Why Egalitarians Should Not Care About Equality
Can outcome equality (say, in welfare) ever be unjust? Despite the extensive inquiry into the nature of luck egalitarianism in recent years, this question is curiously under-explored. Leading luck egalitarians pay little attention to the issue of unjust equalities, and when they do, they appear not...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
Springer Science + Business Media B. V
2012
|
| In: |
Ethical theory and moral practice
Year: 2012, Volume: 15, Issue: 4, Pages: 507-519 |
| Further subjects: | B
Justice
B Luck Egalitarianism B Equality B Desert B Responsibility |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
MARC
| LEADER | 00000naa a22000002 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | 1785696858 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20220112044107.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220112s2012 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1007/s10677-011-9306-7 |2 doi | |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)1785696858 | ||
| 035 | |a (DE-599)KXP1785696858 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rda | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 084 | |a 1 |2 ssgn | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Segall, Shlomi |e VerfasserIn |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Why Egalitarians Should Not Care About Equality |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2012 | |
| 336 | |a Text |b txt |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a Computermedien |b c |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a Online-Ressource |b cr |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a Can outcome equality (say, in welfare) ever be unjust? Despite the extensive inquiry into the nature of luck egalitarianism in recent years, this question is curiously under-explored. Leading luck egalitarians pay little attention to the issue of unjust equalities, and when they do, they appear not to speak in one voice. To facilitate the inquiry into the potential injustice of equalities, the paper introduces two rival interpretations of egalitarianism: the responsibility view, which may condemn equalities as unjust (when they reflect unequal levels of personal responsibility); and, the non-responsibility view, which does not. It then teases out the implications of these two views, in the hope of establishing that the latter is at least as plausible as the former. The paper thus establishes that the egalitarian ideal can be plausibly formulated in a way that condemns only (certain) inequalities but never equalities, and that this formulation is both coherent and attractive. | ||
| 650 | 4 | |a Responsibility | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Luck Egalitarianism | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Justice | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Equality | |
| 650 | 4 | |a Desert | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |t Ethical theory and moral practice |d Dordrecht [u.a.] : Springer Science + Business Media B.V, 1998 |g 15(2012), 4, Seite 507-519 |h Online-Ressource |w (DE-627)320527093 |w (DE-600)2015306-5 |w (DE-576)104558555 |x 1572-8447 |7 nnns |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:15 |g year:2012 |g number:4 |g pages:507-519 |
| 856 | |3 Volltext |u http://www.jstor.org/stable/23254308 |x JSTOR | ||
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1007/s10677-011-9306-7 |x Resolving-System |z lizenzpflichtig |3 Volltext |
| 935 | |a mteo | ||
| 936 | u | w | |d 15 |j 2012 |e 4 |h 507-519 |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| ELC | |a 1 | ||
| ITA | |a 1 |t 1 | ||
| LOK | |0 000 xxxxxcx a22 zn 4500 | ||
| LOK | |0 001 4033755756 | ||
| LOK | |0 003 DE-627 | ||
| LOK | |0 004 1785696858 | ||
| LOK | |0 005 20220112044107 | ||
| LOK | |0 008 220112||||||||||||||||ger||||||| | ||
| LOK | |0 035 |a (DE-Tue135)IxTheo#2021-12-30#BFAE33850D309EE3A691A3CE349C0BBA9DDA679A | ||
| LOK | |0 040 |a DE-Tue135 |c DE-627 |d DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 092 |o n | ||
| LOK | |0 852 |a DE-Tue135 | ||
| LOK | |0 852 1 |9 00 | ||
| LOK | |0 866 |x JSTOR#http://www.jstor.org/stable/23254308 | ||
| LOK | |0 935 |a ixzs |a ixrk |a zota | ||
| ORI | |a SA-MARC-ixtheoa001.raw | ||