Choices Chance and Change: Luck Egalitarianism Over Time

Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (2):393-407 (2013)

Authors
Patrick Tomlin
University of Warwick
Abstract
The family of theories dubbed ‘luck egalitarianism’ represent an attempt to infuse egalitarian thinking with a concern for personal responsibility, arguing that inequalities are just when they result from, or the extent to which they result from, choice, but are unjust when they result from, or the extent to which they result from, luck. In this essay I argue that luck egalitarians should sometimes seek to limit inequalities, even when they have a fully choice-based pedigree (i.e., result only from the choices of agents). I grant that the broad approach is correct but argue that the temporal standpoint from which we judge whether the person can be held responsible, or the extent to which they can be held responsible, should be radically altered. Instead of asking, as Standard (or Static) Luck Egalitarianism seems to, whether or not, or to what extent, a person was responsible for the choice at the time of choosing, and asking the question of responsibility only once, we should ask whether, or to what extent, they are responsible for the choice at the point at which we are seeking to discover whether, or to what extent, the inequality is just, and so the question of responsibility is not settled but constantly under review. Such an approach will differ from Standard Luck Egalitarianism only if responsibility for a choice is not set in stone—if responsibility can weaken then we should not see the boundary between luck and responsibility within a particular action as static. Drawing on Derek Parfit’s illuminating discussions of personal identity, and contemporary literature on moral responsibility, I suggest there are good reasons to think that responsibility can weaken—that we are not necessarily fully responsible for a choice for ever, even if we were fully responsible at the time of choosing. I call the variant of luck egalitarianism that recognises this shift in temporal standpoint and that responsibility can weaken Dynamic Luck Egalitarianism (DLE). In conclusion I offer a preliminary discussion of what kind of policies DLE would support
Keywords Luck egalitarianism  Personal identity  Equality  Responsibility  Distributive justice
Categories (categorize this paper)
DOI 10.1007/s10677-012-9340-0
Options
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Request removal from index
Revision history

Download options

Our Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy     Papers currently archived: 41,650
Through your library

References found in this work BETA

Reasons and Persons.Derek Parfit - 1984 - Oxford University Press.
Rescuing Justice and Equality.G. A. Cohen (ed.) - 2008 - Harvard University Press.
Freedom of the Will and the Concept of a Person.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1971 - Journal of Philosophy 68 (1):5-20.
Alternate Possibilities and Moral Responsibility.Harry G. Frankfurt - 1969 - Journal of Philosophy 66 (23):829-839.

View all 24 references / Add more references

Citations of this work BETA

Egalitarian Justice and Expected Value.Carl Knight - 2013 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 16 (5):1061-1073.
Preferences, Reasoning Errors, and Resource Egalitarianism.Alexandru Volacu - 2018 - Philosophical Studies 175 (8):1851-1870.
Luck Egalitarianism and What Valuing Responsibility Requires.Alexandra Couto - 2018 - Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 21 (2):193-217.
Equal Opportunity, Responsibility, and Personal Identity.Ian Carter - 2018 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 21 (4):825-839.

View all 6 citations / Add more citations

Similar books and articles

The Incompleteness of Luck Egalitarianism.Ryan Long - 2011 - Social Philosophy Today 27:87-96.
Language and Luck.Helder De Schutter & Lea Ypi - 2012 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 11 (4):357-381.
The Metaphysical Case for Luck Egalitarianism.Carl Knight - 2006 - Social Theory and Practice 32 (2):173-189.
Equality and Information.Carl Knight & Roger Knight - 2012 - Ethical Perspectives 19 (3):469-499.
In Defence of Luck Egalitarianism.Carl Knight - 2005 - Res Publica 11 (1):1-10.
Why Egalitarians Should Not Care About Equality.Shlomi Segall - 2012 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 15 (4):507 - 519.
Distributive Luck.Carl Knight - 2012 - South African Journal of Philosophy 31 (2):541-559.
Holding People Responsible for What They Do Not Control.Zofia Stemplowska - 2008 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 7 (4):355-377.
Hurley on Egalitarianism and the Luck-Neutralizing Aim.Kasper Lippert-Rasmussen - 2005 - Politics, Philosophy and Economics 4 (2):249-265.
Luck and Oppression.Mark Navin - 2011 - Ethical Theory and Moral Practice 14 (5):533-547.

Analytics

Added to PP index
2012-02-04

Total views
203 ( #33,037 of 2,250,048 )

Recent downloads (6 months)
6 ( #311,053 of 2,250,048 )

How can I increase my downloads?

Downloads

My notes

Sign in to use this feature