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...

Descrizione completa

Salvato in:  
Dettagli Bibliografici
Autore principale: Segall, Shlomi (Autore)
Tipo di documento: Elettronico Articolo
Lingua:Inglese
Verificare la disponibilità: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
Caricamento...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
Pubblicazione: Springer Science + Business Media B. V 2012
In: Ethical theory and moral practice
Anno: 2012, Volume: 15, Fascicolo: 4, Pagine: 507-519
Altre parole chiave:B Justice
B Luck Egalitarianism
B Equality
B Desert
B Responsibility
Accesso online: Volltext (JSTOR)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Descrizione
Riepilogo: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.
ISSN:1572-8447
Comprende:Enthalten in: Ethical theory and moral practice
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1007/s10677-011-9306-7