Economics and Philosophy 21 (2):199-220 (2005)
Prioritarianism is the view that we ought to give priority to benefiting those who are worse off. Sufficientism, on the other hand, is the view that we ought to give priority to benefiting those who are not sufficiently well off. This paper concerns the relative merits of these two views; in particular, it examines an argument advanced by Roger Crisp to the effect that sufficientism is the superior of the two. My aim is to show that Crisp's argument is unsound. While I concede his objections against the particular prioritarian views that he considers, I propose a different version of prioritarianism that is invulnerable to those objections.
|Keywords||No keywords specified (fix it)|
|Categories||categorize this paper)|
References found in this work BETA
No references found.
Citations of this work BETA
Prioritarianism for Variable Populations.Campbell Brown - 2007 - Philosophical Studies 134 (3):325-361.
Egalitarians, Sufficientarians, and Mathematicians: A Critical Notice of Harry Frankfurt’s On Inequality.David Rondel - 2016 - Canadian Journal of Philosophy 46 (2):145-162.
Similar books and articles
In Defence of the Priority View: A Response to Otsuka and Voorhoeve.Roger Crisp - 2011 - Utilitas 23 (1):105-108.
Monism and Intrinsicality.Kelly Trogdon - 2009 - Australasian Journal of Philosophy 87 (1):127 – 148.
Equality, Priority and Person-Affecting Value.Ingmar Persson - 2001 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 4 (1):23-39.
Added to index2009-01-28
Total downloads119 ( #40,645 of 2,163,984 )
Recent downloads (6 months)11 ( #30,805 of 2,163,984 )
How can I increase my downloads?