Egalitarianism, Responsibility, and Information

Economics and Philosophy 3 (2):215-244 (1987)
  Copy   BIBTEX


Radical and liberal theories of egalitarianism are distinguished, in large part, by the differing degrees to which they hold people responsible for their own well-being. The most liberal or individualistic theory calls for equality of opportunity. Once such “starting gate equality,” as Dworkin calls it, is guaranteed, then any final outcome is justified, provided certain rules, such as voluntary trading, are observed. At the other pole, the most radical egalitarianism calls for equality of welfare. In between these two extremes are egalitarian proposals that equalize more than conventional opportunities, yet less than full welfare. Sen speaks of equality of basic capabilities as a goal; implementing that requires more than starting gate equality, because some will require more resources than others to attain the same capabilities. Meeting basic needs is another objective. Equality of needs fulfillment is perhaps less radical than equality of basic capabilities and more radical than equality of opportunity. Rawls takes equality of primary goods as a benchmark; he distinguishes primary goods from welfare, but includes among them goods that are more complicated than conventional resources and opportunities, all of which are supposed inputs into any conception of welfare. One could imagine proposing an egalitarianism that equalized some quite measurable outcome across populations, such as infant mortality. That would be an outcome-equalizing theory where the rate of infant mortality is a proxy, presumably, for some more complicated maximand, such as the degree of wellbeing of a population.



    Upload a copy of this work     Papers currently archived: 89,764

External links

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

Through your library

Similar books and articles

What is to Be Distributed?Rodney G. Peffer - 1998 - The Paideia Project.
Equality of Talent.John E. Roemer - 1985 - Economics and Philosophy 1 (2):151-188.
Equal Opportunity or Equal Social Outcome?Marc Fleurbaey - 1995 - Economics and Philosophy 11 (1):25.
Equality of talent.John E. Roemer - 1985 - Economics and Philosophy 1 (2):151-.
Equality and Information.Carl Knight & Roger Knight - 2012 - Ethical Perspectives 19 (3):469-499.
Distributive equality.David McCarthy - 2015 - Mind 124 (496):1045-1109.
Ce este egalitarianismul?Eugen Huzum - 2012 - Transilvania:79-85.
Reassessing Egalitarianism.Jeremy Moss - 2014 - Palgrave McMillan.
How to Value Equality.Jeremy Moss - 2015 - Philosophy Compass 10 (3):187-196.
Welfare Luck Egalitarianism and Expensive Tastes.Nils Holtug - 2015 - Moral Philosophy and Politics 2 (1):179-206.
The Incompleteness of Luck Egalitarianism.Ryan Long - 2011 - Social Philosophy Today 27:87-96.
Liberal Equality.Amy Gutmann (ed.) - 1980 - Cambridge University Press.


Added to PP

84 (#181,433)

6 months
7 (#174,021)

Historical graph of downloads
How can I increase my downloads?

Citations of this work

Disability and the Right to Work*: GREGORY S. KAVKA.Gregory S. Kavka - 1992 - Social Philosophy and Policy 9 (1):262-290.

Add more citations

References found in this work

An Essay on Free Will.Peter Van Inwagen - 1983 - New York: Oxford University Press.
What is equality? Part 2: Equality of resources.Ronald Dworkin - 1981 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 10 (4):283 - 345.
What is equality? Part 1: Equality of welfare.Ronald Dworkin - 1981 - Philosophy and Public Affairs 10 (3):185-246.
An essay on free will.Peter van Inwagen & A. Phillips Griffiths - 1985 - Revue Philosophique de la France Et de l'Etranger 175 (4):557-558.

View all 12 references / Add more references