Justice is not equality

Ratio 21 (4):371-391 (2008)
  Copy   BIBTEX

Abstract

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.

Links

PhilArchive



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 93,031

External links

Setup an account with your affiliations in order to access resources via your University's proxy server

Through your library

Analytics

Added to PP
2009-01-28

Downloads
342 (#62,049)

6 months
24 (#121,446)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Author's Profile

Richard J. Arneson
University of California, San Diego

Citations of this work

The Priority View Bites the Dust?Andrew Williams - 2012 - Utilitas 24 (3):315-331.
Choices Chance and Change: Luck Egalitarianism Over Time.Patrick Tomlin - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):393-407.
Luck egalitarianism and what valuing responsibility requires.Alexandra Couto - 2018 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 21 (2):193-217.
Ce este egalitarianismul?Eugen Huzum - 2012 - Transilvania:79-85.

View all 14 citations / Add more citations

References found in this work

No references found.

Add more references