Ratio 27 (2):205-221 (2014)

Gerald Lang
University of Leeds
According to Saul Smilansky's ‘Paradox of Beneficial Retirement’, many serving members of professions may have decisive integrity-based reasons for retiring immediately. The Paradox of Beneficial Retirement holds that a below-par performance in one's job does not require any outright incompetence, but may take a purely relational form, in which a good performance is not good enough if it would be improved upon by someone else who would be appointed instead. It is argued, in response, that jobs in the sectors Smilansky mentions are not merely positions to optimize the goals of the profession, but are professional careers in which there is the possibility of security and personal fulfilment. The article also explores connections between Smilansky's argument and G. A. Cohen's anti-incentives argument against Rawls. It is suggested that both thinkers underappreciate the relationship between personal reasons and institutional reasons.
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1111/rati.12024
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

PhilArchive copy

Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 59,677
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

No references found.

Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

How Interesting is the “Boring Problem” for Luck Egalitarianism?Gerald Lang - 2015 - Philosophy and Phenomenological Research 91 (3):698-722.

Add more citations

Similar books and articles


Added to PP index

Total views
128 ( #79,479 of 2,432,200 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
3 ( #214,792 of 2,432,200 )

How can I increase my downloads?


My notes