This category needs an editor. We encourage you to help if you are qualified.
Volunteer, or read more about what this involves.
Related categories
Subcategories:
1590 found
Search inside:
(import / add options)   Order:
1 — 50 / 1590
Material to categorize
  1. Gerhard Jean Daniël Aalders (1975). Political Thought in Hellenistic Times. A. M. Hakkert.
  2. G. John M. Abbarno (2009). Ethical Approaches to Global Poverty. In Jinfen Yan & David E. Schrader (eds.), Creating a Global Dialogue on Value Inquiry: Papers From the Xxii Congress of Philosophy (Rethinking Philosophy Today). Edwin Mellen Press.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  3. R. Abbey (2007). Back Toward a Comprehensive Liberalism? Political Theory 35 (1):5-28.
  4. B. Agarwala (1988). The Distribution of Natural Talents As a Social Asset. Indian Philosophical Quarterly 15 (4):501.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  5. K. B. Agrawal (1993). The Rule of Law and the Principles of the Welfare State. Rechtstheorie. Beiheft 15:135-143.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  6. Fernando Aguiar, Alice Becker & Luis Miller (2013). Whose Impartiality? An Experimental Study of Veiled Stakeholders, Involved Spectators and Detached Observers. Economics and Philosophy 29 (2):155-174.
    We present an experiment designed to investigate three different mechanisms to achieve impartiality in distributive justice. We consider a first-person procedure, inspired by the Rawlsian veil of ignorance,and two third-party procedures, an involved spectator and a detached observer. First-person veiled stakeholders and involved spectators are affected by an initially unfair distribution that, in the stakeholders’ case,is to be redressed. We find substantial differences in the redressing task.Detached observers propose significantly fairer redistributions than veiled takeholders or involved spectators. Risk preferences partly (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   16 citations  
  7. Jaime Ahlberg (2010). Ideal and Nonideal Theory in the Realm of the Political. Dissertation, The University of Wisconsin - Madison
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  8. Linell Ajello (2014). A Game of Poverty and Tragic Deliberation. Constellations 21 (1):134-152.
  9. Christopher Ake (1975). Justice as Equality. Philosophy and Public Affairs 5 (1):69-89.
  10. Christopher Francis Ake (1977). Justice as Fairness, Justice as Equality. Dissertation, Princeton University
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  11. L. M. Alcoff (2007). Fraser on Redistribution, Recognition, and Identity. European Journal of Political Theory 6 (3):255-265.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  12. Marja Alestalo’S. (1993). Science and the Welfare State Program: The Growth of State Activism in Finland. Knowledge and Policy 6 (1):52-66.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  13. J. McKenzie Alexander (2000). Evolutionary Explanations of Distributive Justice. Philosophy of Science 67 (3):490-516.
    Evolutionary game theoretic accounts of justice attempt to explain our willingness to follow certain principles of justice by appealing to robustness properties possessed by those principles. Skyrms (1996) offers one sketch of how such an account might go for divide-the-dollar, the simplest version of the Nash bargaining game, using the replicator dynamics of Taylor and Jonker (1978). In a recent article, D'Arms et al. (1998) criticize his account and describe a model which, they allege, undermines his theory. I sketch a (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   4 citations  
  14. Larry A. Alexander (1985). Fair Equality of Opportunity. Philosophy Research Archives 11:197-208.
    Although discussions of John Rawls’ A Theory of Justice generally refer to Rawls’ two principles of justice, and although Rawls himself labels his principles “the two principles of justice”, Rawls actually sets forth three distinct principles in the following lexical order: the liberty principle, the fair equality of opportunity principle, and the difference principle. Rawls argues at some length for the priority of the liberty principle over the other two. On the other hand, Rawls offers hardly any argument at all (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  15. Anita L. Allen (2011). Was I Entitled or Should I Apologize? Affirmative Action Going Forward. Journal of Ethics 15 (3):253-263.
    As a U.S. civil rights policy, affirmative action commonly denotes race-conscious and result-oriented efforts by private and public officials to correct the unequal distribution of economic opportunity and education attributed to slavery, segregation, poverty and racism. Opponents argue that affirmative action (1) violates ideals of color-blind public policies, offending moral principles of fairness and constitutional principles of equality and due process; (2) has proven to be socially and politically divisive; (3) has not made things better; (4) mainly benefits middle-class, wealthy (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  16. Ernie Alleva (1990). Democracy and the Welfare State, Amy Gutmann . Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1988, Ix + 290 Pages. [REVIEW] Economics and Philosophy 6 (2):322.
  17. Michael Allingham (2013). Distributive Justice. Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy.
    Distributive Justice Theories of distributive justice seek to specify what is meant by a just distribution of goods among members of society. All liberal theories (in the sense specified below) may be seen as expressions of laissez-faire with compensations for factors that they consider to be morally arbitrary. More specifically, such theories may be interpreted […].
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  18. David Alm (2011). Equality and Comparative Justice. Inquiry 53 (4):309-325.
    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 (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  19. Ingvild Almås, Alexander W. Cappelen, Kjell G. Salvanes, Erik Ø Sørensen & Bertil Tungodden (forthcoming). Fairness and Family Background. Politics, Philosophy and Economics:1470594-15618966.
    Fairness preferences fundamentally affect individual behavior and play an important role in shaping social and political institutions. However, people differ both with respect to what they view as fair and with respect to how much weight they attach to fairness considerations. In this article, we study the role of family background in explaining these heterogeneities in fairness preferences. In particular, we examine how socioeconomic background relates to fairness views and to how people make trade-offs between fairness and self-interest. To study (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (3 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  20. Allen Andrew A. Alvarez (2007). Threshold Considerations in Fair Allocation of Health Resources: Justice Beyond Scarcity. Bioethics 21 (8):426–438.
  21. Bower Aly (1950). Welfare State. [Columbia? Mo..
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  22. Anthony Amatrudo (2010). Being Lucky and Being Deserving, and Distribution. Heythrop Journal 51 (4):658-669.
    This paper examines the concepts of desert and luck, familiar in political theory but neglected by sociologists. I argue that the idea of desert is composed of both personal performance and the degree of responsibility a person has over that performance. Distribution ought to be in accordance with the indebtedness created by the person's performance. This can be compromised by luck; that is, personal desert is undermined where lack of performance scuttles the applicability of the contributory model. This paper examines (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  23. Yoram Amiel & Frank Cowell (1999). Thinking About Inequality: Personal Judgment and Income Distributions. Cambridge University Press.
    What is inequality? In the late 1990s there was an explosion of interest in the subject that yielded a substantial body of formal tools and results for income-distribution analysis. Nearly all of this is founded on a small set of core assumptions - such as the Principle of Transfers, scale independence, the population principle∑ - that are used to give meaning to specific concepts of inequality measurement, inequality ranking and, indeed, to inequality itself. But does the standard axiomatic structure coincide (...)
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  24. Sudhir Anand (ed.) (2004). Public Health, Ethics, and Equity. Oxford University Press UK.
    In the last fifty years, average overall health status has increased more or less in parallel with a much celebrated decline in mortality, attributed mostly to poverty reduction, sanitation, nutrition, housing, immunization, and improved medical care. It is becoming increasingly clear, however, that these achievements were not equally distributed. In most countries, while some social groups have benefited significantly, the situation of others has stagnated or may even have worsened.If health is a prerequisite to a person functioning as an agent, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  25. Elizabeth Anderson (2004). Welfare, Work Requirements, and Dependant-Care. Journal of Applied Philosophy 21 (3):243-256.
    the arguments in their favour are weak. Arguments based on reciprocity fail to explain why only means-tested public benefits should be subject to work requirements, and why unpaid dependant care work should not count as satisfying citizens’ obligations to reciprocate. Argu- ments based on promoting the work ethic misattribute recipients’ nonwork to deviant values, when their core problem is finding steady employment consistent with supporting a family and meeting dependant care responsibilities. Rigid work requirements impose unreasonable costs on some of (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (7 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  26. Elizabeth Anderson (1995). Inequality Reexamined, Sen Amartya. Harvard University Press, 1992, 207 + Xiv Pages. Economics and Philosophy 11 (1):182.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  27. Rodolfo Arango (2003). Basic Social Rights, Constitutional Justice, and Democracy. Ratio Juris 16 (2):141-154.
  28. Chris Armstrong (2014). Justice and Attachment to Natural Resources. Journal of Political Philosophy 22 (1):48-65.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   2 citations  
  29. Chris Armstrong (2013). Kok-Chor Tan, Justice, Institutions, and Luck: The Site, Ground, and Scope of Equality. Social Theory and Practice 39 (4):695-701.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  30. Dick Arneson, The Welfarist Strikes Back.
    In chapter 1 of Sovereign Virtue Ronald Dworkin argues against the claim that insofar as we care about distributive equality (equality in the distribution of resources to be privately owned), what we should care about is equality of welfare. This says that a distribution of resources in a society is equal just in case it results in all members of society having the same level of welfare (utility, well-being, personal good).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  31. R. J. Arneson (2010). Book Review: Disadvantage, Capability, Commensurability, and Policy. [REVIEW] Politics, Philosophy and Economics 9 (3):339-357.
    (No abstract is available for this citation).
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  32. Richard Arneson, Distributive Justice and Basic Capability Equality: 'Good Enough' is Not Good Enough Richard J. Arneson.
    Amartya Sen is a renowned economist who has also made important contributions to philosophical thinking about distributive justice. These contributions tend to take the form of criticism of inadequate positions and insistence on making distinctions that will promote clear thinking about the topic. Sen is not shy about making substantive normative claims, but thus far he has avoided commitment to a theory of justice, in the sense of a set of principles that specifies what facts are relevant for policy choice (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  33. 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 (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  34. Richard Arneson, Real Freedom and Distributive Justice.
    Here is a picture of a society that one might suppose to be ideally just in its distributive practices: All members of the society are equally free to live in any way that they might choose, and institutions are arranged so that the equal freedom available to all is at the highest feasible level. What, if anything, is wrong with this picture? One might object against the insistence on equal freedom for all and propose that freedom should instead be maximinned, (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  35. 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 (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  36. Richard Arneson (2010). Democratic Equality and Relating as Equals. In Colin M. Macleod (ed.), Justice and Equality. University of Calgary Press. pp. 25-52.
    Remove from this list   Direct download  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  37. 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 (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (9 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  38. Richard Arneson (2000). Economic Analysis Meets Distributive Justice. Social Theory and Practice 26 (2):327-345.
    Some of the best philosophers do not hold academic appointments in philosophy departments. Wouldn't you rather have the ghost of Frank Ramsey (the Cambridge mathematician who died in the 1920s) as a hall mate instead of some of your current colleagues? Confining our attention to the living, we find some economists among the more philosophically inclined intellectuals. The best of these fellow traveling economistphilosophers are the Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen and also John Roemer. In the early 1980s Roemer did (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (6 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  39. 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 (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (8 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   10 citations  
  40. Richard J. Arneson, Disadvantage, Capability, Commensurability, and Policy.
    In their excellent book Disadvantage, Jonathan Wolff and Avner de-Shalit (hereafter: the Authors) state that their aim “is to provide practical guidance to policy makers by providing a version of egalitarian theory which can be applied to actual social policy.”1 This is a worthy project and their execution of it is full of insight. However, I doubt that they succeed in fulfilling their stated aim.
    Remove from this list  
    Translate
      Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  41. Richard J. Arneson, Distributive Justice and Basic Capability Equality: 'Good Enough' is Not Good Enough.
    Amartya Sen is a renowned economist who has also made important contributions to philosophical thinking about distributive justice. These contributions tend to take the form of criticism of inadequate positions and insistence on making distinctions that will promote clear thinking about the topic. Sen is not shy about making substantive normative claims, but thus far he has avoided commitment to a theory of justice, in the sense of a set of principles that specifies what facts are relevant for policy choice (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  42. Richard J. Arneson, Whatever of What?
    In 1980, Amartya Sen’s essay ‘Equality of What?’ stimulated a still ongoing discussion on the question: ‘Insofar as one holds that social justice demands rendering people’s condition more nearly equal, what aspects of people’s condition should be equalized?’ (Sen, 1982). In what respects should people be rendered more nearly the same? Prominent responses include resources, fundamental liberties, capabilities, advantages, welfare, and opportunities for welfare.1 There is a more general question in this neighbourhood that should be of interest. We might conceive (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  43. Richard J. Arneson (2010). Democratic Equality and Relating as Equals. Canadian Journal of Philosophy 40 (sup1):25-52.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (2 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  44. Richard J. Arneson (1990). Primary Goods Reconsidered. Noûs 24 (3):429-454.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   8 citations  
  45. Richard J. Arneson (1989). Liberal Egalitarianism and World Resource Distribution: Two Views. [REVIEW] Journal of Value Inquiry 23 (3):171-190.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (4 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  46. N. Scott Arnold (1988). Reply to Professor Putterman. Economics and Philosophy 4 (2):337.
  47. N. Scott Arnold (1987). Final Reply to Professor Schweickart. Economics and Philosophy 3 (2):335.
    Since Schweickart asserts that I have not addressed his main argument, let me consider briefly the four claims he advances at the beginning of his second reply. Regarding 1: To argue, as I have, that there would be a strong tendency for market socialism to degenerate into capitalism, it is necessary to spell out carefully what capitalism is. Following Marx, I defined capitalism as a system in which the workers do not control the means of production and the workers sell (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  48. N. Scott Arnold (1987). Further Thoughts on the Degeneration of Market Socialism: A Reply to Schweickart. Economics and Philosophy 3 (2):320.
    David Schweickart has challenged a number of claims that are central to my argument that market socialism would probably degenerate into something only nominally distinguishable from capitalism. Chief among these is the claim that competitive pressures would force the workers in a worker-controlled firm to create pay and authority differentials that would make such firms structurally homologous to capitalist firms. Schweickart challenges this on two fronts: He argues that there is no good reason to believe that market forces under market (...)
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography   1 citation  
  49. Gustaf Arrhenius, Meritarian Axiologies and Distributive Justice.
    in . T. Rønnow-Rasmussen, B. Petersson, J. Josefsson & D. Egonsson (eds.) Hommage à Wlodek: Philosophical Papers Dedicated to Wlodek Rabinowicz, 2007.
    Remove from this list  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
  50. J. Atherton (1998). Book Reviews : Economic Justice: Selections From 'Distributive Justice' and 'A Living Wage', by John A. Ryan (1869-1945), Edited by Harlan R. Beckley. Louisville, Kentucky: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996. 186 Pp. Pb. US$29. ISBN 0-664-25660-. [REVIEW] Studies in Christian Ethics 11 (1):115-118.
    Remove from this list   Direct download (5 more)  
     
    Export citation  
     
    My bibliography  
1 — 50 / 1590