Journal of Political Philosophy 11 (1):122–132.
  18.  82
    Richard J. Arneson (1982). The Principle of Fairness and Free-Rider Problems. Ethics 92 (4):616-633.
    This article references the following linked citations. If you are trying to access articles from an off-campus location, you may be required to first logon via your library web site to access JSTOR. Please visit your library's website or contact a librarian to learn about options for remote access to JSTOR.
    Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   24 citations  
  19. Richard J. Arneson, What, If Anything, Renders All Humans Morally Equal?
    All humans have an equal basic moral status. They possess the same fundamental rights, and the comparable interests of each person should count the same in calculations that determine social policy. Neither supposed racial differences, nor skin color, sex, sexual orientation, ethnicity, intelligence, nor any other differences among humans negate their fundamental equal worth and dignity. These platitudes are virtually universally affirmed. A white supremacist racist or an admirer of Adolf Hitler who denies them is rightly regarded as beyond the (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  20. Richard J. Arneson (1980). Mill Versus Paternalism. Ethics 90 (4):470-489.
  21. Richard J. Arneson (1999). Egalitarianism and Responsibility. Journal of Ethics 3 (3):225-247.
    This essay examines several possible rationales for the egalitarian judgment that justice requires better-off individuals to help those who are worse off even in the absence of social interaction. These rationales include equality (everyone should enjoy the same level of benefits), moral meritocracy (each should get benefits according to her responsibility or deservingness), the threshold of sufficiency (each should be assured a minimally decent quality of life), prioritarianism (a function of benefits to individuals should be maximized that gives priority to (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  22.  58
    Richard Arneson (2000). Welfare Should Be the Currency of Justice. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 30 (4):497-524.
    Some theories of justice hold that individuals placed in fortunate circumstances through no merit or choice of their own are morally obligated to aid individuals placed in unfortunate circumstances through no fault or choice of their own. In these theories what are usually regarded as obligations of benevolence are reinterpreted as strict obligations of justice. A closely related view is that the institutions of a society should be arranged in a way that gives priority to helping people placed in unfortunate (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  23. Richard J. Arneson (2007). Desert and Equality. In Nils Holtug & Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen (eds.), Egalitarianism: New Essays on the Nature and Value of Equality. Clarendon Press 262--293.
  24. Richard J. Arneson (2010). Self-Ownership and World Ownership: Against Left-Libertarianism. Social Philosophy and Policy 27 (1):168-194.
    What regime of property ownership satisfies norms of justice? The doctrine known as “left-libertarianism” offers a seemingly plausible answer.1 Its basic thrust is that libertarianism properly understood leaves room for an egalitarianism that enhances its appeal. In this essay I argue that the seeming plausibility of the doctrine evaporates under scrutiny. This set of views is unacceptable from any political standpoint, left, right, or center. The left-libertarian category encompasses a family of positions. I focus on one of these, the views (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  25. Richard Arneson, Rawls, Responsibility, and Distributive Justice.
    The theory of justice pioneered by John Rawls explores a simple idea--that the concern of distributive justice is to compensate individuals for misfortune. Some people are blessed with good luck, some are cursed with bad luck, and it is the responsibility of society--all of us regarded collectively--to alter the distribution of goods and evils that arises from the jumble of lotteries that constitutes human life as we know it. Some are lucky to be born wealthy, or into a favorable socializing (...)
    Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  26. Richard Arneson (2000). Egalitarian Justice Versus the Right to Privacy? Social Philosophy and Policy 17 (2):91.
    In their celebrated essay “The Right to Privacy,” Samuel Warren and Louis Brandeis identify as the generic privacy value “the right to be let alone.”1 This same phrase occurs in Louis Brandeis’s dissent in Olmstead v. U.S.2 This characterization of privacy has been found objectionable by philosophers acting as conceptual police. For example, William Parent asserts that one can wrongfully fail to let another person alone in all sorts of ways such as assault that intuitively do not qualify as violations (...)
    Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   7 citations  
  27.  65
    Richard Arneson (2002). Why Justice Requires Transfers to Offset Income and Wealth Inequalities. Social Philosophy and Policy 19 (1):172-200.
    If an array of goods is for sale on a market, one’s wealth, the tradeable resources one owns, determines what one can purchase from this array. One’s income is the increment in wealth one acquires over a given period of time. In any society, we observe some people having more wealth and income, some less. At any given time, in some societies average wealth is greater than in others. Across time, we can observe societies becoming richer or poorer and showing (...)
    Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  28. Richard J. Arneson (2002). The End of Welfare as We Know It? Scanlon Versus Welfarist Consequentialism. Social Theory and Practice 28 (2):315-336.
  29. Richard Arneson (2005). Sophisticated Rule Consequentialism: Some Simple Objections. Philosophical Issues 15 (1):235–251.
    The popularity of rule-consequentialism among philosophers has waxed and waned. Waned, mostly; at least lately. The idea that the morality that ought to claim allegiance is the ideal code of rules whose acceptance by everybody would bring about best consequences became the object of careful analysis about half a century ago, in the writings of J. J. C. Smart, John Rawls, David Lyons, Richard Brandt, Richard Hare, and others.1 They considered utilitarian versions of rule consequentialism but discovered flaws in the (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  30.  75
    Richard Arneson, What is Wrongful Discrimination?
    Motivation to Permissibility 780 III. The Deception Accounts of Wrongful Discrimination 783 IV. Discrimination from Animus and Prejudice 787 V. An Objection 789 VI. Innocent Discrimination 790 VII. Disparate Impact 793 VIII. Suspect Classifications 795..
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  31.  75
    Richard J. Arneson (1997). Egalitarianism and the Undeserving Poor. Journal of Political Philosophy 5 (4):327–350.
    Recently in the U.S. a near-consensus has formed around the idea that it would be desirable to "end welfare as we know it," in the words of President Bill Clinton.1 In this context, the term "welfare" does not refer to the entire panoply of welfare state provision including government sponsored old age pensions, government provided medical care for the elderly, unemployment benefits for workers who have lost their jobs without being fired for cause, or aid to the disabled. "Welfare" in (...)
    Direct download (10 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  32.  74
    Richard Arneson, Egalitarianism. Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
  33. Richard Arneson, Rawls Versus Utilitarianism in the Light of Political Liberalism.
    The critique of utilitarianism forms a crucial subplot in the complex analysis of social justice that John Rawls develops in his first book, A Theory of Justice.1 The weaknesses of utilitarianism indicate the need for an alternative theory, and at many stages of the argument the test for the adequacy of the new theory that Rawls elaborates is whether it can be demonstrated to be superior to the utilitarian rival. The account of social justice shifts in the transition to Rawls’s (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  34. Richard J. Arneson (1984). Marlow's Skepticism in Heart of Darkness. Ethics 94 (3):420-440.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. Richard J. Arneson (2005). Do Patriotic Ties Limit Global Justice Duties? Journal of Ethics 9 (1-2):127 - 150.
    Some theorists who accept the existence of global justice duties to alleviate the condition of distant needy strangers hold that these duties are significantly constrained by special ties to fellow countrymen. The patriotic priority thesis holds that morality requires the members of each nation-state to give priority to helping needy fellow compatriots over more needy distant strangers. Three arguments for constraint and patriotic priority are examined in this essay: an argument from fair play, one from coercion, another from coercion and (...)
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36.  21
    Richard J. Arneson, What Do We Owe to Poor Families?
    This essay argues that when there is a moral duty to procreate,nonprocreators owe assistance in the task of providing for children, evenif their presence renders nonprocreators worse off. When new childrenbring benefits to nonprocreators, they have a duty of reciprocity owed tocooperating parents. If there is a moral duty to provide meaningful workopportunities, especially to the worse off, we have special duties to helppoor people enjoy opportunities for the meaningful work of raising children.Given the benefits of stable families for both (...)
    No categories
    Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37.  34
    Richard J. Arneson (1987). Meaningful Work and Market Socialism. Ethics 97 (3):517-545.
  38. Richard Arneson, Moral Limits on the Demands of Beneficence?
    If you came upon a small child drowning in a pond, you ought to save the child even at considerable cost and risk to yourself. In 1972 Peter Singer observed that inhabitants of affluent industrialized societies stand in exactly the same relationship to the millions of poor inhabitants of poor undeveloped societies that you would stand to the small child drowning in the example just given. Given that you ought to help the drowning child, by parity of reasoning we ought (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  39. Samantha Brennan, Claudia Card, Bernard Dauenhauer, Marilyn A. Friedman, Dale Jamieson, Richard Arneson, Clark Wolf, Robert Nagle, James Nickel, Christoph Fehige & Norman Daniels (2000). The Idea of a Political Liberalism: Essays on Rawls. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
    In this unique volume, some of today's most eminent political philosophers examine the thought of John Rawls, focusing in particular on his most recent work. These original essays explore diverse issues, including the problem of pluralism, the relationship between constitutive commitment and liberal institutions, just treatment of dissident minorities, the constitutional implications of liberalism, international relations, and the structure of international law. The first comprehensive study of Rawls's recent work, The Idea of Political Liberalism will be indispensable for political philosophers (...)
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   6 citations  
  40.  50
    Richard J. Arneson, Against Freedom of Conscience.
    Is there a moral right to freedom of conscience? Should a legal right to freedom of conscience be established in each country on Earth? This essay argues for negative answers to both questions. The term freedom of conscience might refer to freedom of thought and the freedom of expression that sustains freedom of thought. In this sense we might affirm the right of each person to form individual opinions about the right and the good, about what we owe one another (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  41. Hugh LaFollette, Elijah Millgram, David McCabe, Richard J. Arneson & Noël Carroll (2000). 10. Charles W. Mills, Blackness Visible: Essays on Philosophy and Race Charles W. Mills, Blackness Visible: Essays on Philosophy and Race (Pp. 432-434). [REVIEW] Ethics 110 (2).
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   9 citations  
  42. Richard Arneson, Introduction to Rawls on Justice and Rawls on Utilitarianism.
    According to Rawls, the principles of justice are principles that determine a fair resolution of conflicts of interest among persons in a society. “A set of principles is required for choosing among the various social arrangements which determine this division of advantages and for underwriting an agreement on the proper distributive shares” (p. 4). Different interpretations or conceptions of justice fill out this core concept; a theory of justice seeks a best conception. Justice takes priority over other normative claims—as Rawls (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. Richard J. Arneson (1981). What's Wrong with Exploitation? Ethics 91 (2):202-227.
    Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   3 citations  
  44. Richard Arneson, Consequentialism and its Critics.
    Consequentialism broadly speaking is the idea that the moral rightness and wrongness of a thing (an act, a policy, an institution) is determined by the quality of its consequences. A prominent version is act consequentialism, which holds one morally always ought to do an act whose outcome is no worse than the outcome of any other act one might have done instead. This doctrine has little content—no commitment is involved as to how one should evaluate consequences—but is still highly controversial. (...)
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  45.  76
    Richard J. Arneson, Chapter 3: Theories, Types, and Bounds of Justice.
    What do we owe to people in other countries around the globe? What do others owe to us? What does morality require of nation states in their policies toward other nation states and toward people other than co-nationals? (On the latter, see Buchanan 2004 and Rawls 1999). These questions define the subject matter of global justice theory.
    Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. Richard Arneson (1994). Autonomy and Preference Formation. In Joel Feinberg, Jules L. Coleman & Allen E. Buchanan (eds.), In Harm's Way: Essays in Honor of Joel Feinberg. Cambridge University Press 42--75.
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   5 citations  
  47. Richard Arneson (2003). Consequentialism Vs. Special-Ties Partiality. The Monist 86 (3):382-401.
    Richard J. Arneson Word count 6932 Most people believe that partiality toward those near and dear to us is morally required. Parents ought to favor their own children over other people’s children, and friends ought to favor each other over strangers. Partiality toward extended kin, fellow clan members, co-nationals, neighbors, members of one’s own community, and other affiliates is often affirmed, though it is controversial or at least unclear just what sorts of social relationship generate obligations of partiality.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48.  51
    Richard J. Arneson (1990). Primary Goods Reconsidered. Noûs 24 (3):429-454.
    Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  49. Richard J. Arneson, Value Pluralism Does Not Support Liberalism.
    Following hints in the writings of Isaiah Berlin, some political theorists hold that the thesis of value pluralism is true and that this truth provides support for political liberalism of a sort that prescribes wide guarantees of individual liberty.1 There are many different goods, and they are incommensurable. Hence, people should be left free to live their own lives as they choose so long as they don’t harm others in certain ways. In a free society there is a strong presumption (...)
    Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. Richard J. Arneson, Robert E. Goodin, David Schmidtz, Agnieszka Jaworska, Caspar Hare & Lionel K. McPherson (2007). 10. Laurence Thomas, The Family and the Political Self Laurence Thomas, The Family and the Political Self (Pp. 580-585). In Laurie DiMauro (ed.), Ethics. Greenhaven Press
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
1 — 50 / 159